Customer Reviews

Miracle at Oxford

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Okay, it might help to know something about rowing. I suspect that the majority of viewers of this film will be rowers, or at least the majority of people who appreciate it will be. And yes, I'm a rower. This is the (largely) true story of the 1987 Boat Race mutiny at Oxford, based on the book by the coach, Dan Topolski. The actors apparently trained for 6 months to learn how to row, and overall did a pretty fair job of it. While purists (as exist with every sports movie) can complain about some things (rowing nuances: like if they're going so damn fast, why aren't they clearing their puddles in the beautiful overhead shot near the end? And why are there hatchet blades [first introduced in 1991, and not even ubiquitous until a few years later] being used by the Cambridge crew in 1987?), it does a pretty good job, and it's nice to see a good rowing movie for a change (example of bad rowing movie: Oxford Blues). This English movie was originally released in 1996 as "True Blue"; one suspects that its recent DVD release in the US under its current name is indeed an attempt to capitalize on the success of "Miracle." But the story is based on fact (even though there are opposing viewpoints), and the sequence of events actually happened, including the Disney ending. The ringer Americans in the film are portrayed as major jerks, but there is minor redemption at the end for one; and again, this was certainly how Topolski saw it, and may have been as it really was. I also suspect that, unlike football, baseball, and basketball movies, just tossing out rowing terminology will be gibberish to the average viewer, as most people have at least a passing acquaintance with our most popular sports, but rowing remains, in this country at least, a bit more esoteric. I imagine this was less of a problem in the UK, where the Boat Race is a major televised spectacle (sort of like the Super Bowl) and British rowing icons are respected, revered, and knighted (witness Sirs Steve Redgrave and Matthew Pinsent). So this film is doomed to be less well understood on these shores. But, while not outstanding in its writing and tying up loose ends, it's a very good movie, with tremendous on the water scenes, and reasonably well-acted. For anyone with a passing knowledge of the sport who is looking for a good (and true) tale, this is a worthwhile way to pass 2 hours. You may even want to watch it while erging*---might make that less painful!

*Erging: The verb developed from the machine, the rowing ergometer, known to all rowers as more of a torture device. They are shown in the movie as well.

I can vouch for the previous reviewer's suggestion of watching this while erging, because that's exactly what I did this morning. And, the true test, I kept finding myself pulling hard without even realizing it at strategic points in the plot.

I think it would be an OK film for non-rowers, but not a great one. Some of the characters are hard to tell apart and I haven't exactly figured out why the movie needed the priest character. Also, most of the Americans are stereotypically one-dimensional.

As a rower, I very much appreciated that they got the terminology right - they may not have cleared their puddles, but the coach commented on them. (In a good eight, when stroke seat's oar hits the water, the boat will be past the puddles left by bow seat's oar on the previous stroke.) The rowing wasn't quite world-class but was much better than in most rowing movies, not that there are all that many others.

The scenery is very nice to watch as well, both the towery spires of Oxford and the convincingly fit (especially in the brief shower scenes!) rowers.

This movie is absolutely fantastic, and this film has captured the magic of the race perfectly. But, I believe that if you are not a big fan of Rowing that you would still enjoy this movie for its superb performances by the actors, and I'm sure that people would appreciate actually seeing the actors row the race instead of some stunt double rowing it for them, because it truly is a heart wrenching thing to row at full pelt for 20 minutes. And I truly encourage everybody who reads this to see this movie.

I'm watching the movie now. I've done a little singles rowing (but no racing,) so I do understand the basics. What I can't understand is what they were arguing about. Well, it was about training methods, with the American Olympians complaining about it, but nobody saying exactly what was wrong. The coach was 20 years out of date, they said, and there were better ways to train. I want to hear how else they could have trained. And why did they win in the end? I don't believe that the Americans or the others were lazy. And when they say, "Coach, we've worked very hard today, that's enough" I don't believe that is the whole issue. THese are Olympians. They know how to train hard, and more importantly, efficiently. I dunno. It's pretty to watch, great to see Oxford, the river scenes, the rowing, but the conflict just doesn't make sense. Does the coach know about recovery times, for instance? You can train yourself into the dirt unless you allow for recovery. Oh there are lots of things, but I never find out, so I don't believe the conflict. They all just seem stubborn for no reason.

I love rowing and watching movies which involve rowing. This movie which is specifically about rowing falls short to capture my attention.

Of course, the pickings are pretty slim. In this film, the rowers actually look like rowers and more importantly, row like them. The story line is pretty good and the acting was above average for a B grade movie. Overall, if it's a rowing movie you're looking for, this is the most accurate portrayal of the sport I have witnessed on film.

I was excited to find this movie at my local video store this weekend - to be honest, I had never heard of the film before seeing it on the shelf. I almost wish I had left it there, though.

I rowed for my college while studying at Oxford more than 10 years ago ("We love you Worcester, oh yes we do. . ."), so I understand the sentiment behind the Boat Race, the importance of rowing in Oxford, the feeling of many Oxford students towards Americans and the lingo of rowing in Oxford (different from "crew" in the US). Accordingly, I was all set to be excited by this film.

Unfortunately, the acting was as wooden as the blades they used in the race, the story was thin, and by 2/3 of the way through the movie, I resorted to fast-forwarding to the rowing scenes.

I would suggest this movie for those people who spent time at Oxford and want to see scenes of early morning outings, Crew Dinners and other little vignettes that will remind them of their stint.

Otherwise, I'd take a pass. Oxford Blues is more entertaining.

Ok, the cover looks like a clone of Miracle with Kurt Russell and that is about the best thing this movie has going for it. West looks really young so this is probably a made for tv British film that has been repackage to ride the curtail of West recent critical acclaim on HBO's The Wire and on the success of Disney's Miracle. I didn't finish the movie because I honestly didn't care who won the boat race. Unlike Miracle which keeps you watching despite Russell's wardrobe and great looking toupee, this movie never draws you in and you just wish the boat would sink and drown the entire cast.

The only good thing about this movie was my wife going into labor 2 hours later. We must have fast forwarded 1/2 the movie, and it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. My wife enjoyed labor more than I enjoyed enduring the movie. Be careful if it's not close to your due date . . .