1981 replies to this topic

[Michael Ferner]

Oh, come on, what's so dewy-eyed and romantic about crashes, crashes and injured drivers, crashes and killed spectators, crashes and drivers burning to death, and more crashes. I don't have no "magic formula", but most certainly there wouldn't be a single accident in any racing movie I'd be interested to watch, and not only because it's such a cliché - I'm not interested in crashes! Also, the Eve Saint Whatsit character going hysteric about the death of her boyfriend is extremely corny, taken on its own, but in the context (i.e. without any part of the story really refering to it) it is just one thing: a glaring outcry against motor racing as a whole. And don't get me started on the insipid, nay, plainly stupid dialogue, delivered as if words of wisdom - ugh!

 

I think I've said it before, but the saving grace for the movie was its daring photography (and editing), but today that looks pretty dated, only interesting in a (film-) historical context. To say it was a wasted effort would be giving the movie too much credit.

Edited by Michael Ferner, 25 March 2014 - 16:25.

[Nemo1965]

Oh, come on, what's so dewy-eyed and romantic about crashes, crashes and injured drivers, crashes and killed spectators, crashes and drivers burning to death, and more crashes. I don't have no "magic formula", but most certainly there wouldn't be a single accident in any racing movie I'd be interested to watch, and not only because it's such a cliché - I'm not interested in crashes! Also, the Eve Saint Whatsit character going hysteric about the death of her boyfriend is extremely corny, taken on its own, but in the context (i.e. without any part of the story really refering to it) it is just one thing: a glaring outcry against motor racing as a whole. And don't get me started on the insipid, nay, plainly stupid dialogue, delivered as if words of wisdom - ugh!

 

I think I've said it before, but the saving grace for the movie was its daring photography (and editing), but today that looks pretty dated, only interesting in a (film-) historical context. To say it was a wasted effort would be giving the movie too much credit.

 

Well, I agree with some of your remarks, but not a single accident in any racing movie? That would be also absurd, especially if you make a movie about the 60's or early 70's. 

 

Then about Eve Marie Saints' hysteric behaviour... well... one of my first memories of F1 is the photograph of Lady Courage at Zandvoort in Dutch newspapers, being escorted away from the Zandvoort track when her man crashed fatally there. I would not call her hysteric, but even from the photo you could see that she was howling with agony. Nina Rindt was doped on valium, heavily, according to herself, when he she accepted the world champions trophy on behalf of her husband.

Edited by Nemo1965, 25 March 2014 - 19:42.

[Manfred Cubenoggin]

Nemo...

 

Yes, I recall seeing a photo the next day in the Toronto Daily Star of Sally Courage after hearing the news.  Being escorted by another lady, if I'm not mistaken.  Clearly distraught and who wouldn't be?  Friggin' dailies.  UGH! 

[Nemo1965]

I remember that a lady and an older gentleman escorted her. Years after, I thought to recognise Lord Stanley, teamboss of BRM, pushing photographers aside. But I could never confirm that, somewhere.

 

The photo must be somewhere in my parents stuff. But where?

 

Ah, never mind. 

[TecnoRacing]

I remember that a lady and an older gentleman escorted her. Years after, I thought to recognise Lord Stanley, teamboss of BRM, pushing photographers aside. But I could never confirm that, somewhere.

 

The photo must be somewhere in my parents stuff. But where?

 

Ah, never mind. 

 

 

Yes, you're right about it being Lord Stanley...it's in Adam Cooper's book. The woman in the photo was likely either Sally Swart or Nina Rindt.

[kayemod]

Yes, you're right about it being Lord Stanley...

 

Lord Stanley? Lord Stanley?? Lord Stanley???

 

Never in a million years, but you've just made someone long-dead very happy, I bet his grave is puffing itself up at this very moment.

[PCC]

Lord Stanley? Lord Stanley?? Lord Stanley???

I wonder where that often-repeated error originated. Maybe whenever he walked into a room people were heard to mutter, "Oh, Lord - Stanley!"

[Michael Ferner]

Then about Eve Marie Saints' hysteric behaviour... well... one of my first memories of F1 is the photograph of Lady Courage at Zandvoort in Dutch newspapers, being escorted away from the Zandvoort track when her man crashed fatally there. I would not call her hysteric, but even from the photo you could see that she was howling with agony. Nina Rindt was doped on valium, heavily, according to herself, when he she accepted the world champions trophy on behalf of her husband.

 

Well, that's interesting but what has it got to do with the movie "Grand Prix"? Life imitating art???

[Nemo1965]

I wonder where that often-repeated error originated. Maybe whenever he walked into a room people were heard to mutter, "Oh, Lord - Stanley!"

 

I always assumed Stanley was a member of the realm, just like Hesketh. My mistake.

 

 

Well, that's interesting but what has it got to do with the movie "Grand Prix"? Life imitating art???

 

Just that I think that crying, screaming ladies might by be irritating for diehard racing fans but not neccesarily a stupid thing in a racing movie. 

[Michael Ferner]

Stupid? Don't really know what you mean by that, but isn't it a bit unkind towards Mrs. Courage and Mrs. Rindt?

[Nemo1965]

The point was that most race-fans - including a well known poster here - are annoyed by the scene in which Eve-Marie Saint goes hysteric in Grand Prix. Most of those fans think that scene is stupid, I do not. So I do not imply that the reaction of Mr. Rindt or Mrs Courage was stupid, nor do I think that the scene with Mrs Saint in Grand Prix is stupid.

[Michael Ferner]

Well, you introduced the word here; I still don't see the relevance.

[arttidesco]

I have a confession to make ...

 

... I saw Rush several weeks ago and as movies go it gripped me 'til the very end despite the fact I knew the outcome and one could write a pedantic book about all of the errors of fact.

 

Probably not Ron Howard's best work, but I won't be holding it against him.

[Snakedriver]

My 2 cents worth on Evas scene in question...

 

I make my living as a Helicopter EMS pilot and we usually arrive on scene well after (10 or 15 min)  the ground EMS have got the patient in an ambulance...usually.  I can honestly attest to the fact that in the 9 or 10 years I have been doing this I have seen about 3 or 4 Eva Marie Saint level emotional responses from family.  It usually happens when my crew get out of the ambulance "empty handed" so to speak.

 

So is that scene spot on?  Well, I would, as the Myth Busters, would say, plausible.

 

Cheers

 

Leo

[404KF2]

Le Mans was great, and had some nice racing scenes, but the story behind it all was kind of weak, especially the widow.  Still, it remains my favourite racing movie.  Maybe because I saw those same cars racing in person when I was a kid.  The sounds are fantastic.

[Nemo1965]

The point I tried to make with the 'hysteric' scene of Eve Marie Saint in 'Grand Prix' is that it is just the kind of scene with which 'Hollywood' (for lack of a better word) tries to connect with the audience, but by which they 'disconnect' with people who can look at Williams F1 car and say: 'Hey, that is the 1983 model, the last Williams Car with the Cosworth DFV in it.'

 

If racing fans dislike certain movies, it has little to do with 'reality' or 'realistic' but a lot with perception. Look at this review on Youtube of Rush. Obviously, a good example of a non-F1 fan who totally digs the movie. It pains me to say it, but perhaps I, as an avid follower of F1 (see above) perhaps I am not the right person to judge 'Rush' as a Hollywood portrayal of F1.

 

PS: Le Mans has grown on me. Earlier I thought it was 'okayish' but after I met Gijs van Lennep (drove the Porsche 917) and Jan Lammers (drove in Le Mans in the old configuration, before 'Maison Blanche' was curtailed), the movie suddenly connected in my head. I think it is the best racing-movie I ever saw since then and got it on DVD as well.

Edited by Nemo1965, 27 March 2014 - 12:32.

[Collombin]

a good example of a non-F1 fan who totally digs the movie. It pains me to say it, but perhaps I, as an avid follower of F1 (see above) perhaps I am not the right person to judge

Why would anyone go to see a movie about a subject they aren't interested in?

Oh I know lots of people do. In droves. I've just never understood why.

[kayemod]

Why would anyone go to see a movie about a subject they aren't interested in?

Oh I know lots of people do. In droves. I've just never understood why.

 

A valid comment which makes me wonder if Rush is doing anything in the USA, surely essential to its commercial success. it's a form of sport completely alien to most Americans, featuring people they've never heard of, and wouldn't care about if they had. "Gee honey, why haven't those racecars got roofs on?". Anyone know?

[Nemo1965]

A valid comment which makes me wonder if Rush is doing anything in the USA, surely essential to its commercial success. it's a form of sport completely alien to most Americans, featuring people they've never heard of, and wouldn't care about if they had. "Gee honey, why haven't those racecars got roofs on?". Anyone know?

 

Not that bad, al things considered.

 

http://www.celebitch...fumble_of_rush/

 

So, how did Rush do with the American box office in its first weekend of wide release? Not all that great. Rush made $10.3 million and came in #3 in the North American box office, meaning that Americans still aren’t all that interested in Formula One, especially when we have NASCAR. That being said, it’s not all bad news – the film got solid-to-good reviews and Thor: The Dark World will probably make crazy money, so Chris will survive.

 

If the movie DOES make people go a F1 movie AND makes them want to know more about F1 (as in the earlier review the reviewer said), I think Howard did a good job. But I still think he underperformed with this flick (considering he made Apollo 13, Cocoon, and so forth)

[Snakedriver]

If Rush came in at #3 in America, Id say it did pretty well...a podium finish if you will.   

 

I agree with Nemo.  Kayemods comment I would want to amend...I think most of Americas love affair with the oval track is partly due to the fact you can see the whole race from one seat, and the over all accessibility of the program is pretty wide open.  Also in the US we have CART, or INDY Cars...What ever its being called this week to watch.  Don't forget that the AMLS is picking up speed as well.  When there is only one race in country its hard to swoon an audience to follow, especially when there are other top shelf series to follow that are organic to the US.

 

Just for the record, I am not a fan of NASCAR and would much rather watch F1...LOL

 

Leo

[PCC]

Why would anyone go to see a movie about a subject they aren't interested in?

Because any competent movie is about a lot more than its 'subject'. Rush isn't really about racing - or at least not only about racing. It's about two contrasting character, their motivations, and the different ways they try to achieve greatness. Racing is the setting. But the movie will live or die by how compelling audiences find those two characters.

 

One of the reasons why Rush is a really tough sell to an audience of racing fanatics is that most of them would much rather be watching races than movies. So Rush will always fall way, way short.

[Michael Ferner]

Judging from this thread alone, people appear to be going to the movies to watch anything that resembles authenticity...

[Allan Lupton]

One of the reasons why Rush is a really tough sell to an audience of racing fanatics is that most of them would much rather be watching races than movies. So Rush will always fall way, way short.

Leaving aside the point that it is presumably a "talkie" not just a "movie," this film is about a time when racing was still worth watching, so although the period is a bit recent for me, I can see that a film, set in the earlier age of real racing, might be better watching than today's Effone.

[king_crud]

I think that the movie fan and the race fan could have both been somewhat appeased if the racing shots were done a bit better, I don't think it would have taken anything away from the story. The helicopter shot over Kyalami was fantastic, unfortunately there weren't enough racing shots of that level of quality, too many zoomy quick cut shots where the cars clearly look like they're trundling around behind a camera car or clearly not on the circuit they say they are.

[Collombin]

At least the DVD version tries to faithfully recreate the experience of seeing it in the cinema - every time you put the DVD in, you are forced to watch several minutes of trailers for other movies without being able to skip straight to the main menu. Grrrrrrrr smiley.

[Nemo1965]

Because any competent movie is about a lot more than its 'subject'. Rush isn't really about racing - or at least not only about racing. It's about two contrasting character, their motivations, and the different ways they try to achieve greatness. Racing is the setting. But the movie will live or die by how compelling audiences find those two characters.

 

You saved me the problem of posting something similiar, very well said... I could not get INTO the movie because I did not believe in the two characters and how they interacted. I can't judge how compelling the movie is regarding James and Niki because I know (sort of) James and Niki. My knowledge stands in my way, so to say. So with a lot scenes, I think: 'But in reality James was... but in reality Niki was...'

 

But having said that, I've seen many, many movies about real-life events about which I knew a lot about... and still I was swept away with the story. 'Ali', was a good example. I knew a lot about the person and his story, I was very sceptical about Will Smith as the lead character, still the movie impressed me.

[Lutz G]

I disagree - both movies did the sport a great disservice. I'm still puzzled as to how people who regard themselves as racing enthusiasts can give a film like "Grand Prix" the thumbs up - apart from being totally moronic, it's also pretty openly anti-racing! As for "Le Mans", well, it's moronic, too - apart from that, I never even understood what it's about. It comes closest to being a documentary, but as such it fails entirely.

 
Grand Prix - great cinematography, great sound, but boy that cheesy plot (wouldn't call it anti-racing)...

Rush, IMO by far the best f1 movie (but no real competitors ;))

Edited by Lutz G, 17 April 2014 - 10:14.

[john aston]

Hmmm.. I enjoyed Rush but Le Mans is pre-eminent in being the one racing film (I am not at home to Mr Movie ) which portrays the visceral appeal of the sport and of course the machinery is out of this world. Grand Prix? The good bits just about outweigh the lumpen dialogue and wooden acting but it is now awfully dated  and not in a good way.  

[SCUDmissile]

I just saw the movie and I was wondering if....SPOILERS INCOMING

 

 

 

the bit with the mixup of the Japanese GP results with Hunt in 5th originally actually happened? Or was that for drama?

[27gilles27]

I have to agree with nemo1965, to me the movie just felt too fake, although there were some great shots from the season. Trouble is, the real story was so good that no imitation can come close. There was indeed confusion at the end of the race and Hunt had initially believed he did not finish 3rd. There was also some debate, I remember, about whether Andretti actually won the race. It was thought that he may have been credited an extra lap in the confusing conditions, if I remember correctly, and that could have made Depailler the actual winner in the six wheeler. But that couldn't be proved.

[Michael Ferner]

Finally found the DVD (by chance), bought it (with mixed feelings, but hey, it's "my" sport!), and just finished watching it. As movies go, I thought it was boring. Cliché ridden. Pretty soon, I found myself thinking of other things to do, and finally doing them while watching the movie. But at least I stopped the player when I went outside for a smoke (if only just...). Wearing my anorak, the most glaring mistake for me was the erasure of Mariella Reininghaus from the story, and having Niki meet Marlene Krauss at a time when she probably wasn't even dating Curd Jürgens. Missed opportunity for a good subplot, in my view. Another one of those: having James apologize to his team after the Fuji finish, when in reality he came out swinging his fists - you'd believe that professional writers would jump at a chance like this, no? I couldn't care less about misplaced sponsor stickers and the like.

 

Verdict: if you haven't watched the movie by now, then don't. Spare yourself a disappointment.

[Michael Ferner]

There was also some debate, I remember, about whether Andretti actually won the race. It was thought that he may have been credited an extra lap in the confusing conditions, if I remember correctly, and that could have made Depailler the actual winner in the six wheeler. But that couldn't be proved.

Andretti was a full lap ahead of Depailler, so how could that have made the Tyrrell a winner? Surely they didn't credit the Lotus with two extra laps, did they??