Jump to content


Photo

'Grand Prix' - the out-takes?


  • Please log in to reply
1515 replies to this topic

#801 R.W. Mackenzie

R.W. Mackenzie
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 24 December 2007 - 17:40

In a shamelessly transparent attempt to get this back on page 1 of the forum, I was scanning through "Grand Prix" looking for a suitable topic for the purpose and I tripped over a legitimate issue. I had actually noticed this a long time ago but with my new found still capture skills (a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing!) I can actually look at it closer.

During the Monaco Grand Prix, when Stoddard passes Sarti ("The old master is usually unbeatable on these twisting Monte Carlo streets."), it's coming out of a left hand bend. There are only three real left hand bends at Monaco and only Massenet (past the Hotel de Paris) fits in with the sequence. It looks a bit like Massenet except that it is too sharp and the road too narrow. But more telling is that it appears to lead into the run down to Mirabeau without making the necessary right bend at Casino.

This capture shows the BRM and Ferrari exiting "Massenet":

Posted Image

Now they should be entering Casino but it's no where to be seen. In fact the real estate seems to be falling away on the left where Casino Square should be:

Posted Image

Now they appear to be on the run down to Mirabeau, but notice the car in the background coming out of a left hand turn when he should be coming out of the right hand Casino bend?

Posted Image

This the actual run down to Mirabeau from in-car. Notice the guardrails that were not in the previous shot? The scenery isn't even close.

Posted Image

I seem to recall that when watching the Whicker segment on the making of Grand Prix (the "Making of Grand Prix" I wish they had included on the DVD) many, many years ago, it was stated that on a particular day Frankenheimer was unable to use the part of the course he needed and as time was running out he had to make do with some side streets instead of the real thing.

Does anyone else recall this or have more info about where the shots were actually filmed?

I only ever saw the Whicker episode once and then by accident. It was far more candid, behind the scenes and interesting than the efforts released on the DVD. One scene in particular that I recall was Brian Bedford being "bloodied up" for the accident scene. He seemed to find considerable humour in the attempts to make him appear grievously injured. I think there was also some interesting dialogue between Frankenheimer and the stunt drivers who were required to bump the two BRM's together, bounce one of them off the guardrail and spin the other. If I recall it correctly, the stunt drivers were quite nervous and Frankenheimer was trying to exhort (extort?) them to greater efforts.

I wish this episode was available now. I had never heard of Alan Whicker before and didn't realize that what I had seen was in fact part of his Whicker's World series until fairly recently. (I doubt the series has ever been shown here in Canada.) The first time I ever heard of him was when he was brutally parodied by Monty Python ("Whicker Island" in episode 27).

Does anyone else recall seeing the Whicker segment and has anyone seen it recently?

Bob Mackenzie

Advertisement

#802 R.W. Mackenzie

R.W. Mackenzie
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 24 December 2007 - 18:01

The last picture from post #801 above seems to have gotten zapped by ImageShack, so here it is again:

Posted Image

Bob Mackenzie

#803 Barry Boor

Barry Boor
  • Member

  • 10,850 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 24 December 2007 - 20:30

Very impressive, Bob.

I don't know how many times I have watched this film but I had never noticed the above.

You are quite correct - those top 4 shots must be from elsewhere in the town.

Right, next May, some investigating is required. :)

#804 Gary C

Gary C
  • Member

  • 4,538 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 24 December 2007 - 20:58

'Does anyone else recall seeing the Whicker segment and has anyone seen it recently?'
???? It's on the double DVD set that I bought just two weeks ago!! One of many 'extras'.

#805 R.W. Mackenzie

R.W. Mackenzie
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 24 December 2007 - 22:18

Gary C,

My two-disc special edition which I bought as soon as it came out (pre-ordered it at amazon.com actually) has the following special features:

4 New 40th-Anniversary Making-of documentaries:

Pushing the Limit: The Making of Grand Prix
Flat Out: Formula One in the Sixties
The Style and Sound of Speed
Brands Hatch: Chasing the Checkered Flag

Vintage Featurette:

Grand Prix: Challenge of the Champions

I've watched them all and I don't recall either of the items I recounted in my earlier post (the Bedford "blood" scene and the Frankenheimer pep talk to the stunt drivers). Does your DVD set have different special features?

I may be confused as to whether what I saw was the Whicker episode as it was over 35 years ago and as I said I didn't even know who Alan Whicker was back then. Maybe what I saw was another "Making of Grand Prix" but it did have these two scenes in it (along with the item about using streets not really part of the course) and I've never seen it since.

Bob Mackenzie

#806 Macca

Macca
  • Member

  • 3,335 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 24 December 2007 - 23:59

Great spot with those stills, Bob...........I've done some looking with Google Earth and I suspect they were shot on the Avenue de la Princesse Alice, quite near Massenet.

http://maps.google.c...&z=18&hl=en&t=h

Paul M

#807 GD66

GD66
  • Member

  • 2,178 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 25 December 2007 - 03:25

Wow ! You're one sharp cookie spotting that detail, Bob. As I recall from the time, Frankenheimer was often only able to get access to half the track, with one half in Grimaldi territory and accessible, and the other half in the hands of the casino-owning conglomerate who may or may not have been "mafia", for want of a better term. I would imagine these people would have been less than co-operative, in view of the possibility of the Steve McQueen movie project coming off in opposition, as explained in the early throes of this fascinating thread, which would explain Frankenheimer's inventiveness in using the dummy location to replicate the plunge to the Mirabeau. Bloody clever, but not good enough to fool Bob.... :p

#808 R.W. Mackenzie

R.W. Mackenzie
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 25 December 2007 - 05:33

I think I first noticed the fake Massenet after taping "Grand Prix" off of TV many years ago and it always bothered me as I couldn't really tell what was happening.

(Although it didn't bother me nearly as much as Scott Stodard's "fixing people by changing their parts" lecture to Mrs. Stoddard. Every time I watch that scene my stomach churns. God how I wish that little speech had ended up on the cutting room floor!)

Oops, sorry for that little diversion.

The magic of movies is making things seem real to the audience in spite the many limitations imposed on the film-makers to accurately represent reality. I'm almost certain that John Frankenheimer didn't expect that there would be so many crazy people like you and me who would watch his movie over and over again so many times. His goal was just to get us to pay to watch it once! And he must either be rolling in his grave (or splitting himself laughing in it) that some of us are even sicko enough to make stills and analyze every frame. (OK, maybe it isn't us. Maybe it's just me!)

The first time I saw "Grand Prix" I was absolutely gobsmacked. I was a mere boy of 12 and it was literally a life changing experience. You couldn't tell me that every car that appeared on the screen wasn't a genuine, fire breathing Formula One car and that every corner on every track wasn't the real McCoy. (Mind you, people who were involved in racing at the time who I later met weren't nearly as impressed.)

The point is that Frankenheimer succeeded in capturing and portraying contemporary Grand Prix racing to a degree that still leaves me in awe. And the fact that he had to play a few tricks here and there to get the job done doesn't in any way diminish that. That he was able to "fool" us like that is a testament to his craft. It was several years later and after many viewings (and after having become an obsessed racing fan) than I began to think, "Wait a minute, that's not a Ferrari. It's Brabham (or Lotus) painted red." or "Gee, those exhaust pipes don't look quite right."

I became very defensive about "Grand Prix" for many years. The prevailing opinion was that it had some good racing scenes but the story sucked and the acting wasn't much better. However I look at it now and see nothing wrong with the story or the acting (apart from the one scene referred to above). Many movies and television shows don't age well. What seemed compelling several decades ago now seem hokey and unrealistic. I'm not really sure why, but for me "Grand Prix" has gone the other way. In spite of its flaws and occasional inaccuracies it seems more realistic at its core than when I first saw it forty years ago.

And it's so much fun finding those little things like faked corners here and there. I knew that there was something wrong with "Massenet" in that scene years ago but until this morning, I had no idea that the side view of Stoddard completing the pass on Sarti on the run down to Mirabeau wasn't even filmed on that part of the track (or on the track at all). I was flabbergasted! Now I wonder what other little goodies I can uncover.

But not tonight. It's now past midnight and Santa will be here any minute. I'd better get to bed.

Merry Christmas!

Bob Mackenzie

#809 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 25 December 2007 - 09:28

Sweet dreams! And kudos for your revelatory skills! [that good English?? :confused:]

But, as besides being a petrolhead I also regard myself as something of a film buff, I have to say that I can't concur with all of your views. Yes, from a cinematographic view it is immaterial if he used F1 or FJunior cars, if the scenes are played before the Hotel de Paris and the Tip Top Bar or on the Avenue de la Princesse Alice and so on. The only thing that counts is the visual "impression", or even "imprint" that's left in your brain. Sure, you can watch a movie a thousand times, and in slo-mo at that, so that you can destroy that imprint and get a view of reality that's often quite different. But that has nothing more to do with the movie, it's called obsession... :lol:

The point I'm trying to make, is that "Grand Prix" is an excellent movie from a cinematographic view, but its plot is awful drivel, almost as bad as "Le Mans". It's a sad fact, but historically, "the story" has always played a small role in movie making, especially in Hollywood! Overall, however, "Grand Prix" still stands as a film you can wholeheartedly support, in sharp contrast to "Le Mans".

#810 Barry Boor

Barry Boor
  • Member

  • 10,850 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 25 December 2007 - 09:44

The thing to remember, Michael, is that Grand Prix was a FEATURE film. It wasn't made for the purpose of creating a lifelong obsession for a few dozen sad souls who inhabit this forum. It was made for movie-goers to go and see,

Imagine the average, non-racing-fanatic viewer leaving the theatre and saying to his/her wife/husband etc, "Well, the racing car bits were spectacular but there wasn't any plot!" There HAD to be a plot - there always is... the fact that it appears weak to some of our eyes is incidental.

Anyway, who is to say that the plot was unrealistic? There have been cases of ladies moving around between drivers - wasn't there a similar situation around Carraciola? And what about Michael Schumacher 'stealing' then marrying Harry Frentzen's girlfriend?

And as far as drivers leaving a team in mid-season and coming back with another ... what about Surtees in the very year Grand Prix was made?

Then we have a driver being killed at Monza on the brink of the World Championship - Sarti - substitute von Trips. And surely the Jochen Rindt situation was even more bizarre than the film; i.e. driver dies but STILL becomes World Champion.

So really, the plot was far more realistic and far less fanciful than maybe we realise.

#811 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 25 December 2007 - 09:59

I think there's a misunderstanding, Barry, I don't think the movie was unrealistic or did not have a plot, I just think it was drivel. Perhaps my view of movies is a bit "esoteric", but in any movie, I want a plot that tells an interesting story, one that has me thinking about various aspects of life, usually (but not exclusively, but that's another matter). For want of a better word, I like to see something unusual in the story, not the kind of stuff I have to listen to while waiting for my appointment with the doc! :yawn:

To reiterate, "Grand Prix" scores very high in the "cinematographic category", which is the classic way of making movies by way of visual "entrancing", and very low in the "plot category", which is the more modern and European way of making movies in an almost literary way. I am myself mostly in the middle of these two extremes, which are definitely not mutually exclusive (see e.g. Akira Kurosawa's rather breathtaking "Ran"!).

#812 roger.daltrey

roger.daltrey
  • Member

  • 51 posts
  • Joined: July 06

Posted 25 December 2007 - 10:13

Hi Everyone

I'm glad Bob Mac remembers that Alan Whicker thing, as I do too !!

I sent a post to this thread a while ago on the subject, but can't remember what replies there were to it.

But, the Whicker thing was shown on the BBC during a 'speed' evening as the warm-up to a showing of Grand Prix. It must have been around 20 to 25 years ago I think.

It showed how they did the special effects, and interviews with the stars etc..

I too was disappointed that it was not all on the new Grand Prix DVD, but someone may release it soon - or one day.

From my recollection of the DVD (not seen the special features since I bought last year) the Whicker stuff is not a good print, maybe second generation copy and suffers from that.

It would be good to get the original BBC (or ITV) prints and release as either a download or new DVD.

Cheers
Rog

#813 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 25 December 2007 - 10:27

Speaking of Roger Daltrey, I think "Tommy" was a good movie, too! Both cinematographically, and musically (plot) :D

#814 roger.daltrey

roger.daltrey
  • Member

  • 51 posts
  • Joined: July 06

Posted 25 December 2007 - 13:09

Thanks, Tommy was indeed a great film.

You know we were planning a 'sequel' based on the life of Jack the ripper, called 'Saucy Jack' - but enough of my yackin.....

Back to my last post, my original posting on the Whicker program was not to this thread but another one - on the DVD of grand prix - sorry if I mislead anyone. Had to do a search myself to find it.

Back to the xmas meal cooking, I've got some salmon on the go at the moment - from my own farm.

Cheers
Rog.

#815 R.W. Mackenzie

R.W. Mackenzie
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 25 December 2007 - 14:52

Michael,

I would definitely agree that "Grand Prix" isn't on par plot-wise with, say, "Doctor Zhivago". But have you ever seen "The Racers" with Kirk Douglas, Cesar Romero and Gilbert "I spit in your crankcase!" Roland? Or "The Young Racers" with Mark Damon (his dialogue voiced over by William "Captain Kirk" Shatner for some reason), William Campbell (first husband of Judith Campbell, the woman who screwed around with JFK, Frank Sinatra and Sam Giancana) and Luana Anders?

Both of these movies tease you with some brief but excellent real racing footage but the story lines are just horrible. I can't think of any word to truly describe their plots. "Drivel" would actually be a compliment in their case. Then there is "Winning" with virtually no really good racing shots and a storyline truly deserving of the word drivel. And these are the better racing movies!

"Le Mans" I consider to be in a class of its own. I don't think it was ever intended to be anything more than a racing enthusiasts' movie and didn't make much pretense at having a plot. McQueen's crew did some things better than Frankenheimer but overall I don't think they ended up with as exciting a finished product. I might feel differently if some of the important staged scenes had been filmed at true racing speed. The final lap to me seems more like road rage on the 401 (our version of the I-90, M1 or Autobahn) than 917's and 512's duking it out at 200+. My brother (who is as obsessed with "Le Mans" as I am with "Grand Prix") and I argue about this all the time. He says I got that impression by not watching it in it's true widescreen form where you have more of a sense of speed. But I say you can tell. Things in your immediate field of vision should be flying by so fast you can barely notice them. Even in "Grand Prix" there are some in-car shots where you are just putt-putting along and others where you know you are flying (Zandvoort in the BRM and Monza in the Bandini and Parkes Ferraris).

As usual, I seem to have rambled on and got way off the original topic. I guess my point is that if the storyline in "Grand Prix" is drivel, at least it's better than average drivel by racing movie standards. (Thank goodness they didn't use more of the storyline that's in the Manning Lee Stokes novel, based on the Robert Alan Arthur screenplay! Now that is trash.)

Posted Image

Bob Mackenzie

#816 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 25 December 2007 - 16:05

No Bob, I haven't seen any of those movies. Y'see, I'm not a genre fan in any art, be that music, movies, literature or what have you, so I don't go watching movies just because they contain racing footage. But I have seen "Grand Prix" and "Le Mans", and I have to say the latter really sucks. Maybe the plot of "Grand Prix" isn't drivel, but at least it's boring, dull, not interesting, inconsequential. But "Le Mans" is positively STUPID! As for the cinematography in those two films, "Grand Prix" is good, exciting, innovative, and still gripping after 40 years - "Le Mans" is dull, effect-driven and with no particular pattern, no features, in a word: trivial. Just my point of view.

#817 R.W. Mackenzie

R.W. Mackenzie
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 25 December 2007 - 17:47

Michael,

Just back away from the keyboard and nobody will get hurt. :lol:

Since we've been such good friends for so long I'm going to do you a big favour and not tell my brother what you said about "Le Mans".

Seriously though, racing movies are but a sub-group of my motion picture interests. If you checked out my DVD collection you'd see just about everything that Monty Python or Mel Brooks ever did plus "Caddyshack" and "Airplane". In addition to comedy I've got historically based pictures like "Patton", "A Bridge Too Far", "Gettysburg", "Waterloo", "The Alamo" (the recent version and not the John Wayne B-western version) and "JFK" plus all sorts of documentaries related to these subjects. My tastes lean towards depictions of historical events and the more realistically portrayed the better. I like fiction as well if it is believable (as in "The Godfather" and "Apocalypse Now") but I'm not as likely to watch most of it frequently so I don't own much of it. I enjoy science fiction such as "Star Trek" and "Star Wars" but the same applies.

However, motor racing is my most enduring interest and I consider the 50's and 60's to be my golden age of racing. And as I missed all but the last couple of years of the 60's and there wasn't much motion picture coverage of racing back then, anything that shows real footage of that era catches my attention. And that is why I spend so much of my pitiful existence lurking in the darkened passageways of the Nostalgia Forum. It's amazing what you find and who you meet here.

Oh, by the way, if you haven't ever watched "The Racers" or "The Young Racers" (or, God forbid, "The Green Helmet"!) , do yourself a big favour. Don't! If you thought "Le Mans" was stupid, these gems would leave you positively apoplectic!

Bob Mackenzie

#818 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 25 December 2007 - 18:24

Hey, no harm intended! :D I also have several Monthy DVDs, Airplane I & II, and recently purchased my first Mel Brooks! And I have Godfather I-III and Apocalypse Now as well (btw, if you think those are fiction, what do you think is reality???;)). Tell your brother how much I admire his tastes, he's such a nice fellow... :cat: :blush: :wave:

#819 R.W. Mackenzie

R.W. Mackenzie
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 25 December 2007 - 18:47

Roger,

I went back to the thread you referred to to see what other comments people had about the Whicker feature and discovered I'd better be careful what I say about "The Green Helmet". There are apparently those who remember it fondly! I actually had read the book prior to seeing the movie and I thought the book told a decent story. But the movie didn't do it justice. For one thing, they wrote Jack Brabham into the script and his performance makes Graham Hill's in "Grand Prix" look positively Oscar-winning!

I met Jack at Watkins Glen several years ago during a vintage weekend that featured F1 cars and there was an autograph/photo session at the VIP/hospitality centre (recently destroyed in a fire). It was on a Saturday and I took the opportunity to point out to Jack that "The Green Helmet" was on Speed Channel's "Lost Drive-In" that evening. I forget exactly what his response was but he certainly didn't launch into fond recollections of its filming. In fact I think he tried to pretend that he didn't know what I was talking about! (If you watch the film, you'll understand why.)

I'd love to see "The Green Helmet" remade with a more serious attempt to capture the feel of racing in the 50's.

By the way, as I am writing this I have the special features from "Grand Prix" running in the background and to my surprise there is Alan Whicker interviewing Garner and Frankenheimer. Gary C, I stand corrected (partially). It has been quite a while since I watched it but it's more a matter of what you don't see when you're not looking for it. They even showed a brief part of JF's pep talk to one of the stunt drivers. But if they used some of the Whicker material they must have had access to all of it. Why did they leave so much of it out?

Bob Mackenzie

Advertisement

#820 R.W. Mackenzie

R.W. Mackenzie
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 25 December 2007 - 19:10

Michael,

I'm glad to hear that you have such excellent taste in movies. I almost included "The Godfather" and "Apocalypse Now" in my historically based list as I do consider them to be based on true events but wrapped within a fictional story.

Oh, and don't worry about my brother. He's relatively harmless. :rotfl:

Bob Mackenzie

#821 Robin Fairservice

Robin Fairservice
  • Member

  • 496 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 26 December 2007 - 00:26

I was marshalling at Brands Hatch when Frankenheimer was filming "Grand Prix" and he tried to take over the place. We had to be on track on the GP morning at some unearthly hour so that he could film some of his sequencies. The best bit was when Phil Hill was out with the Cobra camera car, the Red Arrows turned up for a fly around in preparation for their later performance. One of them must have realised what was going on because, all of a sudden' he swept in low over Clearways, with his smoke on, and blotted out the whole of the bowl area!

We were invited to go back for a day's filming one day during the next week to act as track marshalls, but I had to work A friend did, and he was one of the marshalls who abandoned the script and rescued James Garner from a burning car. It had a small propane jet to simulate a fire, but it became real. James was very shaken, and when Frankenheimer asked if they could re-shoot the episode, James told him no way in very uncertain language. James was extremely grateful to the marshalls, and especially thanked my friend's wife for letting be there!

#822 Manfred Cubenoggin

Manfred Cubenoggin
  • Member

  • 804 posts
  • Joined: October 02

Posted 26 December 2007 - 00:43

Re Robin's note directly above concerning the 'flame-up' at Brands, the very last scene of 'Grand Prix' features Jim Garner on the pit straight at Monza. At one point, he turns to reveal a rather nasty looking wound to his throat. I believe that this was genuine and as a direct result of the Brands toasting. Forgive me if this has already been posted.

RWM:

We have much more in common that might have otherwise believed. :D

#823 COUGAR508

COUGAR508
  • Member

  • 1,182 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 26 December 2007 - 12:03

Going back to the comparisons of the artistic merits of "Grand Prix" and "Le Mans", I watch both regularly on DVD. I regard "Le Mans" as bordering on a documentary, with the extensive coverage of the pits etc during the race, and the emphasis on the whole Le Mans carnival. The non-racing passages seem very contrived and cliche-laden.

"Grand Prix" was aimed at a more mainstream market, and is less "anoraky" than "Le Mans".

#824 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 26 December 2007 - 12:39

Originally posted by COUGAR508
Going back to the comparisons of the artistic merits of "Grand Prix" and "Le Mans", I watch both regularly on DVD. I regard "Le Mans" as bordering on a documentary, with the extensive coverage of the pits etc during the race, and the emphasis on the whole Le Mans carnival. The non-racing passages seem very contrived and cliche-laden.

Perhaps I have to take another look at the movie, but my lasting impression was that your last sentence not only applied to the non-racing passages!!!

#825 Lee200

Lee200
  • Member

  • 58 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 27 December 2007 - 19:04

Here's an attempt to post a screenshot of the new GPL '66 Mod:

Sarti leading Aron and Stoddard through the Parabolica.

http://img411.images...=screen4xo4.jpg

Lee

#826 Macca

Macca
  • Member

  • 3,335 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 28 December 2007 - 14:38

Posted Image

Brilliant..........the 24-valve Ferrari especially!

Briefly getting back to the question of the Yamura at Monza, DSJ in 'Motor Sport' reported that after Amon failed to qualify, Spence's car was painted white and renumbered from 42 to 32.

However, here is a still clearly showing Spence leaving the paddock, presumably shot during paractise..............carrying #50 (which was the entry number of the 'Willment'Climax' to have been driven by Frank Gardner, whatever that was.):

Posted Image

Paul M

Edited by Macca, 31 August 2012 - 15:07.


#827 Manfred Cubenoggin

Manfred Cubenoggin
  • Member

  • 804 posts
  • Joined: October 02

Posted 28 December 2007 - 21:52

Macca:

That pix also shows, I believe, the Hertz renta Shelby GT350 that Garner & Walter arrived in to the circuit.

#828 R.W. Mackenzie

R.W. Mackenzie
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 28 December 2007 - 23:38

Paul,

I have wondered about this shot as to whether is from the actual race weekend or whether it was staged at another time. The car numbered 50 looks more like a Parnell Lotus BRM and neither of them wore #50 (although I'm not sure what number Baghetti had before he broke his and switched to the borrowed Ferrari). Also, just before the #50 car came past, the #28 BRM drove past driven by someone with distinctly red hair. This fits with the story sequence as Stoddard had just finished talking to the missus while in the car and had presumably then driven it off to the pits. Stoddard had red hair but Stewart didn't. And I don't think that Frankenheimer would have allowed Brian Bedford to drive through a crowd of unsuspecting race fans when the most positive assessment of his driving ability was "absolutely hopeless" (Unless this critical task was performed by a stunt driver or double!).

And one thing that I just thought of is that while the sense of a crowd has been created around the cars passing through the paddock, when you look back at the overall paddock, it seems rather empty. I just can't see the paddock at Monza being that vacant on a Grand Prix weekend when there were two Italian-driven Ferraris entered with an excellent chance to win.

On the other hand, the grey-haired gentleman in the extreme lower right might be Louis Stanley or Raymond Mays. Would they be there on a non-race day for a staged filming?

Thanks for the confirmation of the suspected number switch. The truth is emerging piece by piece!

Bob Mackenzie

#829 Lee200

Lee200
  • Member

  • 58 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 29 December 2007 - 00:19

Bob,

I think most if not all of the movie sequences depicting Monza were shot on a nonrace day. There may be a few clips of the actual race, but not much.

Lee

#830 KJJ

KJJ
  • Member

  • 702 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 29 December 2007 - 09:19

Originally posted by R.W. Mackenzie
In all of these summaries they list only 22 cars (20 starters plus Chris Amon and Phil Hill), however in Michael Frostick's book "Return to Power, The Grands Prix of 1966 and 1967" I found this comment about practice and qualifying:

"29 cars had actually practised-or one should perhaps say 29 drivers, for there was so much chopping and changing with different cars appearing with the same number that the confusion for the spectators was complete and for the time-keepers evidently considerable. Finally it was agreed that the fastest 20 would start, which left Hill and Amon out, as well as Taylor's Shannon-Climax which had re-appeared after its showing at Brands Hatch, and Gardner with something called the Willment-Climax V8, and Innes Ireland with a Brabham B.R.M."


What's all this about then? I'm confused.

#831 R.W. Mackenzie

R.W. Mackenzie
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 29 December 2007 - 14:35

Originally posted by KJJ


What's all this about then? I'm confused.


KJJ,

I'm still a bit confused too. And I wrote it! I was trying to identify a car that appears in certain scenes at Monza pretending to be a Yamura. Paul Macca had thought that the only "Yamura" actually entered in the 1966 Italian GP was Chris Amon's Brabham-BRM but I was pretty sure that I had seen a Lotus "Yamura" that could have been an actual race entry or a car filmed during staged scenes (in other words filmed on days not part of the real race weekend).

So I did some investigation and isolated shots of two separate vehicles pretending to be Pete Aron's Yamura. One was definitely Amon's car (which until Paul pointed it out I didn't realize existed) and the other was almost certainly a Lotus. Amon's car was entered as #32 in the real GP but failed to qualify. So if the shots of the Lotus "Yamura" were from the real GP, it meant that someone who qualified had their car repainted and renumbered before the race took place (as Bondurant had done at Spa when Bruce McLaren withdrew after practice/qualifying).

Mike Spence was the most likely suspect as he had already run his Parnell Lotus-BRM as #32 Yamura at Zandvoort but I wanted to find documented confirmation in a race report from the Italian GP weekend. The only race report I could find was in a book I own (the Michael Frostick book) but it's not a really exhaustive report and it adds more confusion than it clears up.

He mentions that cars and numbers were changed and mixed all weekend. (Presumably this chaos was largely Frankenheimer's doing.) But he doesn't mention any final number changes. He states that 20 cars started the race but also that 29 drivers had practiced (no other reports that I have seen mention more than 22) but only accounts for five of the nine non-qualifiers (Phill Hill, Chris Amon, Trevor Taylor, Frank Gardner and Innes Ireland).

Paul has confirmed that Spence had run the 1966 Italian Grand Prix painted as the #32 Yamura from Denis Jenkinson's report in 'Motorsport' and from a picture in 'Motor'. But this still doesn't clear up the confusion created by Michael Frostick's account of the weekend. I had prodded Paul to post these reports but I will nudge him again. (Hey Paul, nudge, nudge!) Hopefully this will clarify events once and for all.

Or were you simply confused why anyone would care about such trivial details? (I am reliably informed that there are actually over half a billion people living in China right now who don't give a s**t!) :lol:

Bob Mackenzie

#832 KJJ

KJJ
  • Member

  • 702 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 29 December 2007 - 15:16

Bob

It's the mention of these additional cars that's confusing me, the Shannon, the Willment and Ireland in a Brabham. These have never been mentioned in any of the sources I've seen, they certainly seem to have escaped DSJ's attention in his race reports, and yet ... would someone write-up something like that without some basis in fact.

I know it's a bit off topic for the thread but were these additionals really circulating at Monza in 1966?

#833 Lee200

Lee200
  • Member

  • 58 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 29 December 2007 - 15:53

Originally posted by R.W. Mackenzie


Or were you simply confused why anyone would care about such trivial details? (I am reliably informed that there are actually over half a billion people living in China right now who don't give a s**t!) :lol:

Bob Mackenzie


Bob,

And my wife... :p

Lee

#834 R.W. Mackenzie

R.W. Mackenzie
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 29 December 2007 - 16:06

Originally posted by KJJ
Bob

It's the mention of these additional cars that's confusing me, the Shannon, the Willment and Ireland in a Brabham. These have never been mentioned in any of the sources I've seen, they certainly seem to have escaped DSJ's attention in his race reports, and yet ... would someone write-up something like that without some basis in fact.

I know it's a bit off topic for the thread but were these additionals really circulating at Monza in 1966?


Yes, damn it! We the public have a right to know!

Bob Mackenzie

#835 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 29 December 2007 - 19:43

Originally posted by R.W. Mackenzie
Or were you simply confused why anyone would care about such trivial details? (I am reliably informed that there are actually over half a billion people living in China right now who don't give a s**t!) :lol:

Bob Mackenzie

Do you mean to say the other half billion is reading these posts??? :eek: :eek:

#836 R.W. Mackenzie

R.W. Mackenzie
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 29 December 2007 - 21:47

Michael,

I guess my understanding of the population of China is out of date (to put it mildly). I just checked on Wikipedia to get a more up to date figure. (Boy, those folks over there in China have been rather busy lately!)

Now what worries me is, if half a billion are busy not giving a s**t about who drove the "Yamura" at Monza and another half billion are busy reading these posts, what are the other 321 million up to?:eek:

Kinda scary don't you think?

Bob Mackenzie

#837 lanciaman

lanciaman
  • Member

  • 552 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 30 December 2007 - 01:57

Thank you, but anyone commenting on "Grand Prix" or "LeMans" ought to, at least, remember what the standard of accemptance was, prior.

I thought "The Green Helmet" was the apex of cinema replication until I watched "Winning" in a preview audience and got some idea of what racing cinema could be.

It is all relative. GP and LM are great examples of cinema art...though LM could have use a bit more script and dialogue, replacing Steve McQueen's 1000 yard stare....

#838 Lee200

Lee200
  • Member

  • 58 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 30 December 2007 - 02:33

Originally posted by lanciaman

It is all relative. GP and LM are great examples of cinema art...though LM could have use a bit more script and dialogue, replacing Steve McQueen's 1000 yard stare....


I once timed how long it took before there was any meaningful dialog between two actors in LeMans and it was 37 minutes. :p

But who cared when you could watch Porsche 917s and Ferrari 330s?

Lee

#839 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 30 December 2007 - 10:38

Perhaps that is the main problem, I never cared much about Porsche 917 or Ferrari 330! :lol:

Advertisement

#840 Macca

Macca
  • Member

  • 3,335 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 01 January 2008 - 15:58

...........or even the Ferrari 512!

I've been unable to give this thread my normal attention over Xmas, but will do so and re-examine my sources shortly, and reply to Bob's queries, provided my wife (who also doesn't give a s**t!) allows me time..........meanwhile.........

In interviews about the film, James Garner has mentioned that he liked driving so much that he drove in scenes where he wasn't playing Aron and can be glimpsed on screen - after a quick look at the DVD, I've got this capture of Barlini at the Monaco chicane just after the Stoddard/Aron crash, pursued by a works Lotus:

Posted Image

Paul M

#841 Breadmaster

Breadmaster
  • Member

  • 2,507 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 01 January 2008 - 16:19

Well spotted Paul! (again)

I guess it's time for another viewing of the DVD!

#842 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 01 January 2008 - 16:50

Sorry to drag an old bone in through the backdoor again :D but I was just reminded again of an Oliver Stone movie, "Any Given Sunday" (or similar). It's about (American) Football, and I must admit that I don't give a ****'s **** about football, be it American or European of type, but I watched the movie and was, to my utter astonishment, splendidly entertained! It's a good movie, somehow not dissimilar in style to "Grand Prix", but with an infinitely more interesting story, and I thoroughly enjoyed it even if I still don't understand what that game is all about. It didn't matter.

If motor racing could only be so lucky to attract a producer/screen writer of that format, all would be well and maybe one day I'd get a chance to watch a really good racing movie, but these days its attraction apparently stops just short of Hollywood's more amoeba like characters of the Sylvester Stallone ilk! :sigh:

#843 David Beard

David Beard
  • Member

  • 4,887 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 01 January 2008 - 17:08

Originally posted by Macca
...

Posted Image

Paul M


Is the actor in th red fake car driving without gloves?

#844 Lee200

Lee200
  • Member

  • 58 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 01 January 2008 - 18:58

Good job Paul,

This shot gives an excellent view of the Lotus 20 rear suspension and its lack of a top link too.

Lee

#845 Barry Boor

Barry Boor
  • Member

  • 10,850 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 01 January 2008 - 20:02

As someone who fiddles with composite pictures, that doesn't half look like one!

#846 R.W. Mackenzie

R.W. Mackenzie
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 01 January 2008 - 20:16

Originally posted by David Beard


Is the actor in th red fake car driving without gloves?


What's worse is, he's driving without any talent! (Acting or driving!)

Bob Mackenzie

#847 R.W. Mackenzie

R.W. Mackenzie
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 01 January 2008 - 20:21

Originally posted by Macca
In interviews about the film, James Garner has mentioned that he liked driving so much that he drove in scenes where he wasn't playing Aron and can be glimpsed on screen - after a quick look at the DVD, I've got this capture of Barlini at the Monaco chicane just after the Stoddard/Aron crash, pursued by a works Lotus:

Posted Image

Paul M


But he was already playing Aron in that scene. If the camera panned to the right you'd see him bobbing around in the harbour!

Bob Mackenzie

#848 Phil Rainford

Phil Rainford
  • Member

  • 5,289 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 01 January 2008 - 21:00

[QUOTE]Originally posted by fines
[B]Sorry to drag an old bone in through the backdoor again :D but I was just reminded again of an Oliver Stone movie, "Any Given Sunday" (or similar). It's about (American) Football, and I must admit that I don't give a ****'s **** about football, be it American or European of type, but I watched the movie and was, to my utter astonishment, splendidly entertained! It's a good movie, somehow not dissimilar in style to "Grand Prix", but with an infinitely more interesting story, and I thoroughly enjoyed it even if I still don't understand what that game is all about. It didn't matter.

"Any Given Sunday" was indeed the title of the movie and is not only worth watching as it stars Cameron Diaz :) .............but also features a pre-match team talk from Al Pacino that at its conclusion the viewer is looking for his /her mouth guard and helmet in order to take on whatever the opposing team has to offer!! :up:

Kind regards

Phil

#849 Macca

Macca
  • Member

  • 3,335 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 01 January 2008 - 22:47

But Barlini wasn't acting OR driving............he was bolted to the back of a GT40.......

Both Stoddart and Sarti had their helmets come off in their big crashes........you'd think Sarti would have learned his lesson about tightening the strap at Spa where his helmet seemingly came off and then fell back into place on his head by the time the marshalls hauled him out:

Posted Image

Paul M

#850 R.W. Mackenzie

R.W. Mackenzie
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 02 January 2008 - 19:08

Paul,

Are you sure they had the GT40 towing rig at Monaco? I didn't think that they came up with that until later. In fact I thought even Yves Montand drove at Monaco until he tried to put his "Ferrari" through a shop window. (That was another event covered in the Whicker documentary but now witheld from the public. Yes, I'm beginning to think conspiracy here!)

By the way, here's an updated figure on the total number of people who really don't give a "you know what":

1,321,000,003 (the population of China, although I'm sure it's changed since I last checked plus your wife, Lee's wife and my wife)

Stand by for further updates.

Bob Mackenzie