MovieChat Forums > Senna (2011) Discussion > Why no original material?

Why no original material?

posted 13 years ago by TheSummer2012
6 replies | jump to latest

I read somewhere that no original material was used to make this film. By that I mean the filmmakers did only use archive material and did not conduct interviews themselves for example.

I thought this was a mistake. First, it was not clear at times who the person providing the voiceover was. Not everyone knows Ron Dennis' or Sid Watkins' voice. A collage of different soundbites tells a certain story but unless you know who the person talking is and when exactly that person was making the statement, it can be misleading.

What is more, by merely putting together archive material, we didn't really learn anything new about Senna. It would have been interesting to hear more from Alain Prost (predictably portrayed as the villain again!) or his close driver friend Gerhard Berger how they view Senna and the events from back then today.

The Senna home videos and the FIA archive material (eg, the drivers' meetings) were a nice touch but for those vaguely familiar with Formula 1, there wasn't anything in this film that we hadn't seen or heard before.

A nice documentary nonetheless but one that is more suited to the TV than the cinema, in my view.

[–] xav1991 13 years ago

The long-version of the film, known as 'Senna : Beyond the Speed of Sound' has 1 hour of interviews with Prost and others, which are unseen in the version released in cinemas in Europe and North America.

It is available on torrent sites... I suggest of downloading it, as you won't be able to access it anywhere else.

[–] ghluko 13 years ago

Thank you xav!

[–] die_hard_kavorka 13 years ago

I disagree. I thought the use of only archive material made for an incredible, insightful glimpse into the recent past. I felt transported.

It also served to help provide more of a clear-eyed, unbiased approach (although it still felt like the filmmakers slanted toward Senna's perspective whenever possible).

The sea was angry that day, my friends. Like an old man trying to send back soup in a deli.

[–] ubcool 13 years ago

'It also served to help provide more of a clear-eyed, unbiased approach' you obviously have no idea about the power of editing.

[–] MrBigglesworth999 13 years ago

I suppose that 15+ years after Senna's death the survivors' recollections today would be more hazy, distorted or biased compared to contemporaneous accounts.

After all, it's no coincidence that contemporaneous notes taken from police officer's notebooks hold much weight in court proceedings, especially when compared to alternatives such as witness cross-examinations.

As further evidence just read some politician's memoirs recalled and written by that politician long after the events occurred - a greater work of fiction you will never see!

Of course the last poster is right also: clever editing can generate whatever emotion the editor wants you to feel whether it be love/hate/outrage etc. The so-called "reality" TV shows are obvious evidence of this at its lowest.

[–] die_hard_kavorka 12 years ago

I'm a part time editor myself, ubcool, but looking back, I see your point.

The sea was angry that day, my friends. Like an old man trying to send back soup in a deli.