Wooden acting, weak dialogue, and a story that's more like a forced drama than anything else.
I would give it maybe a 7 and that too for the setting and the snazzy depiction of the era. Maybe a refreshing escape from the superhero crap we get these days. But that's as far as it goes.
Deservingly snubbed from the oscars.
Great acting, great story, great rivalry, great directing?
I gave it a 9 and I don't even like auto racing.
and I don't even like auto racing.
Loved this movie, it was a 10 for me.
shareI can tell because this sort of "rivalry" is a staple in any racing circuit
It's all to do with better car design and building.
Contrary to your claim, the cars were actually much slower in that era, but were rolling death traps.
The first 200 mph lap was achieved in 1978. The current track record lap speed is 236.9 mph in 1996. The following year saw turbochargers banned and speeds dropped off slightly, but they are still typically in the 225-230 mph range.
Same here. Im a 32 year old woman, no interest in ANY kind of racing, and Rush was one of my favorite movies of last year!
sharewho are you kidding here? the only reason you enjoyed is because Hemsworth is the leading actor..
shareHahahahah oh gosh---I actually don't care for him at all. So don't jump to conclusions just because I am a woman. Daniel Bruhl was the star of this movie, and not good looking at all.
shareWhat a dumb comment. It may shock you that not everybody is quite as shallow as you.
shareI have no interest in racing. I thought this was a great movie. I left the theater in awe, surprised by how much I liked it. I've seen it probably 8 or 10 times to date, on TV and counting. While I like Chris Hemsworth very much (what girl doesn't?), Daniel Bruhl made this movie what it is.
shareGave it a 9 too and for the same reasons!
Ron Howard really knows how to tell a story...
People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs
Rush inspires and touches your soul. The character of Lauda is exact and he is "wooden", he is a person with a wooden personality. Perfect. The drama moves as if it were 'forced' to attack the future with courage and a love of racing. Perfection again. This drama moves.
shareNot sure what this drama is suppsoed to move, but its quite clear that in this movie it was anger that moved the cars.
---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.
[deleted]
Loved every minute and gave it a 10. I think the same as you about half the films in the IMDB 250 i watch but i dont go around criticising them as obviously enough people enjoyed it to rate it that high.
shareAnd I'm trying to understand what in the movie is worth that high a rating.:-)
Those in awe with the German's acting should really see his other movies for how one-dimensional he can be. Check out Bourne Supremacy, for example.
But then there is that horrible dialogue throughout the movie. Nothing to write home about - as if someone put it together over a weekend.
Finally, I have no idea why they did this story. The story of a playboy winning a season through a hack against supposedly a better driver who actually does go on to win several subsequent seasons. If anything, they should have done the movie on Lauda - showing his subsequent season wins despite his accident. Now THAT would have been inspirational - not this meaningless script.
Like I said, it's simply an attempt at recreating the racing track atmosphere on the big screen - a job that it does do well - but the inside story of the supposed "rivalry" is a big yawn.
They didn't do it on Lauda because it wasn't a documentary.
shareTreppeD isn't saying do a documentary, he's just saying Lauda is the more interesting topic. I do agree with the OP that this movie was overrated. Finally forced myself to watch it and get it off my DVR. My husband and I are not big Ron Howard fans and I was surprised that he really like this movie (went to see it in theater without me :( ), but I can see why. The race scenes were technically well done (and as a former film production guy, he always appreciates that--in horse racing films, etc.). For me, I could see they were well done, but I found them kind of boring because I'm just not into car racing and--gasp-I even did a few fast forwards! But I did think the tension built at the Japanese Grand Prix was effective.
Otherwise, I think there was some good material for human tension that was kind of too step-by-step, cut and dry--Hunt and his wife have a nasty exchange; NEXT; Hunt and Lauda have a nasty exchange; NEXT, etc. I know there's a short-hand to film-making, but I just found this unsatisfying. Then at the end, all neatly wrapped-up with actual footage of the real guys and a voiceover from Lauda saying he actually liked and respected Hunt--whaaa? I mean, I already knew that from other things I'd read, but I think it would have been a much more interesting story if the complexity of liking and respecting someone was mixed with the fierce competitiveness and ego of race car driving. It was a real missed opportunity. Overall I'd say great editing, casting, and production (sets, costumes, etc.), but slightly sub-par screen writing and directing. But wow, I did love Chris Hemsworth--yeah, I know, he's gorgeous--but also the camera loves the guy and I thought he really captured the dichotomy of a "driven playboy" (no pun intended).
Lauda won the '79 season and then retired in '80 after coming 4th. He returned for financial reasons in '82 and eventually won again in '84 after two poor seasons. He won three times in total. Was he a better driver? maybe, but not the tour de force you make him out to be.
The man evidently had almost no friends and had no life to speak of and would very probably have been a rather tedious point of view for the whole film to be viewed from. As it happened he had many of his own scenes, and although he is kind of made out to be the antagonist in this film, I didn't find him to be so, and considered him to be as much of a lead character as James Hunt.
I really don't understand people that come on the forums and moan about a film being giving maybe one or two stars over what they imagined it should have got, this happens to millions of people for every film that comes out, because people have different ideas of what is enjoyable to watch. If every single one of those persons came on and posted about it there would just be endless amounts of spam. I wish we could just stick to the positives for good films like this.
Moral of the story: there was no story. Neither driver had done anything plot-worthy.
Forced drama, that is.
And you do realize that the purpose of these forums is to come out and post our opinions?
The movie was about Lauda. It was a trick.
shareWhat meaning do you have to receive in order to enjoy movies? This movie pulled us through several dramatic and personal events. It was fun, sad, astonishing, victorious...good entertainment. What'meanings' do you need? Please list the meaning you need.
shareThe story of a playboy winning a season through a hack against supposedly a better driver who actually does go on to win several subsequent seasons. If anything, they should have done the movie on Lauda - showing his subsequent season wins despite his accident. Now THAT would have been inspirational - not this meaningless script.I agree.
Late reply but yes, the dialogue is a bit crappy...am watching it now and quite enjoying it and I, too, have absolutely no interest in motor racing....
"Hot lesbian witches!"
I haven't seen the film, but it looks decent enough, however IMDB ratings are not very reliable. I have loved quite a few in the 250.. I have also hated a decent amount of them. I mean the most votes any movie has on here is a little over 1,000,000. less then 1% of movie watching audiences. plus with trolls and people of verifying tastes and beliefs, It's almost impossible to know for sure before you see a film. (unless if it's in the bottom in there barrel) sometimes you'll like em sometimes you won't.
shareI'm glad that you liked it. I did too.
But to rate it a 10? Does it really rank up there with the best films ever made?
Votes like this are why IMDB ratings are inflated and unreliable. I imagine that people do vote 10 if I liked it, and 0 if "it sucked." If people are going to vote like this, why have a 10 point rating?
There's a great deal to enjoy about Rush, but it has weaknesses in the story, the characterization, the acting and the music.
I gave it a 7, and that doesn't mean it thought it a bad film. Bad films I score below 5.
I love how you asked a question, and then jumped to the conclusion that he/she doesn't find it to be one of the best films ever made and claim that is what's wrong with IMDB.
shareI concur.
5 or 6 at best.
Over the top Hollywood feel.
Agree with 5 or 6. Story was only somewhat interesting. Maybe if you are a big Formula One racing fan this movie would be great, but I am not so the movie bored me for the most part.
sharegave it a 5. Not oscar worthy. Forwarded some parts due to boredom/predictability.
shareI don't get why people say things like "too predictable" or "forced drama" whenever a film is based on real events.
I saw Titanic. The ending was too predictable.. really? really?
First up: acting - 10/10. The two leads absolutely destroyed it. They both played their characters so frighteningly well. The only reason that best supporting actor wasn't a Nod (didn't deserve to win, but a nod would have been nice) is because Nikki is a person that people in America just aren't familiar with. anyone who thinks that he was played as a wooden character has never seen interviews with him. The interviews in the film were almost verbatim with Nikki.
Second: dialogue - 6/10. The best dialogue came from the actual dialogue the two had. Some of what they said was clichéd. Some of what they actually said was brilliant. Some of what they actually said is cliché now, but probably wasn't at the time.
Third: pace - 9/10. Didn't feel too fast or too slow. Kept me going the whole time. Didn't feel dull, although I thought they should have kept the scene where it showed Nikki was messing with James from the hospital by sending him women.
Fourth: audio/visual - 9/10. They got the visuals perfect. The audio was great too but I don't think it really captured just how loud these beasts get.
Fifth: overall - 8.4/10. There is little that I can point to that is wrong with this film. What is great about this film is that it captures the time, it captures the rivalry, and it captures the importance of this moment in F1 history. People who watch this and are critical of it don't appreciate how important Nikki was to F1 and how he revolutionized it. They don't appreciate how horribly important it was for Britain to have James win the championship (and the F1 GB circuit).
Honestly I think this movie was more about Nikki than it was about James, but for a variety of reasons it makes more sense to do a film about James. First off, he was photogenic and had a cavalier attitude that made him a larger than life character. He was interesting to follow. Nikki was like a machine during his F1 carrier and would have been boring to watch. The most excitement that occurred during that rivalry was during the 76 season. It just made sense to make it about James.
I don't think that this score is out of line at all. For the genre that this film represents, it is probably the best racing film out there. To each their own. Anyone that says that this is wooden acting though really owes it to themselves to watch the interviews with both of these guys to compare against the performance. I think it is the opposite of "man on the moon" where Jim Carrey was accused of acting so well he made an otherwise not so interesting character interesting. These guys nailed it, it's just that Nikki really wasn't that interesting.
I know some scenes do need a "build up" - maybe i'm just a jaded movie watcher who has no patience for this type of "filler" To me it's just boring/predictable. You went on a tangent there with your reply I was merely implying CERTAIN parts are boring/predictable. Don't know how titanic got brought up into this...
shareI'm going to post on the forum of every film that didn't quite get the result that I think it should, I recommend every person in the world should do this to.
Because, I'm sure the other 6.5 billion people in the world give a *beep* what I think.
I literally just finished watching this, on one of those channels, uncut, and as an ex-Indy car fan, disappointed NASCAR aficionado (after over 15 years of adoring Jeff Gordon and my cuz, Dale E), I thought this movie was SO much more than a racing picture. It was a tale of love, death, pain, moral motives, excruciating decisions, people defending others (Hunt bashing that reporter in the closet after the reporter asked that asinine question, and Lauda not knowing about it until years later) and as a writer (a paid one; been doing it for years) I thought this picture had it all.
I knew Hunt would die, and would die young, and off the track, because of his lifestyle, but I was heartsick anyway. The story of these two men, their "groupies", Lauda (supposedly) giving up the Japanese GP so he wouldn't die and grieve his wife, Hunt and Susi (and I KNEW that was Olivia Wilde! Great accent, girl), just that whole world and time in history, was brought alive and fascinated me. Sorry some here didn't get it. Oh, well.
Got to agree with TrepeeD here.
I was really excited to see this movie based on all the rave reviews, but it really didn't wow me at all. It was okay acting, okay story, okay message, but nothing really compelling here.
I think it would have been better if it were inspired by real life...throw in some fictional elements to make it more interesting.
X
I think it would have been better if it were inspired by real life...throw in some fictional elements to make it more interesting.
Wooden acting?? Seriously?? Have you not seen what James Hunt and Niki Lauda were like in real life?? CH and DB got them right down perfect ...
Forced drama? - I'm guessing you never saw it in real life - it was exactly like this. I remember it clearly.
Snubbed from the oscars because its not a popular subject in the USA - doesn't make it a bad film. And on that subject, of course the best film of the year always wins the oscars doesn't it
----------------------------------------
I don't know what it is, but its weird and pissed off!
And I'm trying to understand what in the movie is worth that high a rating.:-)Erm, he must have had at least 3 minutes screen time in Bourne. Pretty hard to make any conclusions from that. Inglorious Basterds was a better test don;t you think? He was pretty good in that no?
Those in awe with the German's acting should really see his other movies for how one-dimensional he can be. Check out Bourne Supremacy, for example.
But then there is that horrible dialogue throughout the movie. Nothing to write home about - as if someone put it together over a weekend.Really - this is what they were like - honestly. I know its all a bit European
Finally, I have no idea why they did this story. The story of a playboy winning a season through a hack against supposedly a better driver who actually does go on to win several subsequent seasons. If anything, they should have done the movie on Lauda - showing his subsequent season wins despite his accident. Now THAT would have been inspirational - not this meaningless script.Again, and I'm assuming you are not from Europe/Asia. F1 is the biggest sporting event there is over here - it can draw crowds of up to 300K and TV viewing into the higher 100s of millions even now yet alone back in the 70's when it was HUGELY popular. This was the high point of the entire F1 - they had just gotten decent cars and engines which had outgrown the old tracks built for lower speeds and it was really dangerous and very exciting as there was a lot of bumping and overtaking and, dare I say it, crashes. The Hunt and Lauda rivalry is legendary in this era and literally changed these drivers into rock stars. These guys were the highest paid pro sportsmen on the planet and it paved the way for other sports to do the same thing. After this period, new rules came in and more safety which made the cars and tracks less interesting for spectators and the sport waned.
Like I said, it's simply an attempt at recreating the racing track atmosphere on the big screen - a job that it does do well - but the inside story of the supposed "rivalry" is a big yawn.OK = well of you find it boring then theres not a lot more to it than the fact that Hunt and Lauda were the high point of this sport and the rivalry was certainly NOT "supposed" - it was a real fight, and nearly to the death. They were like gladiators and they got in this hunk of metal and nearly killed themselves doing it - in fact like Lauda says there is a 20pc risk of killing yourself every time you got in the car - got to make you think before you get in yes?
Erm, he must have had at least 3 minutes screen time in Bourne. Pretty hard to make any conclusions from that.
Really - this is what they were like - honestly. I know its all a bit European
Again, and I'm assuming you are not from Europe/Asia. F1 is the biggest sporting event there is over here ... They were like gladiators and they got in this hunk of metal and nearly killed themselves doing it - in fact like Lauda says there is a 20pc risk of killing yourself every time you got in the car
OK = well of you find it boring then theres not a lot more to it than the fact that Hunt and Lauda were the high point of this sport and the rivalry was certainly NOT "supposed" - it was a real fight, and nearly to the death.
Get a proper writer to help the wooden dialogue
Once again, just because it sucked in real life doesn't mean it needs to suck on the big screen.
Make a documentary if you want to keep them "real". There is a separate Oscar category for it.
snubbed implies it belonged there which it didn't. i was very disappointed in this movie. i expected more from ron howard.
that said, it was still better than most movies these days. a solid 7 in my book.
"You only need matches and balls and I got those"
Completely agree. Am staggered at the praise heaped on what for me was a film that looked cheap, inconvincing and - apart from some of the acting, and the post-crash scenes - was dull. The credit roll took 9 minutes, which is astonishing since it looked like it was made on a budget. A small budget.
Hard to believe the director of Apollo 13 made this.
www.chrismrogers.net, a website for architecture and visual culture