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.
Just watched it and thought it was great. 9 for me. I forget how good an actor Chris is after watching him in all those superhero movies. The characters were pretty on point. I grew up knowing who Lauda was so seeing this actor portraying him... I couldn't believe how very close to accurate he was.
(•_•)
can't outrun your own shadow
I AM DEE BEE -- 10 years !
Well compared to alot of other racing movies ,it was pretty solid.
They did a good job with the material,The rivalry/respect between the two drivers was portraid really well in the movie.Here is a quote from james hunt that kinda
sums up the movie.
People always think of us as rivals but he was among the very few I liked and even fewer that I respected. ... James Hunt
Actually Lauda said it at the end of the movie.
shareI agree that this film should not be on the top 250, but you are being way too harsh on it.
This is reminiscent of Warrior. Another good film but should be nowhere near the top 250, although I prefer Rush.
I enjoyed it, I gave it an 8. I am an F1 nut though so maybe a bit biased. Sure it wasn't completely accurate. As mentioned before Hunt and Lauda were flat mates and good friends, in the movie they were made to be frenemies, leaning more so on enemies it seemed like. Also as far as I know, the Formula 3 incident between the 2 never happened as shown earlier in the film.
I was most impressed by how they made the actors look and act almost identical to the real life counterparts, Bruhl looked and sounded exactly like Lauda before and after the crash, Hemsworth looked for the most part like Hunt and acted exactly like him, Alexandra Lara looked exactly like Marlene. The wreck was done to look exactly as it happened to the t. Although not the biggest fan of all the cgi done to make it happen as such, still all very well made.
Ha, what?! I also gave it a seven, but it seems pretty odd that the OP has this level of indignation about the film being ranked an eight instead of a seven. Wow.
shareYou clearly misunderstood what the movie was trying to portray. Two revolutionary drivers in the golden age of formula 1, with no equal peers other than each other. A character study of these legends and the risks they would take just for the sake of being the best. They changed the sport forever and their rivalry was the pinnacle of formula 1. They are a testament that as people we are at our best when we have someone or something to beat, enemies and obstacles bringing us to new heights and defining who we are.
If that doesn't make for a good enough movie for you, then maybe Twilight is more up your alley?
Oh be quiet junior, the adults like movies too.
shareWooden acting? Bruhl was outstanding and Hemsworth nailed it in classic leading man style, which is not as easy as people think.
But I thought there were way too many close shots of racing and not enough wides and aerials. There is this current belief that extreme close-ups and hand-held shots are the only way to get an audience to experience what the driver is going through. Maybe it's the F1 lover in me, but wider shots (like we see in F1 TV coverage) would have given us a more balanced perspective of what the drivers are up against while racing...a perfect blend of the visceral and the intellectual, like Hunt and Lauda. F1 is a blend of brains and balls after all. But the film chose to stay with just the visceral.
And the music sucked. Every time they were racing there were these clanging guitar strums drowning out those beautiful engines. Hans Zimmer trying to do a Harry Gregson-Williams straight out of a Tony Scott flick. Huge pi$$ off.
I give it a 7.5.
BTW, how does one know when one's reply actually gets to the person one replies to, here? I found my post to... someone, but it was nowhere near that person's post, and in a very odd place.
Anyone?
If you respond to the OP, your post will be placed at the end of all the others who replied to the OP. This might result in your post being on page 10. Replying to any post works the same way. If multiple people reply to the same person on page 8, then the last poster may be on page 10. If you view the page as "Nest" or "Thread, you will notice that the posts are offset from the one above it. This designates it as a reply to the above post. If the reply is all the way to the left, then it's a reply to the OP. If it's partially offset, then follow the edge up to the earlier post that is on the same offset. In your account settings you can specify your default view. I chose "nest" as mine. You can also request that replies to your posts be sent to an email address, thus alerting you to any replies made to you. If a thread is long like this one, and you want to find your post easily, go to your account and scroll down to "Your Latest Message Board Posts". Locate the movie/post/date and click on the "Re:(post)" and it will take you to that post. Click on the movie title and it will take you to the movies home page. Any other questions, just ask.
Example of senility.http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/2779/paintx.png
I completely agree about wooden acting and weak dialogue. The primary reason is director ron howard is a real douchebag. Anyone whose contract requires he be referred to as "director ron howard" definitely has one wire laying across another. I understand he even changed his name in the phonebook to "director ron howard".
share