Discussion
Probably covered extensively already, but the ersatz Search funciton isn't throwing much up.
Wasn't sure whether to put this in here or in Motorsport. Obv I'm a bit behind the curve here in terms of not having watched this before, but I just watched the Senna film - got it for Xmas but not had an evening to myself to settle down and watch uninterrupted.
Struggling to find the right superlatives. Compelling? Sensational? (in a "that's an amazing film" way, not in a "sensationalist" way). Gripping. Emotive.
Lowered my opinion of Prost significantly, albeit salvaged somewhat during the credits.
Definitely a must-see if you have a sniff of fuel in your veins, just make sure you have a little speck of grit handy to remove from your eye.
Wasn't sure whether to put this in here or in Motorsport. Obv I'm a bit behind the curve here in terms of not having watched this before, but I just watched the Senna film - got it for Xmas but not had an evening to myself to settle down and watch uninterrupted.
Struggling to find the right superlatives. Compelling? Sensational? (in a "that's an amazing film" way, not in a "sensationalist" way). Gripping. Emotive.
Lowered my opinion of Prost significantly, albeit salvaged somewhat during the credits.
Definitely a must-see if you have a sniff of fuel in your veins, just make sure you have a little speck of grit handy to remove from your eye.
Fantastic film. But it is obviously very one sided. Prost isn't quite the 'baddie' he's made out to be. I recommend giving the extended version a watch. It's a little broken up but you get to hear off Prost. There are a lot more things I don't agree with from Prost but it's a bit more accurate than the perception the normal cut creates.
In some ways, this documentary produced by the BBC shortly after his death is superior. More relevant information packed into its 45 minute running time than the newer movie-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula...
I can't believe the praise it's got, and the awards its won. It's very one sided, there is way too much focus on Japan 1990, no mention of his later admission that he hit Prost on purpose etc. That white haired American guy they keep showing is really annoying, I guess they didn't use Nigel Roebuck etc because they would have criticised (as well as praised) Senna. It's just not very good, uses very few people to comment, and is way too one sided. It really is the emporers new clothes, I couldn't believe how poor it is.
I think it's a great piece of work, but really shouldn't be used as a historical document. I believe even the film's producers have acknowledged that they went too far with the Prost thing.
The film will produce much embarrassment for future fans who believe the film though, that's for sure.
The film will produce much embarrassment for future fans who believe the film though, that's for sure.
Watched a bit of again recently and it still feels like a glorified fanboy YT video.
Senna is the protagonist but because he's devisive, complex, etc; its very easy to say its one sided as I and a lot of people did at the cinema.
IMO Prost arguably was the baddie but the rivalry was complex, too oversimplified. I thought the passing mention of 1989 San Marino GP was criminal because the aftermath their relationship truly hit rock bottom.
Anyone who is interested in knowing more on this particular rivalry pick and read a biography on Senna - Christopher Hilton's is probably best, and a book called Senna Versus Prost - some say this book is biased to Prost but Jo Ramirez and Josef Leberer bring some balance because they tried to remain neutral.
Senna is the protagonist but because he's devisive, complex, etc; its very easy to say its one sided as I and a lot of people did at the cinema.
IMO Prost arguably was the baddie but the rivalry was complex, too oversimplified. I thought the passing mention of 1989 San Marino GP was criminal because the aftermath their relationship truly hit rock bottom.
Anyone who is interested in knowing more on this particular rivalry pick and read a biography on Senna - Christopher Hilton's is probably best, and a book called Senna Versus Prost - some say this book is biased to Prost but Jo Ramirez and Josef Leberer bring some balance because they tried to remain neutral.
I watched this DVD (finally) and while I enjoyed the footage and some things that I hadn't seen before I will, shamefacedly, admit that I was dissapointed in it, in that it didn't really say a lot and didn't go in to as much depth as I'd hoped. Senna had other rivalries other than Prost and his history was far deeper than was portrayed.
I can recommend the Tom Rubython biography as a good read as it will shed more light on his life and background - admittedly a book will always tell you more, but this sheds more light.
I wish I'd seen the film first, if I'm honest, as it just left me thinking "but what about...."
I can recommend the Tom Rubython biography as a good read as it will shed more light on his life and background - admittedly a book will always tell you more, but this sheds more light.
I wish I'd seen the film first, if I'm honest, as it just left me thinking "but what about...."
Eric Mc said:
AshVX220 said:
I enjoyed it, don't be surprised it's Pro-Senna, it's called "Senna" after all.
A documentary about Atilla the Hun wouldn't necessarilly be pro Atilla the Hun.Besides, I reckon if you looked at Atilla the Hun's entire "career", you may be able to find enough to do 2 hours of "good" work from him.
I wasn'r comparing their careers (although Senna could be almost as ruthless). I was making the point that a documentary about an individual can be objective instead of being hagiographic.
I enjoyed the film when I saw it and there were one or two revelations and some previously unseen footage. But as an objective telling of the story of Senna and his era in F1, it was pretty poor to be honest.
I enjoyed the film when I saw it and there were one or two revelations and some previously unseen footage. But as an objective telling of the story of Senna and his era in F1, it was pretty poor to be honest.
Eric Mc said:
I wasn'r comparing their careers (although Senna could be almost as ruthless). I was making the point that a documentary about an individual can be objective instead of being hagiographic.
I enjoyed the film when I saw it and there were one or two revelations and some previously unseen footage. But as an objective telling of the story of Senna and his era in F1, it was pretty poor to be honest.
Damn it man, I had to look that up!! I enjoyed the film when I saw it and there were one or two revelations and some previously unseen footage. But as an objective telling of the story of Senna and his era in F1, it was pretty poor to be honest.
Please remember I'm but a simpleton! 
I think they had a line to focus on, in the rivalry between Senna and Prost and possibly because of the films backers, it had to be positive in Senna's favour. As I understand they had so much footage that even after the initial cull of footage they still had 5 hours worth to try and cut down to 2 hours IIRC.
Anyway, I enjoyed it, maybe because it was that year that I started to get into F1, so missed all the previous rivalries?
AshVX220 said:
In fairness though Eric, there's a cavernous difference between Atilla the Hun and Senna. That's just chalk and cheese.
Besides, I reckon if you looked at Atilla the Hun's entire "career", you may be able to find enough to do 2 hours of "good" work from him.
He was terrible in the wet too, or was that Ivan the Terrible.Besides, I reckon if you looked at Atilla the Hun's entire "career", you may be able to find enough to do 2 hours of "good" work from him.
AshVX220 said:
Eric Mc said:
I wasn'r comparing their careers (although Senna could be almost as ruthless). I was making the point that a documentary about an individual can be objective instead of being hagiographic.
I enjoyed the film when I saw it and there were one or two revelations and some previously unseen footage. But as an objective telling of the story of Senna and his era in F1, it was pretty poor to be honest.
Damn it man, I had to look that up!! I enjoyed the film when I saw it and there were one or two revelations and some previously unseen footage. But as an objective telling of the story of Senna and his era in F1, it was pretty poor to be honest.
Please remember I'm but a simpleton! I think they had a line to focus on, in the rivalry between Senna and Prost and possibly because of the films backers, it had to be positive in Senna's favour. As I understand they had so much footage that even after the initial cull of footage they still had 5 hours worth to try and cut down to 2 hours IIRC.
Anyway, I enjoyed it, maybe because it was that year that I started to get into F1, so missed all the previous rivalries?
The film worked best for those who knew little about him BEFORE they'd seen the film. Anyone who'd been around during his career (including the pre F1 era) and had already read about would have spotted all the omissions and biasednness (which I was able to do - being an old codger).
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff