MotoGP Forum  

Go Back   MotoGP Forum > MotoGP Forum > MotoGP

MotoGP MotoGP Forum - MotoGP Class Motorcycle Racing Forum


Like Tree27Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
July 31st, 2016, 11:17 PM   #11
Blue Smoker
 
Arrabbiata1's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2008
From: Out of Nowhere

Posts: 6,757
Likes: 2433

I Ride: The original
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPSLotus View Post
It's utter shit visually as Ron Howard took the easy way out with the bullshit CG.
And as for that Apollo 13...should have assembled a Saturn V, filmed it in orbit and circled the moon.
Arrabbiata1 is offline  
 
August 1st, 2016, 03:56 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Keshav's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2007
From: Nu Yawk City

Posts: 8,343
Likes: 974

I Ride: DRZ400sm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arrabbiata1 View Post
And as for that Apollo 13...should have assembled a Saturn V, filmed it in orbit and circled the moon.
.
Keshav is offline  
August 1st, 2016, 04:20 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2007
From: sydney australia

Posts: 9,254
Likes: 1462

Quote:
Originally Posted by JPSLotus View Post
I wouldn't even call Rush visually brilliant.

It's utter shit visually as Ron Howard took the easy way out with the bullshit CG.

The two greatest racing movies ever made are Grand Prix and Le Mans. They all use practical effects. No surprise they shit on Rush. Kind of a shame since Rush could have been good had Howard bothered to try and emulate those movies properly. Instead he took the pussy way out.
I have to say I liked all 3 movies. Being a Lauda fan probably helped with Rush, but in my biased opinion the Australian guy was quite good and gave a fairly nuanced performance as Hunt.
michaelm is offline  
August 1st, 2016, 04:38 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
JPSLotus's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2015
From: Hethel Industrial Estate, Potash Ln, Hethel, Norwich NR14 8EY, United Kingdom

Posts: 4,636
Likes: 2055

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arrabbiata1 View Post
And as for that Apollo 13...should have assembled a Saturn V, filmed it in orbit and circled the moon.
Arrab, have you ever watched either Grand Prix or Le Mans?

Le Mans uses a ton footage that was filmed from an onboard camera mounted to a Porsche 908 at the 1970 24 Hours of Le Mans. The camera car finished in 9th position.

I get what you are trying to go for with your quip. But as Stanley Kubrick proved with 2001, practical FX will always be far superior to most CG. It's interesting you should mention Apollo 13 since it's a space film, and the contrast in quality between the original Star Wars trilogy and the prequel films has always been in the heavy use of CG in the prequels. It actually managed to take away the possibility of creating a natural look.

CG has a time and a place, but Ron Howard had a real chance to try and match either of the two aforementioned race films, and shit the bed with his heavy use of CG. It's about trying to create a natural look, not an unnatural one.
JPSLotus is offline  
August 1st, 2016, 04:48 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2007
From: sydney australia

Posts: 9,254
Likes: 1462

Quote:
Originally Posted by JPSLotus View Post
Arrab, have you ever watched either Grand Prix or Le Mans?

Le Mans uses a ton footage that was filmed from an onboard camera mounted to a Porsche 908 at the 1970 24 Hours of Le Mans. The camera car finished in 9th position.

I get what you are trying to go for with your quip. But as Stanley Kubrick proved with 2001, practical FX will always be far superior to most CG. It's interesting you should mention Apollo 13 since it's a space film, and the contrast in quality between the original Star Wars trilogy and the prequel films has always been in the heavy use of CG in the prequels. It actually managed to take away the possibility of creating a natural look.

CG has a time and a place, but Ron Howard had a real chance to try and match either of the two aforementioned race films, and shit the bed with his heavy use of CG. It's about trying to create a natural look, not an unnatural one.
James Hunt is dead, and any of the cars from 1976 which are still around are probably in museums, worth millions of dollars, and wouldn't be covered by insurance if you tried to drive them at racing speeds now.

Reproducing Le Mans would be even harder, God knows what even a small number of those cars would be worth if still extant now, probably more than even a modern movie budget. They don't make actors like Steve McQueen (or Paul Newman) any more either.

Last edited by michaelm; August 1st, 2016 at 04:51 AM.
michaelm is offline  
August 1st, 2016, 05:10 AM   #16
Blue Smoker
 
Arrabbiata1's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2008
From: Out of Nowhere

Posts: 6,757
Likes: 2433

I Ride: The original
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPSLotus View Post
Arrab, have you ever watched either Grand Prix or Le Mans?

Le Mans uses a ton footage that was filmed from an onboard camera mounted to a Porsche 908 at the 1970 24 Hours of Le Mans. The camera car finished in 9th position.

I get what you are trying to go for with your quip. But as Stanley Kubrick proved with 2001, practical FX will always be far superior to most CG. It's interesting you should mention Apollo 13 since it's a space film, and the contrast in quality between the original Star Wars trilogy and the prequel films has always been in the heavy use of CG in the prequels. It actually managed to take away the possibility of creating a natural look.

CG has a time and a place, but Ron Howard had a real chance to try and match either of the two aforementioned race films, and shit the bed with his heavy use of CG. It's about trying to create a natural look, not an unnatural one.
Sorry, it was meant to be a joke. - I was being a facetious troll. If inserted a 'wink' emoji to indicate that I was being a tit, I'd come across as patronising like J8rn0 and that'd be even worse.

Actually, I wholeheartedly agree with you. It's a bit like putting photoshop in the hands of the general public - instead of effecting subtle barely discernible enhancement, the results are often a garish farrago. Aside from the fact that I do like something vaguely resembling dialogue in a film, I find modern Hollywood blockbusters unwatchable with the excessive reliance on CGI which apart from being wholly unconvincing, robs the film of depth, dynamic and all verisimilitude - much like much of the music in the post analogue age. Hollywood being so obsessed with remakes, then it should rediscover some of its pioneering production techniques. No one is about to become the next Cecil B De Mille, as you say, largely due to expense, but it would be nice to see a return to real life action.

As a kid, I loved both Le Mans and Grand Prix (-that was James Garner right?). The makers similarly incorporated real footage of the '79 GP at Silverstone during 'Silver Dream Racer' - problem was, it was shit. If Richie Cunningham had wanted to do the same thing, he would have needed to find a vintage club race, but then nothing stopping them filming on boards from some race reps and employing some racers to swap paint I guess.
birdman and JPSLotus like this.
Arrabbiata1 is offline  
August 1st, 2016, 06:10 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
JPSLotus's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2015
From: Hethel Industrial Estate, Potash Ln, Hethel, Norwich NR14 8EY, United Kingdom

Posts: 4,636
Likes: 2055

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arrabbiata1 View Post
Sorry, it was meant to be a joke. - I was being a facetious troll. If inserted a 'wink' emoji to indicate that I was being a tit, I'd come across as patronising like J8rn0 and that'd be even worse.

Actually, I wholeheartedly agree with you. It's a bit like putting photoshop in the hands of the general public - instead of effecting subtle barely discernible enhancement, the results are often a garish farrago. Aside from the fact that I do like something vaguely resembling dialogue in a film, I find modern Hollywood blockbusters unwatchable with the excessive reliance on CGI which apart from being wholly unconvincing, robs the film of depth, dynamic and all verisimilitude - much like much of the music in the post analogue age. Hollywood being so obsessed with remakes, then it should rediscover some of its pioneering production techniques. No one is about to become the next Cecil B De Mille, as you say, largely due to expense, but it would be nice to see a return to real life action.

As a kid, I loved both Le Mans and Grand Prix (-that was James Garner right?). The makers similarly incorporated real footage of the '79 GP at Silverstone during 'Silver Dream Racer' - problem was, it was shit. If Richie Cunningham had wanted to do the same thing, he would have needed to find a vintage club race, but then nothing stopping them filming on boards from some race reps and employing some racers to swap paint I guess.
A man after my own heart.

I know you were joking with it, but Rush is a sore point with me in particular because of all the bullshit Ron Howard spewed prior to the film being released about filming with THE REAL CARS on REAL RACE TRACKS. I genuinely thought we were going to get a gritty racing movie shot on grainy film stock to really simulate the era for all it's glory. Instead he released a highly processed film that was missing all of the grittiness that it should have had...and in spite of that, the public lapped up the movie like it was the pinnacle of race films. All I could think was, that it's been nearly 50 years since Grand Prix (James Garner ) was released, and for all of the money Hollywood spends on a budget, they can't even use the techniques John Frankenheimer perfected in the 1960s?

The thing is, Howard had access to all of the original GP cars from the era since most of them are used in the FIA Historic F1 series. That's what makes it head-scratching. He literally had the ability to do what he wanted, and instead wound up with a film that was short on the actual racing, and high on the bullshit drama.

We as diehard race fans know that racing brings it's own drama for better or worse, and you don't need to write much of a script for the story itself. The on-track product is an intrinsic part of the story. For all the talk we've spent on Sepang 2015, from a storytelling point of view, it was incredible. You could not script an event like that. 1976 F1 season was just that, and all the wasted time in that movie managed to take the edge off of it. Bruhl did a great job with Lauda yes. But Hunt was infinitely more difficult to capture because he had that natural charisma like Barry Sheene, and both were wild as could be. Biggest difference was Hunt lost the will to drive after Ronnie Peterson was killed on Monza in 1978 and retired in the middle of 1979. Sheene wasn't deterred by the danger when most would have retired after the Daytona crash.
JPSLotus is offline  
August 1st, 2016, 06:14 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
JPSLotus's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2015
From: Hethel Industrial Estate, Potash Ln, Hethel, Norwich NR14 8EY, United Kingdom

Posts: 4,636
Likes: 2055

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelm View Post
James Hunt is dead, and any of the cars from 1976 which are still around are probably in museums, worth millions of dollars, and wouldn't be covered by insurance if you tried to drive them at racing speeds now.

Reproducing Le Mans would be even harder, God knows what even a small number of those cars would be worth if still extant now, probably more than even a modern movie budget. They don't make actors like Steve McQueen (or Paul Newman) any more either.
FIA Historic F1 series.



Lotus 49 crashing at Monaco 2014.

JPSLotus is offline  
August 1st, 2016, 06:15 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
MdubSTYLIE's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2009
From: Shovel's Club

Posts: 4,481
Likes: 1356

I Ride: your mom
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPSLotus View Post
A man after my own heart.

I know you were joking with it, but Rush is a sore point with me in particular because of all the bullshit Ron Howard spewed prior to the film being released about filming with THE REAL CARS on REAL RACE TRACKS. I genuinely thought we were going to get a gritty racing movie shot on grainy film stock to really simulate the era for all it's glory. Instead he released a highly processed film that was missing all of the grittiness that it should have had...and in spite of that, the public lapped up the movie like it was the pinnacle of race films. All I could think was, that it's been nearly 50 years since Grand Prix (James Garner ) was released, and for all of the money Hollywood spends on a budget, they can't even use the techniques John Frankenheimer perfected in the 1960s?

The thing is, Howard had access to all of the original GP cars from the era since most of them are used in the FIA Historic F1 series. That's what makes it head-scratching. He literally had the ability to do what he wanted, and instead wound up with a film that was short on the actual racing, and high on the bullshit drama.

We as diehard race fans know that racing brings it's own drama for better or worse, and you don't need to write much of a script for the story itself. The on-track product is an intrinsic part of the story. For all the talk we've spent on Sepang 2015, from a storytelling point of view, it was incredible. You could not script an event like that. 1976 F1 season was just that, and all the wasted time in that movie managed to take the edge off of it. Bruhl did a great job with Lauda yes. But Hunt was infinitely more difficult to capture because he had that natural charisma like Barry Sheene, and both were wild as could be. Biggest difference was Hunt lost the will to drive after Ronnie Peterson was killed on Monza in 1978 and retired in the middle of 1979. Sheene wasn't deterred by the danger when most would have retired after the Daytona crash.
You must be a huge fan of Talladega Nights. Its a very realistic portrayal of NASCAR and I don't think they used any CG.
MdubSTYLIE is offline  
August 1st, 2016, 06:35 AM   #20
Blue Smoker
 
Arrabbiata1's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2008
From: Out of Nowhere

Posts: 6,757
Likes: 2433

I Ride: The original
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPSLotus View Post
Biggest difference was Hunt lost the will to drive after Ronnie Peterson was killed on Monza in 1978 and retired in the middle of 1979. Sheene wasn't deterred by the danger when most would have retired after the Daytona crash.
I suppose the significant difference was that Hunt was already a World Champion when Ronnie Peterson died. The Daytona incident happened comparatively early in Sheene's career and because it was captured by a documentary crew it turned him into a household name. That accident in many ways was his making.

Returning to Hunt, I always thought that his criticism of Patrese in the Peterson incident was unjustified. In the UK Channel 4 used to run a series called 'The real...(insert name here). It was more an unglamorous exposť than anything else. They broached that incident of course, but the most painful viewing was after Hunt had attended a budgerigar convention in some provincial city I can't recall and the CCTV footage captured of him being ejected drunk from a nightclub. Murray Walker laments about his old friend and commentary partner and testifies that the alcohol was a personal demon up until his premature death.
Arrabbiata1 is offline  
Reply

  MotoGP Forum > MotoGP Forum > MotoGP

Tags
barry, movie, sheene



Search tags for this page
Click on a term to search for related topics.
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Barry Sheene Movie? stephanie MotoGP 2 February 15th, 2016 11:39 AM
Barry Sheene Goatboy MotoGP 81 September 18th, 2012 01:55 PM
Barry Sheene website gerard Motorsports 4 January 20th, 2009 10:58 AM
The Barry Sheene & Ham Thread vale4607 MotoGP 6 July 13th, 2007 02:02 PM
Barry Sheene - Biography Channel 9lives MotoGP 2 March 6th, 2007 01:50 PM


Facebook Twitter Google+ RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2017 Powerslide. All rights reserved.
MotoGP Forum is a MotoGP enthusiast's forum, but it is in no way affiliated with, nor does it represent MotoGP or Dorna Sports, S.L. of Madrid, Spain.