Search
Search results

BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Sound of Metal (2019) in Movies
Mar 22, 2021
Rooted in Humanity
SOUND OF METAL has a pretty simple “one-line summary”: Heavy Metal Drummer deals with going deaf. But is it the humanity at the center of this film that makes it worthwhile.
Written and Directed by Darius Marder (THE PLACE BEYOND THE PINES), SOUND OF METAL tells the tale of Ruben, the drummer of the Heavy Metal Band BLACK GAMMON, who must come to terms with suddenly losing most of his hearing.
Starring Riz Ahmed - in an Oscar nominated turn - SOUND OF METAL follows Ruben’s journey as he comes to terms with the wrinkle that his life has thrown at him and the silence makes him study the non-stillness inside of him.
This all sounds like it could be corny, right? Well…under the guidance of Marder and with a central performance that is grounded and real by Ahmed, it is anything but. This film finds itself in it’s humanity and the very real, personal interactions.
Credit must start with the performance of Ahmed (heretofore known to me as Bodhi Rook in STAR WARS: ROGUE ONE), he is in almost every scene in the film and he must bring a vulnerability to the screen for the audience to care about him - and he accomplishes this in spades. Even when his character makes mistakes (and, trust me, he makes a TON of them), you end up rooting for him to succeed.
Paul Raci was nominated for a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his portrayal of Joe, the head of the Deaf Community for Addicts that Ruben eventually goes to. His turn is also grounded in the reality - the reality of addicts who have yet another twist in their life thrown at them. Raci has a road-weary look to him and gives off an aura of someone who has seen - and heard - it all, so must take a “tough love” approach. This performance works very well.
Also strong in this film is Olivia Cooke (READY PLAYER ONE) as Lou, Ruben’s girlfriend/lead singer of the Metal Band they are in. She must make some tough decisions in the course of this film - and you end up emotionally engaged in her story as well. Both Ruben and Lou are good people at heart that must make hard choices, you root for both of them to succeed even though, through these choices, pain and suffering and separation must occur.
All of this sounds good, but there has been many a film that falters under the “good intentions” of it’s Director/Screenwriter, but SOUND OF METAL avoids most of the pitfalls of these types of films by not dwelling too much on the pain and suffering of the leads - it’s there, but (as Joe would say), deal with it. I’m a little surprised that Marder did not get a Best Director Oscar nod (the work is that good), but am glad that he did get an Original Screenplay nomination.
And…as you can imagine…a film about Deafness is reliant on the Sound Design to help bring that aspect of Ruben’s experience to the audience - and this film delivers the goods. The sound team was, rightfully, nominated for the Oscar for sound design - and they should easily win - for the sound is another character in this film and that is what, ultimately, makes this film works. The audience is put in Ruben’s shoes and, at times, are unable to hear what others on the screen are saying.
A very satisfying film experience - one that needs to be seen with no distractions (especially sound distractions), so find a quiet time, lower the shades and dive into the world of the SOUND OF METAL.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Written and Directed by Darius Marder (THE PLACE BEYOND THE PINES), SOUND OF METAL tells the tale of Ruben, the drummer of the Heavy Metal Band BLACK GAMMON, who must come to terms with suddenly losing most of his hearing.
Starring Riz Ahmed - in an Oscar nominated turn - SOUND OF METAL follows Ruben’s journey as he comes to terms with the wrinkle that his life has thrown at him and the silence makes him study the non-stillness inside of him.
This all sounds like it could be corny, right? Well…under the guidance of Marder and with a central performance that is grounded and real by Ahmed, it is anything but. This film finds itself in it’s humanity and the very real, personal interactions.
Credit must start with the performance of Ahmed (heretofore known to me as Bodhi Rook in STAR WARS: ROGUE ONE), he is in almost every scene in the film and he must bring a vulnerability to the screen for the audience to care about him - and he accomplishes this in spades. Even when his character makes mistakes (and, trust me, he makes a TON of them), you end up rooting for him to succeed.
Paul Raci was nominated for a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his portrayal of Joe, the head of the Deaf Community for Addicts that Ruben eventually goes to. His turn is also grounded in the reality - the reality of addicts who have yet another twist in their life thrown at them. Raci has a road-weary look to him and gives off an aura of someone who has seen - and heard - it all, so must take a “tough love” approach. This performance works very well.
Also strong in this film is Olivia Cooke (READY PLAYER ONE) as Lou, Ruben’s girlfriend/lead singer of the Metal Band they are in. She must make some tough decisions in the course of this film - and you end up emotionally engaged in her story as well. Both Ruben and Lou are good people at heart that must make hard choices, you root for both of them to succeed even though, through these choices, pain and suffering and separation must occur.
All of this sounds good, but there has been many a film that falters under the “good intentions” of it’s Director/Screenwriter, but SOUND OF METAL avoids most of the pitfalls of these types of films by not dwelling too much on the pain and suffering of the leads - it’s there, but (as Joe would say), deal with it. I’m a little surprised that Marder did not get a Best Director Oscar nod (the work is that good), but am glad that he did get an Original Screenplay nomination.
And…as you can imagine…a film about Deafness is reliant on the Sound Design to help bring that aspect of Ruben’s experience to the audience - and this film delivers the goods. The sound team was, rightfully, nominated for the Oscar for sound design - and they should easily win - for the sound is another character in this film and that is what, ultimately, makes this film works. The audience is put in Ruben’s shoes and, at times, are unable to hear what others on the screen are saying.
A very satisfying film experience - one that needs to be seen with no distractions (especially sound distractions), so find a quiet time, lower the shades and dive into the world of the SOUND OF METAL.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)

Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated Adrift (2018) in Movies
May 14, 2019
Sinking ship
#adriftmovie is an uninspiring & disjointed film that fails to stay afloat during its short run time. Have you ever seen the film #Allislost with #robertredford ? if the answer is no waste no time with Adrift & rush out & buy that instead right now, its a #masterpiece & #Adrift is the opposite. So why am I comparing the 2? well 'All Is Lost' not only has a similar story but it does everything Adrift fails at & does it exceptionally well. 'All is lost' manages to tell its tragic tail not only with actual #heart & #soul but fantastically without much dialog too, the cinematography is also stunning & the #bond it successfully helps us build with its main character is tremendous & emotionally powerful. Adrift manages none of this - its told out of chronological order which kills suspense & mystery as well as making the film feel messy, the acting isn't great but that could be down to the atrocious/laughably basic dialog, the #soundtrack makes the tone feel unbalanced & the green screen at times is appalling. Its an ok watch but at a short 1h 30m it drags & by the time we finally get to see the accident I'd lost interest completely. Its a shame because I like #SamClaflin as an actor & there was some nice camera work & some #lovely establishing shots. All in all is a big missed opportunity to give this #heartbreaking #truestory the film it deserves & in the end its a film that just ends up being below average at best. #odeon #odeonlimitless #mondaymotivation #ShaileneWoodley #boobs #movie #filmcritic #cinifile #sad #tragic #filmreview #love #beautiful

Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus
Book
The legendary relationships guide that mothers recommend to their daughters, friends give as gifts...

Merissa (12919 KP) rated Everealm (Everealm, #1) in Books
Apr 16, 2023
This is a fantasy romance, with some very hot and steamy scenes, that do not overpower the story. The two main characters, Breestlin and Rowan, have loved each for a long time but were separated when their parents found out that they had 'been intimate'. Rowan's path takes a different turn from becoming the knight he expected, whilst Bree has suitor after suitor paraded in front of her. Luckily, she doesn't accept any of them, and her parents don't force the issue (which is good being as they married for love!)
Dagan and Sidonie are excellent characters who really add a certain 'va va voom' to the story. I actually wanted to hear more about Finn, but I'm hoping he will have his story in a later book. Silas is an evil character from the start. Although, for the most part, he is almost crude in his power plays, there is also a sly side to him that makes for a twisted story. All of the characters are well-developed, whether you like them or not, and the world-building is spot-on. Smoothly paced and well-written, this is a fantasy that will delight. I am looking forward to reading book 2, Wildfire, and am hoping it is just as good.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Sep 29, 2015
Dagan and Sidonie are excellent characters who really add a certain 'va va voom' to the story. I actually wanted to hear more about Finn, but I'm hoping he will have his story in a later book. Silas is an evil character from the start. Although, for the most part, he is almost crude in his power plays, there is also a sly side to him that makes for a twisted story. All of the characters are well-developed, whether you like them or not, and the world-building is spot-on. Smoothly paced and well-written, this is a fantasy that will delight. I am looking forward to reading book 2, Wildfire, and am hoping it is just as good.
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book; the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Sep 29, 2015

Debbiereadsbook (1444 KP) rated Wolf of the Nordic Seas (Valiant Vikings #2) in Books
May 19, 2025
as well as the Viking folklore, we got a paranormal element too!
Independent reviewer for Archaeolibrarian, I was gifted my copy of this book.
This is book 2 in the Valiant Vikings series. While not strictly necessary, I think it would be beneficial to read book one, Dragon of Denmark, before this one. It will give you a better view of this world, how it works and of the author's writing style.
I enjoyed book one, but for the repetitive descriptions of runes and things. That is why I found this a much more . . .difficult(?) . . .read.
The repeating of what runes are for, what the stones are for, and who did what and when takes up a huge portion of this book. I found myself skimming paragraphs just to get back to the story. I didn't feel I missed anything by doing so, either!
I did like that Elfi and Njord both have the majority voice. I loved that we hear again from the bad guy, and how they go about getting what they want. I do love it when well laid out plans don't come to pass for the bad guy!
What I really liked, though, was as well as the Viking folklore, we got a paranormal element too! Mermaids, werewolves, light and dark elves. I loved the way it was all seamlessly meddled together!
A good read, but one I did struggle with. Some of that was the repetition, and some me (I have *stuff* going on!)
3 very good stars
*same worded review will appear elsewhere
This is book 2 in the Valiant Vikings series. While not strictly necessary, I think it would be beneficial to read book one, Dragon of Denmark, before this one. It will give you a better view of this world, how it works and of the author's writing style.
I enjoyed book one, but for the repetitive descriptions of runes and things. That is why I found this a much more . . .difficult(?) . . .read.
The repeating of what runes are for, what the stones are for, and who did what and when takes up a huge portion of this book. I found myself skimming paragraphs just to get back to the story. I didn't feel I missed anything by doing so, either!
I did like that Elfi and Njord both have the majority voice. I loved that we hear again from the bad guy, and how they go about getting what they want. I do love it when well laid out plans don't come to pass for the bad guy!
What I really liked, though, was as well as the Viking folklore, we got a paranormal element too! Mermaids, werewolves, light and dark elves. I loved the way it was all seamlessly meddled together!
A good read, but one I did struggle with. Some of that was the repetition, and some me (I have *stuff* going on!)
3 very good stars
*same worded review will appear elsewhere

Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated Catwoman: Soulstealer - DC Icons Book 3 in Books
Oct 25, 2018
So I needed a "book about a heist" for the PopSugar 2018 Reading Challenge, and naturally, Catwoman fits the bill. It wouldn't be a Catwoman novel/cartoon/graphic novel without a heist! Several, in fact, in this instance. And she teams up with Poison Ivy and Harley Quinn to pull them off, even though she doesn't seem to actually need the girls in this book. I love that Maas chose to include them, because Ivy/Harley/Catwoman is one of my all-time favorite team-ups. The book also delves into the relationship between Ivy and Harley, and Harley's dysfunctional dependence on the Joker (who's in Arkham for this book). I loved seeing that.
Interestingly, Batman doesn't show, other than a few phone calls with Luke Fox, Lucius Fox's son. Luke takes the traditional role of Batman-as-Catwoman's-love-interest, but as Batwing, a sort-of Robin. (Maybe I read too many comics? Nah.) The switch was surprising; it's always Catwoman and Batman, Selina and Bruce. Except when it's Talia and Bruce, I suppose.
I do wonder if they're going to do an ensemble cast novel after these first four books. (Wonder Woman: Warbringer, Batman: Nightwalker, and Superman: Dawnbreaker being the other three.) Superman doesn't come out until January, but the first three have been very disconnected from one another. Wonder Woman wasn't even mentioned in Batman or Catwoman. It seems odd to have them as a series, but never mention one another in each book? That, or the Superman book is going to tie the other three together, which seems like a disservice to Superman.
Anyway. I really liked Luke Fox as Batwing - the book touched, just a little bit, on racial issues, and how even as an obscenely rich black man he's not entirely exempt from those. In one scene he worries about the color of his skin being seen through damage to his batsuit, and cops realizing he's black. It's a sober reminder that even in a city beset by evil clowns, it's still set in the United States and we still have those racist systems in place.
The banter between Luke and Selina, and Selina and Harley and Ivy, is fantastic. I haven't actually read any of Sarah J. Maas' books - I know, I know - but if they're like Catwoman, I should probably give in and do so. So far, Wonder Woman is still my favorite of the DC Icons series (which is no surprise, as I love Leigh Bardugo) but Catwoman is really good.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.com
Interestingly, Batman doesn't show, other than a few phone calls with Luke Fox, Lucius Fox's son. Luke takes the traditional role of Batman-as-Catwoman's-love-interest, but as Batwing, a sort-of Robin. (Maybe I read too many comics? Nah.) The switch was surprising; it's always Catwoman and Batman, Selina and Bruce. Except when it's Talia and Bruce, I suppose.
I do wonder if they're going to do an ensemble cast novel after these first four books. (Wonder Woman: Warbringer, Batman: Nightwalker, and Superman: Dawnbreaker being the other three.) Superman doesn't come out until January, but the first three have been very disconnected from one another. Wonder Woman wasn't even mentioned in Batman or Catwoman. It seems odd to have them as a series, but never mention one another in each book? That, or the Superman book is going to tie the other three together, which seems like a disservice to Superman.
Anyway. I really liked Luke Fox as Batwing - the book touched, just a little bit, on racial issues, and how even as an obscenely rich black man he's not entirely exempt from those. In one scene he worries about the color of his skin being seen through damage to his batsuit, and cops realizing he's black. It's a sober reminder that even in a city beset by evil clowns, it's still set in the United States and we still have those racist systems in place.
The banter between Luke and Selina, and Selina and Harley and Ivy, is fantastic. I haven't actually read any of Sarah J. Maas' books - I know, I know - but if they're like Catwoman, I should probably give in and do so. So far, Wonder Woman is still my favorite of the DC Icons series (which is no surprise, as I love Leigh Bardugo) but Catwoman is really good.
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.com

Backbreaker 2: Vengeance
Games and Sports
App
The million-selling Backbreaker Football is back with a vengeance - and this time YOU tackle!...

Neon's Nerd Nexus (360 KP) rated The Lion King (2019) in Movies
Jul 19, 2019 (Updated Jul 19, 2019)
If this is where the monarchy is headed Count me out!
Lion king 2019 is by far the worst of the Disney live action remakes & while newcomers/children will certainly love it many of the people that hold the original close to their hearts will leave wishing they had just stayed home with the far superior predecessor instead. Aladdin & The Lion King are two of the greatest animated feature films of all time & as I experienced them both in cinema on release they are very special to me. Now i loved the Aladdin remake & im not one for comparing these to the animated features but while I was watching this all i could think about was how much better the original is. While it looks absolutely gorgeous (until anything starts to move) the animation at times is so unnatural especially when animals are walking slowly that its constantly distracting & kills the illusion of these creatures being real. Voice work is bland/mediocre & delivered with almost no enthusiasm at all like the cast were more concerned with sounding different to the original than giving the characters charm & personality. Voices also dont feel connected to the characters like your watching a nature documentary thats been dubbed over. While Aladdin did its own thing & changed up the movie Lion King is practically & infuriatingly a scene for scene remake which would be ok if it had the charm, colour, grand scale, imagination, excitement, thrill, humour & emotional impact of the original but it doesnt. Songs are butchered/dull with seemingly no energy or spectacle to them at all feeling significantly toned down/grounded rather than fun & toe tapping (they have also ruined 'Be Prepared'). So whats new? theres new humour & yup you guessed it its really bad with awkward timing & dragged out jokes that just fall flat. I wanted so bad to love this movie but not even a scense of nostalgia kicked in either because the film is just soulless, unenthusiastic, boring, bland, lacking in excitement & magic. Kids will no doubt love it but for me its this years biggest let down. If it were a silent film with an epic score over the top it might of at least been unique/watchable & helped be bearable but as it is I just cant recomend seeing it. A big fat cash grab.

Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Ford v Ferrari (aka Le Mans '66) (2019) in Movies
Jan 22, 2021 (Updated Jan 22, 2021)
Matt Damon asked Christian Bale how he had managed to lose almost 70lbs for his role as Ken Miles, following his chubbing up to play Dick Cheney in Vice the previous year. Bale just smiled, shrugged and said, “I didn’t eat”. Such is his reputation for playing real people with 100% commitment, apocryphal or not, I totally believe that is true.
Sports films, and especially racing films, hang on three things: the quality and believability of the sports/racing scenes, the dynamic tension between the lead characters, and the degree we are hooked by the underdog makes a comeback element. Le Mans ’66, also known as Ford V Ferrari for American audiences, who obviously can’t make sense of French or numbers, has all three of those boxes ticked, and several others besides.
It will make it easier for me to explain why I liked this film so much if I confess up front to how much I liked it, so without hesitation I confidently state… more than Rush (2013) and Grand Prix (1966), making it probably the best racing film ever, but less than Warrior (2011) or Rocky (1976), making it a contender for top 5 but not the best sports movie ever. So, that is pretty high praise from the flag-fall.
Let’s examine the 3 key elements in order. Firstly, the racing scenes: This film is based on real people in real races driving real cars, with very little altered or tweaked for dramatic purposes (save one key detail of the final race). It didn’t need anything adding, because the real story is incredible enough. Part of that is the very real rivalry that existed between the undisputed champions of the world’s most beautiful cars, Ferrari, representing everything essentially European, and the empire of mass production efficiency that was the Ford dynasty, representing everything American.
The reproductions of the cars themselves and the personalities behind them is vivid and believable from minute one, so when the cars hit the track you can almost smell the fuel and feel the heat and grime, not to mention the speed. Every shot on every straight and turn feels like it should, and would, if you yourself were driving: intense, terrifying, exhilarating and addictive!
At no point did I see anything unrealistic, or a piece of footage copied and pasted. No trick angles or overuse of time stretching techniques, what you see is mostly what you get, and if you understand car racing in even the most amateur way then that is impressive. Add to that a complete understanding of tension building during a race from a direction and acting point of view and you just have to tip your helmet visor to James Mangold and Christian Bale, who seem in complete synthesis about what is required from a racing scene.
Next, look at the chemistry between Damon’s laconic yet stubborn pragmatist, Carroll Shelby, and Bale’s idiosyncratic, twitchy adrenaline junky, Ken Miles. They couldn’t be more different, personality wise, or actually performance wise. Bale chews up the screen with another in a long line now of big bold characterisations that you can’t take your eyes off, and Damon gives off solid, dependable, trust-worthy movie-star vibes in return. Their scenes together are spiky, fun, compelling and feel authetic, in a Hollywood movie way that we recognise and love. It feels almost like Paul Newman and Jack Lemon – the handsome straight guy and the quirky foil.
I love both these actors when they bring their A game. And they do here. It is consummate film acting, completely in control of what kind of film they are making. Not a naturalistic drama hoping to sweep the Oscars and hit hard in the emotional solar plexus, but a fun sports film driven by the conventions and tropes of the genre. Both manage to keep it just the right side of fun and exciting, whilst holding the reigns on believability also. Mangold, who knows how both action (Logan) and Bio-pics (Walk the Line) work to a very high level, brings experience of both genres to the fore here, and the blend is sublime.
Finally, there is the underdog element. Both of these guys were unconventional mavericks, and well known as being so. Both respected, but never treated as champions as they deserved in their lifetime, perhaps because they were not yes men or company men, who toed the line and played by the rules of the big bosses of the sport. Both of them absolutely driven by compulsion and passion to win, yet both flawed on the ways they could achieve that.
Then there is the consideration how much the car is a character, or at least Ford as a concept. What makes this story so great is the David and Goliath element, that makes you sure there is no possible way this could be true. As with all great sports films, even if you know the history and result of a real event, the little guy sticking it to the invincible and arrogant behemoth, win, lose or draw, is what makes us invest and then cheer, or cry, when all the effort is finally spent.
Effort, sacrifice, overcoming obstacles, facing defeat, bouncing back from setbacks, gaining respect of friends and rivals alike – all these elements make a sports film great. Le Mans ’66 has it all, with the added bonus of enough budget to make it fly, which isn’t usually the case in this genre. It looks spectacular, feels exciting and is ultimately completely satisfying, as both a character study of real men, and a document of a game changing moment in sporting history.
It also doesn’t entirely ignore the female influence on such a masculine world; the little known Irish actress Catriona Balfe as Mollie Miles really caught my eye in some really tender scenes. This film won’t be passing the Bechdal test any time soon, however, as she is pretty much the only female member of the cast with an actual name! But it isn’t something to get too hung up about, in my opinion.
I’d be bold enough to recommend this to anyone. No need to love cars, or racing or even sport at all. If you love good movies that keep you hooked till the checkered flag of the credits, then look no further. High art? No. A proper movie with huge mass appeal? 100%
Sports films, and especially racing films, hang on three things: the quality and believability of the sports/racing scenes, the dynamic tension between the lead characters, and the degree we are hooked by the underdog makes a comeback element. Le Mans ’66, also known as Ford V Ferrari for American audiences, who obviously can’t make sense of French or numbers, has all three of those boxes ticked, and several others besides.
It will make it easier for me to explain why I liked this film so much if I confess up front to how much I liked it, so without hesitation I confidently state… more than Rush (2013) and Grand Prix (1966), making it probably the best racing film ever, but less than Warrior (2011) or Rocky (1976), making it a contender for top 5 but not the best sports movie ever. So, that is pretty high praise from the flag-fall.
Let’s examine the 3 key elements in order. Firstly, the racing scenes: This film is based on real people in real races driving real cars, with very little altered or tweaked for dramatic purposes (save one key detail of the final race). It didn’t need anything adding, because the real story is incredible enough. Part of that is the very real rivalry that existed between the undisputed champions of the world’s most beautiful cars, Ferrari, representing everything essentially European, and the empire of mass production efficiency that was the Ford dynasty, representing everything American.
The reproductions of the cars themselves and the personalities behind them is vivid and believable from minute one, so when the cars hit the track you can almost smell the fuel and feel the heat and grime, not to mention the speed. Every shot on every straight and turn feels like it should, and would, if you yourself were driving: intense, terrifying, exhilarating and addictive!
At no point did I see anything unrealistic, or a piece of footage copied and pasted. No trick angles or overuse of time stretching techniques, what you see is mostly what you get, and if you understand car racing in even the most amateur way then that is impressive. Add to that a complete understanding of tension building during a race from a direction and acting point of view and you just have to tip your helmet visor to James Mangold and Christian Bale, who seem in complete synthesis about what is required from a racing scene.
Next, look at the chemistry between Damon’s laconic yet stubborn pragmatist, Carroll Shelby, and Bale’s idiosyncratic, twitchy adrenaline junky, Ken Miles. They couldn’t be more different, personality wise, or actually performance wise. Bale chews up the screen with another in a long line now of big bold characterisations that you can’t take your eyes off, and Damon gives off solid, dependable, trust-worthy movie-star vibes in return. Their scenes together are spiky, fun, compelling and feel authetic, in a Hollywood movie way that we recognise and love. It feels almost like Paul Newman and Jack Lemon – the handsome straight guy and the quirky foil.
I love both these actors when they bring their A game. And they do here. It is consummate film acting, completely in control of what kind of film they are making. Not a naturalistic drama hoping to sweep the Oscars and hit hard in the emotional solar plexus, but a fun sports film driven by the conventions and tropes of the genre. Both manage to keep it just the right side of fun and exciting, whilst holding the reigns on believability also. Mangold, who knows how both action (Logan) and Bio-pics (Walk the Line) work to a very high level, brings experience of both genres to the fore here, and the blend is sublime.
Finally, there is the underdog element. Both of these guys were unconventional mavericks, and well known as being so. Both respected, but never treated as champions as they deserved in their lifetime, perhaps because they were not yes men or company men, who toed the line and played by the rules of the big bosses of the sport. Both of them absolutely driven by compulsion and passion to win, yet both flawed on the ways they could achieve that.
Then there is the consideration how much the car is a character, or at least Ford as a concept. What makes this story so great is the David and Goliath element, that makes you sure there is no possible way this could be true. As with all great sports films, even if you know the history and result of a real event, the little guy sticking it to the invincible and arrogant behemoth, win, lose or draw, is what makes us invest and then cheer, or cry, when all the effort is finally spent.
Effort, sacrifice, overcoming obstacles, facing defeat, bouncing back from setbacks, gaining respect of friends and rivals alike – all these elements make a sports film great. Le Mans ’66 has it all, with the added bonus of enough budget to make it fly, which isn’t usually the case in this genre. It looks spectacular, feels exciting and is ultimately completely satisfying, as both a character study of real men, and a document of a game changing moment in sporting history.
It also doesn’t entirely ignore the female influence on such a masculine world; the little known Irish actress Catriona Balfe as Mollie Miles really caught my eye in some really tender scenes. This film won’t be passing the Bechdal test any time soon, however, as she is pretty much the only female member of the cast with an actual name! But it isn’t something to get too hung up about, in my opinion.
I’d be bold enough to recommend this to anyone. No need to love cars, or racing or even sport at all. If you love good movies that keep you hooked till the checkered flag of the credits, then look no further. High art? No. A proper movie with huge mass appeal? 100%