Rush (2013 movie) - more thoughts

When it was first released on DVD, I composed a blog post reviewing the 2013 movie "Rush".  This is the Ron Howard film which tells the story of the Seventies Formula 1 drivers Niki Lauda and James Hunt.  I recently watched the movie again, and wondered whether my views and impressions might have shifted in the intervening period. I propose to leave aside for the most part any historical inaccuracies which I noticed.

From my late 2015 standpoint, I might describe the feel of "Rush" as being slightly "forced", a little airless and compressed. It is visually impressive, but lacking a touch of elegance, guile and finesse, notwithstanding the inclusion of a few powerful and insightful scenes.

It has been suggested that the movie's comparatively modest budget, and associated time constraints, might have contributed to its flavour and to some of its flaws. My thoughts on this are ambivalent - in places the film has a very "professional" look, but elsewhere one can see where corners might have been cut. For my own tastes "Rush" is a touch too "digital" and post-modern, lacking the charm and fluency of some earlier racing films.

Part of my assertion that the film is "forced" is based on something which I observed when I first saw it almost two years ago. The makers appear to have had a "checklist" of anecdotes and stories (some apocryphal) which they felt they had to pack in during the early portions of the picture. My sensitivity to this phenomenon may be traceable to my status as a 70s-F1-anorak. I appreciate that this would not occur as much to more casusl viewers.

The performances of the main actors attracted much comment. Daniel Bruhl rightly received much praise for his portrayal of Niki Lauda. Quite apart from the physical resemblance, he also managed to capture many of the Austrian driver's traits and mannerisms.

Chris Hemsworth as James Hunt was less universally acclaimed, and it is true that he does not quite evoke the nuances of James' inimitable persona, or the voice. The comparison between the two actors is invidious, though. It may well be more difficult to convincingly play Hunt than it is with Lauda.

I think that "Rush" really gets on track during the scenes relating to the close season of 1975/76, when we are shown Hunt's struggles to get a drive for the forthcoming season, as well as his personal problems. Cliches aplenty, of course, but some very fine moments too. In these sequences Hemsworth is very good.  The movie improves at this point because it becomes less about "back-story", composites of events and time-compression and more about a straight account. The dramatic raw-material is also better....

The Nurburgring sequences I think were well produced, without being excessively long or sensationalist, and the hospital scenes were handled more delicately than one has come to expect in films of this sub-genre or in "biopics".

The dialogue between Niki and James at Monza is convincing and credible, and the press conference where Lauda speaks is actually better than similar scenes in most movies. However, the bit where the journalist is beaten up has rightly been deplored as over-the-top and misrepresentative. A real fly in the ointment, that one. On the plus side, the imagery used at the start of the Monza race is highly effective in conveying the tension and the apprehension.

As for the racing action scenes in "Rush", well on reflection they are a mixed bag. Some are good, and CGI is used to fine effect, but others are less dazzling. One wonders why this was.  The "arty" close ups of crash helmets, suspension parts and so forth are entertaining, and a feast for the senses, but hardly original.

The build-up to the final 1976 race at Fuji is also well done, with a "less is more" ethos concerning dialogue. Visuals, sound and music all help to create the mood and the tension before and during the event.

The final scene at the airport is noteworthy both for its quality and its plausibility. It also comes as quite a surprise to have something this reflective and pensive after what had preceded it. Philosophizing, yes, but in a believable and poignant vein.

Looking at it honestly, "Rush" is a good and entertaining, if unexceptional, piece of cinema, its main strengths being Bruhl's performance, the inherent attractiveness of the subject matter and the occasional amusing or poignant scene.

Rush (2013 movie) - DVD review

First of all, a confession. I did not see Ron Howard's  "Rush" when it was released in the cinemas. I fully intended to, but my September diary ended up being rather preoccupied with more pressing concerns. The movie's DVD release enabled me to catch up, and to commit these thoughts in blog form...

As a confirmed devotee of 1970s Formula 1, and something of an anorak on the subject, I resolved to put aside my reservations about the historical accuracy of the movie, and appraise it on its quality in artistic and technical terms. So within these parameters, what of "Rush"?

In short, the movie follows the fortunes of 1970s Grand Prix drivers James Hunt and Niki Lauda, concentrating on their duel for the 1976 world title. What struck me about the film straight away was the almost semi-documentary flavour to it. The opening scene, set at the Nurburgring, serves as good exposition. This is accompanied by some rather hackneyed pseudo-philosophizing, of the type which has been obligatory in all racing movies since time immemorial.

As expected, the production values are high, although the computer-assisted trickery does not obscure the story-telling. Indeed, the racing scenes, although dramatic and at times striking, were almost incidental to me. I was much more interested in the exploration of the human dimensions of the tale, which after the shaky beginning are told in quite a refreshing and unpretentious way.

Clips and previews had conditioned my expectations regarding the performances of the main actors. Daniel Bruhl is indeed excellent as Lauda, and becomes more convincing as the story unfolds, really coming into his own after the Nurburgring 1976 accident.  Lauda's allegedly prickly and abrasive nature is played up for all it is worth, as is the playboy, non-conformist image of Hunt. Chris Hemsworth's performance as the latter came as a pleasant surprise, and he also manages to capture some of James' more laconic side.

The supposed eccentricities and foibles of every character, including team personnel, are magnified and accentuated, and it seems that the producers felt the need to pack in every known and recorded anecdote and incident involving the two men. Whilst watching, I almost felt the silent presence of a researcher ticking boxes on a "checklist" of items to include in the script. So yes, the "chapters" and content are composites of various things which did occur, many in different contexts and timescales, compressed for dramatic effect. What this all shows is that regardless of how things are presented, Hunt and Lauda, and indeed the era which they lived in, are simply splendid "raw material" for film-makers.

The Hunt-Lauda relationship depicted here is at variance with the generally accepted version, but as the narrative moves on, the dialogue becomes more incisive and cerebral, and feels less forced. The scenes sometimes feel short and staccato, but this is often the case with "biopics", where lots of information has to be included in different settings within a specified time.

The film manages to capture an appealing 1970s European/transatlantic aesthetic, invoking the music, fashions and social trends of the time, but not to excess. The more informal, less regimented atmosphere is well projected, even if the recreations of haircuts and clothes are not always totally on the mark....

I found the action sequences a mixed bag.  Exciting yes, but often looking a little contrived and clinical, even if a 1970s Grand Prix is always a fine sight to behold. The greatest impact is attained via the arty "in helmet" shots and those of suspension parts, tyres and steering wheels. They help to get across the sheer primal mechanical vigour of those cars.

"Rush" moves up a notch or two with the run-up to the 1976 season. The pace quickens, and things become more intense.  This really kicks in with the demise of the Hesketh team, and Hunt's anguish and uncertainty before the McLaren drive becomes available. The 1976 race scenes make good use of the camerawork and effects, helping to capture and encapsulate the pressures and the claustrophobia, as well as the gladiatorial nature of the sport.

The centerpiece of the movie, unsurprisingly, is the '76 German Grand Prix and its aftermath. An ominous and dark atmosphere of foreboding is skilfully created.  The Lauda crash is harrowingly but effectively done, evoking its true horror. The hospital sequences are moving without being mawkish, and are cleverly interspersed with clips of the F1 season continuing to progress in the Austrian's absence.  Daniel Bruhl truly shines in this phase, ably portraying the character's bravery and single-mindedness. One somewhat jarring note is struck by the scene at Monza involving Hunt and an intrusive journalist.

Needless to day, the season finale at Fuji is given the full treatment. Although drenched with CGI, the drama, emotion and confusion are recorded with some clarity.

Overall, I think that "Rush", while being glossy and "Hollywood" up to a point, also brings out the then still grimy world  of racing, that of the nuts and bolts and the oily rags. On its own terms, good quality entertainment, if hardly a cinematic masterpiece. In the end, much of the rumination and verbal sparring between James and Niki is solid and soundly judged. The final main scene, set in Bologna, is a good way to go out - dignified and reflective.

Rush

It sometimes troubles and mystifies me why certain music artists did not appear clearly on my radar until I approached middle-age.  One of these is the Canadian rock group Rush. When I was first becoming seriously immersed in music in the early 1980s, Rush was one of the biggest bands on the planet, by virtue of the sales of their albums "Permanent Waves" and "Moving Pictures".  Looking back, everything about them should have appealed to my musical instincts, but they largely passed me by.  I was aware of their existence, but little beyond that. Only in recent months have I begun to recognize what a talented and under-rated band they are.

What is the secret of their success and appeal, beyond identifying that they are exponents of well-crafted, melodic and intelligent rock music?  Well, they overlap several "constituencies", sharing some of the characteristics of "progressive rock".  In addition, their capacity for writing catchy melodies with universal lyrics has helped to secure some mainstream acceptance. The "power trio" format gives their music an energy and agility, permitting the music to breathe, and the individual members to express themselves.  The muscular and vibrant rhythm section is at times reminiscent of the Yes sound of the early 1970s.  Of course, Neil Peart's lyrics add another dimension. All of these factors somehow coalesce to give Rush a distinct identity and flavour, almost a separate genre by themselves.

The early material shows the band evolving, with a more homogeneous style owing much to Led Zeppelin. The debut album clearly lacks the stamp of Neil Peart, both rhythmically and lyrically. It would be easy to dismiss that first record as "meat and potatoes" hard rock, but this charge is negated by the clearly stylish and superior musicianship.  "Before and After" does offer some pointers to the future, sonically at least, and "Working Man" too shows hints of being a prototype for later endeavours.

On "Fly By Night",  a glance at the song titles alone is evidence of an advance, with the signature Rush sound gradually emerging; that uncluttered, almost crystalline thing which is less futuristic than timeless. The drumming of Neil Peart adds dynamism, and the rhythm section as a whole is more propulsive and prominent. On this second album, there is a more varied palette, and more finesse and subtlety is clearly evident. There is more scope for improvisation and virtuosity, but within a recognizable framework.

Quickly, the recordings show a band blossoming and gaining in confidence and musical ambition.  Longer tracks co-existed on the albums with more concise musical statements, and even the "epics" avoided many of the pitfalls of other "progressive" acts, the energy and spontaneity doing much to ward off any charges of self-indulgence.  The mid-to-late 70s witnessed probably Rush's most fertile period artistically, with grandiose lyrical themes fusing appealingly with that distinctive instrumental fabric.

As already highlighted, the early 1980s was probably the group's commercial zenith, and this period saw the recording of perhaps their best known composition, "The Spirit of Radio".  Purists may derjide this as a "sell-out" and a compromise, but for me it is a consummate rock single, breaking the rules without really drawing attention to itself in that sense. The song has instant appeal, in its evocative subject matter, but this tends to obscure the fact the song has depth, melodically speaking. Packing several genres into just under five minutes - hard rock, prog rock, new wave, power pop, reggae etc. It sounds as exciting now as it did over three decades ago.

I also feel that the members of Rush have not been given due recognition for their individual instrumental prowess. In a three-piece group, there is no place to hide, and each musician has to hold his own and play a central role in the action, bearing an equal share of the burden.  This was very much exemplified by Rush. Alex Lifeson in particular is under-estimated by the critics.

It is heartening to see the respect and affection with which Rush are still viewed by people around the world, even if the musical "establishment" seems slow to accord the same accolades and deference. A band whose talent and integrity are an example others could follow.