This has been lingering on my Netflix to-watch list and I finally got around to it. Being a bit of a car guy and racing fan, I sincerely wanted to like "Journey to Le Mans" (2014)
I didn't. It just did not do anything for me.
Being about a small privateer team, it already offers a unique perspective wholly different from "Truth in 24". Why oh why then does it try so hard to ape that nuts and bolts 'these are the facts laid bare' type of storytelling? Trying to do that with this team using far fewer filmmaking resources just doesn't work.
It's clear the filmmakers couldn't show up for every race meet, every practice, every team meeting and walk through-talk through. They haven't got the firepower. And yet they still try to pull off a story about building up to the big race using a patchwork of mostly generic laps and repetitive crew footage devoid of emotion. What is supposed to be the powerhouse and cache of Patrick Stewart and Tiff Needell end up being a crutch it leans on in order to patch up missing race/event coverage.
Such weaknesses needn't be deficiencies. If only more focus was put towards zeroing in on emotion. If only the filmmakers concentrated on the team principals' love for the sport, about what drives them, why they put in so much time money and effort towards racing. If only they showcased how they FEEL, then maybe we too, the audience, can feel. See: "Love The Beast" with Eric Bana.
Alas, I only came off feeling as though the filmmakers had done a disservice to the interviewees: They all come off as being boring storytellers. To interview someone is to ask them to tell a story. Unfortunately everyone seems to be the type to not expand on their feelings and motivations, who aren't open to talking about how they feel, and just would not open up about which part of their childhood influenced (and continues to influence) this desire, this drive towards victory in the rarefied field of Le Mans top finishers. I mean, there was this part about Simon Dolan being kicked out of school and then... I don't know, pursuing education on his own terms??? He's an accountant, which means his credentials are no joke, even if his education is unconventional and or self taught. Maybe the guy is a supreme autodidact, which means he has in him an amazing story, an amazing journey to share to the audience. Yet I barely got to know him. I had to read about him in another article just to fill in the blanks of "who is this man, and why should I be rooting for him to win?"
Being that I ended up knowing so little about his personality, his family life and how he is as a person, all I know is that he seems to be someone who I'd trust with money, an airline, and yes, a racing team.
But I would not anchor my story on him.
I didn't. It just did not do anything for me.
Being about a small privateer team, it already offers a unique perspective wholly different from "Truth in 24". Why oh why then does it try so hard to ape that nuts and bolts 'these are the facts laid bare' type of storytelling? Trying to do that with this team using far fewer filmmaking resources just doesn't work.
It's clear the filmmakers couldn't show up for every race meet, every practice, every team meeting and walk through-talk through. They haven't got the firepower. And yet they still try to pull off a story about building up to the big race using a patchwork of mostly generic laps and repetitive crew footage devoid of emotion. What is supposed to be the powerhouse and cache of Patrick Stewart and Tiff Needell end up being a crutch it leans on in order to patch up missing race/event coverage.
Such weaknesses needn't be deficiencies. If only more focus was put towards zeroing in on emotion. If only the filmmakers concentrated on the team principals' love for the sport, about what drives them, why they put in so much time money and effort towards racing. If only they showcased how they FEEL, then maybe we too, the audience, can feel. See: "Love The Beast" with Eric Bana.
Alas, I only came off feeling as though the filmmakers had done a disservice to the interviewees: They all come off as being boring storytellers. To interview someone is to ask them to tell a story. Unfortunately everyone seems to be the type to not expand on their feelings and motivations, who aren't open to talking about how they feel, and just would not open up about which part of their childhood influenced (and continues to influence) this desire, this drive towards victory in the rarefied field of Le Mans top finishers. I mean, there was this part about Simon Dolan being kicked out of school and then... I don't know, pursuing education on his own terms??? He's an accountant, which means his credentials are no joke, even if his education is unconventional and or self taught. Maybe the guy is a supreme autodidact, which means he has in him an amazing story, an amazing journey to share to the audience. Yet I barely got to know him. I had to read about him in another article just to fill in the blanks of "who is this man, and why should I be rooting for him to win?"
Being that I ended up knowing so little about his personality, his family life and how he is as a person, all I know is that he seems to be someone who I'd trust with money, an airline, and yes, a racing team.
But I would not anchor my story on him.