CAUTION: SPOILERS
I kicked this thread off stating that I'd lost some contact with the sport at the time Senna moved to McLaren. That was actually a half truth worthy of clarification.
Despite the fact finer details may have slipped my grasp, my interest in the sport had far from waned. I was paying attention; the problem is that I began to despise Ayrton Senna during his days at McLaren.
For everything Senna had done on track to clearly demonstrate that he came to F1 to win, I was less than impressed by his off circuit posturing, even when his gripes held merit and were for the betterment of the sport as a whole.
When Senna later chose to address his complaints behind the wheel of a race car, I'd had enough.
Last year, "Top Gear" presented a tribute to Senna in conjunction with the film's initial release in Europe. Jeremy Clarkson . . . another walking contradiction . . . wrapped up the excellent segment on the "driver's driver" admitting that he was at the time never a Senna fan, but that he instead (to paraphrase) thought Villeneuve the greatest. Frightening as it maybe to admit any alliance with Mr. Clarkson, I shared his perspective.
I was also never a Prost fan. I found his "smooth is fast" precision boring. I much preferred the style of those such as Senna and Villeneuve who slid closer to the edge, even when their sensational efforts were counter productive.
However, as 1994 arrived and Senna moved past his war with a now retired Prost, I found myself greatly anticipating the year ahead.
I must have been sub-conciously aware that this great driver was back to business tackling the challenges which made him the center of the greatest sport on earth. The pure aspects of racing . . . the quest to win F1 Grands Prix . . . developing a car not quite ready for the front row . . . and driving beyond that car's limits in a fashion of which legends are born . . . that's what we paid to see and Ayrton Senna was back. Adding the rise of an amazing new talent in Michael Schumacher, it was going to be a fantastic year.
Therefore, when I sat down for my first screening I brought a set of expectations that were spot on consistent with my own cinematic inclinations. Director Asif Kapadia's claim "we don’t need anyone else to tell Senna’s story except Senna" was a modus operandi I adored with great anticipation. I was ready to have my socks knocked off by a director who in his own words claimed commitment to the visceral experience.
The letdown came in the form of a less than visceral narration, and whereas the film may not show talking heads we certainly hear them. Too often I found the narration skimming over and distracting those aspects of the story which inspired a deeper curiosity.
My point is to not beat up the principal narrator, John Bisignano. Dissecting troubling comments such as "one word to describe Senna and that word is fast" only confuse my point.
Kapadia could have and should have placed greater emphasis on telling the story through Senna's own voice. As a filmmaker, I feel that if I subscribe to "show me don't tell me" then I can't go back to relying on telling the viewer what is happening much less what to think. It's that simple.
I find it ironic that every other choice Kapadia made succeeded in creating an exceptionally visceral exposition of his subject, but the effort ultimately stumbles because the subject Ayrton Senna remains elusive . . .
Utilizing the former ESPN commentator may draw sentimental memories of an era, but Bisignano's first person insight almost prevents our forming our own unique impressions of Senna as if allowed to observe only from safe broadcast distance. Is it too cynical to suggest that I did not need a former (although passionate) commentator retelling a story he'd already told me over the air years ago?
My point is demonstrated in the manner Kapadia brilliantly recovers as the story draws to conclusion. In treating the events of Imola '94 with dignified "hands off" finesse and wrapping the film on Senna's own words, the director returns to his stated commitment, and poignantly closes on a central spirit . . . not only of the film but more importantly of the man himself.
I personally feel Senna's coming of age and subsequent war against the political forces within F1 can be seen as an example for many. Having faced and often failed at the challenge of tempering passion along my own professional journey, I have not lost sight of this film's value beyond a strict motor racing audience, even if I feel that audience may not get to know the sport nor the man as well as I'd imagined.
No comments:
Post a Comment