Ron Howard's "Rush"

[CodeRedR51]

I'm a big fan of Ron Howard's films, especially Apollo 13, so I can't wait to see this.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1979320/

A biography of Formula 1 champion driver Niki Lauda and the 1976 crash that almost claimed his life. Mere weeks after the accident, he got behind the wheel to challenge his rival, James Hunt.

And this was posted today:

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/01/17/ron-howards-rush-caught-filming-at-ring/

 

[Azure Flare]

Looks like I'll have to see this one!

 

[CodeRedR51]

Thought there would be more people around here interested in this.

 

[crooky369]

Can't wait for it.

I hope it's as good as Driven.

 

[Brend]

Can't wait for it.

I hope it's as good as Driven.

I actually liked Driven....

 

[lemansfanatic]

Like ron howard, cant stand niki loudmoutha. hey niki, keep your opinions out of current formula one affairs, they,re not welcome.

 

[F1 fan]

I actually liked Driven....

Really?

Like ron howard, cant stand niki loudmoutha. hey niki, keep your opinions out of current formula one affairs, they,re not welcome.

Sure, I mean, he's only a three time World Champion. What does that idiot know?

 

[PAWEL17]

This could potentially be the best F1 movie to date, i can't wait to see it.

 

[lemansfanatic]

Really?

Sure, I mean, he's only a three time World Champion. What does that idiot know?

I wasnt talking about his racing history. do you know anything about who's calling the shots in current f1 at all? he is good friends with Bernie and makes decisions that affect the sports future rule guidelines. He knows how to kill a 19000 rpm 10 cylinder engine. his proposal to fia legality board- turbo charged 4 bangers... This is not a joke. is this the f1 you want next year F1 "fan"?

 

[daan]

do you know anything about who's calling the shots in current f1 at all?

You clearly don't. Bernie doesn't make the rules. That's the FIA's job, and that is currently run by Jean Todt.

Anyway, this thread is about the forthcoming movies, not F1 rules. So back on topic please.

 

[lemansfanatic]

So sorry to get off topic onto formula one, considering this thread is about a formula one movie. except we were discussing niki lauda, who is actually part of this movie so no, we were not off topic at all, but thanks for chiming in and adding absolutely nothing of value to this thread. and you are kidding yourself if you think Bernie Ecclestone -OWNER of the complete rights to all that is formula one doesnt have any say in the direction his own sport is heading? jean todt is a figure head that does what Bernie tells him to do. back on topic, love ron howard, cant stand niki lauda, even if he was a great driver

 

[daan]

thanks for chiming in and adding absolutely nothing of value to this thread.

Likewise.

Now, if you wish to discuss future F1 rule changes, and your dislike of Lauda's "decisions that affect the sports future rule guidelines" go here.

 

[lemansfanatic]

I'll do my best scarface impersonation here as i exit... "iss okay, say goohbye ta the bah guy!"

Youre all free to go back to talking about "Driven" again without any more interuptions from me. Have fun at the movies dudes!

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Daniel Bruhl as Niki Lauda:

But I'm not sure if this is real or a Photoshop job.

 

[hawkeye122]

The color around his face just doesnt seem to match the depth of color in the overalls. I think it's photoshop.

 

[PeterJB]

The background looks like a very old photo though. He could simply be standing in front of a screen.

 

[CodeRedR51]

New picture courtesy of Speedhunters.

 

[F1 fan]

Getting more and more excited for this film with every new image.

 

[Northstar]

I'm guessing the fact that it's a period piece is whats allowing them to have tobacco logos on the cars still?

Can't wait for this movie, I will go to the theater alone if I have to!!!(Nobody I know likes racing, not to mention F1).

 

[Hun200kmh]

My eagerness to watch this movie is fading with every new bit of information that I get. I understand that this movie cannot be directed only to racing fans or else it'll be a commercial flop. So, I was already aware that I would have to stand some "peeping" into Hunt's intimate life. Sad but true, bedroom scenes sell tickets.

But today I got into something definitely worse. If you guys check these pictures:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...-racing-driver-James-Hunt-new-movie-Rush.html


You'll see what appears to be a depiction of Cevert's crashed car. And you will also notice a crash helmet (pretty modern, not at all a 70's one) with what appears to be a dummy head inside (and maybe some blood near the base of the helmet, can't be sure) .

If you add what apparently are american firemen you'll think Watkins Glen.

So, I see several problems here:

Cévert died at the Glen, driving a Tyrrell, in a horrible and disfiguring way but:
a) that happened in 1973, not 1976;
b) his helmet wasn't white;
c) He wasn't decapitated;

Koinigg died at the Glen, and was decapitated, but:
a) that happened in 1974, not 1976;
b) his helmet wasn't white;
c) he wasn't driving a Tyrrell, or even a blue car.



So, I don't know what to make of this, but I know one thing: If Ron Howard needs to add SEX and GORE to sell movie tickets, I suggest he picks a different subject and fictional characters. Although I do think the 1976 F1 season (more the Lauda story than the Hunt story) has all it needs to have to make for an excellent story and a thrilling movie.



Apollo XIII didn't need these stupid add-ons, I don't know why Rush should be different.

 

[CodeRedR51]

I think we're jumping to conclusions a bit quickly without seeing any footage first.

 

[Northstar]

Koinigg died at the Glen, and was decapitated, but:
a) that happened in 1974, not 1976;
b) his helmet wasn't white;
c) he wasn't driving a Tyrrell, or even a blue car.
.

Perhaps it's a flashback to his fellow countryman's horrific crash?

I wouldn't put to much stock in the captions as I'm fairly sure Liam Hemsworth isn't in the film.

 

[lemansfanatic]

Or they use cgi to replace the drivers head/helmet altogether and edit anothers in post prod

 

[TheCracker]

My eagerness to watch this movie is fading with every new bit of information that I get. I understand that this movie cannot be directed only to racing fans or else it'll be a commercial flop. So, I was already aware that I would have to stand some "peeping" into Hunt's intimate life. Sad but true, bedroom scenes sell tickets.

But today I got into something definitely worse. If you guys check these pictures:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...-racing-driver-James-Hunt-new-movie-Rush.html


You'll see what appears to be a depiction of Cevert's crashed car. And you will also notice a crash helmet (pretty modern, not at all a 70's one) with what appears to be a dummy head inside (and maybe some blood near the base of the helmet, can't be sure) .

If you add what apparently are american firemen you'll think Watkins Glen.

So, I see several problems here:

Cévert died at the Glen, driving a Tyrrell, in a horrible and disfiguring way but:
a) that happened in 1973, not 1976;
b) his helmet wasn't white;
c) He wasn't decapitated;

Koinigg died at the Glen, and was decapitated, but:
a) that happened in 1974, not 1976;
b) his helmet wasn't white;
c) he wasn't driving a Tyrrell, or even a blue car.



So, I don't know what to make of this, but I know one thing: If Ron Howard needs to add SEX and GORE to sell movie tickets, I suggest he picks a different subject and fictional characters. Although I do think the 1976 F1 season (more the Lauda story than the Hunt story) has all it needs to have to make for an excellent story and a thrilling movie.



Apollo XIII didn't need these stupid add-ons, I don't know why Rush should be different.

I think the crash represented is ment to be Lauda's. A couple of other cars were involved in the aftermath of Lauda's crash - the car depicted in the images could well be Bret Lunger's(sp?) Surtees that collided with Lauda's crashed Ferrari. The white helmet does look modern - but i don't think that's a false head in it - i think it's just the beige lining at the back that you can see through the open aperture.

I'd also imagine that the 'American' firemen are not extras in the film, but real firemen on stand-by because of the fiery scene being filmed.

 

[Hun200kmh]

3rd picture in this page:
http://www.totalfilm.com/news/first-look-at-chris-hemsworth-in-rush

I can only HOPE this is some kind of "nightmare" scene from Hunt (normal clothes and bare feet hint that), and not the distorted depiction of a real accident with a real driver.

And let me clarify a few things. Sorry for numbering, I'm not trying to lecture anyone, it's just that with my limited English I feel a need to be more clear and clearly separate several things I say.

1. I understand these films need to establish a few important facts to the casual viewer.

2. I understand that although I'm almost 50 years old and therefore was a young F1 fan back then, 90% of the audience of these films were not even born when this happened.

3. I understand that there are no deaths in Formula 1 since 1994 and therefore most teenagers out there - Formula 1 fans included - never "felt" or watched live the sudden loss of a racing driver (although last year MotoGP fans and Indycar fans knew that feeling).


So ... I understand this movie will need to ascertain that Formula 1 was a DEADLY sport. And that the DEATHS were far from graceful, they were CRUEL, be it by fire, be it by the violence inflicted upon the bodies of the deceased.

Even "Le Mans" started out by the depiction of a death (Ferrari driver - McQueen's rival - in the previous edition). And we understand that the car in question burst into flames and that probably its driver burnt alive.

But what do we see that gives us a more lasting impression? Well, you may feel it differently, but to me it's not the screeching of the tyres, the millisecond sight of the terrified eyes from the soon-to-be-dead-driver, or even the flames. What is more lasting, to me, is:
a) The sound of the syren in the grand stands
b) the soon-to-be widow hearing the announcement
c) McQueen, one year later, long time silent looking at the meanwhile repaired section of armco.

There are many ways of making an audience aware "inside" of the many horrible things we need to tell them, and one of the most powerful of those is exactly by not showing it all, only hinting what our brain then processes.

Hitchcock once replied to the question "What's the most frightening image you can think of" (or something like that) with " a half open door". And I do hope Ron Howard understands that concept.

 

[Liquid]

Sad but true, bedroom scenes sell tickets.

Yes it is, but I'm not sure how Ron Howard can present James Hunt getting stoned and nailing women as being 'dramatic'. Hunt just enjoyed himself and didn't give a Frank who cared.

 

[lbsf1]

Just I thought I would let you guys know, I near where they are filming this (blackbushe), its where I used to race karts. Last month I went down to watch the karting and had a walk around the set (there was no one there apart from some builders), it looks proper amazing. I wish I had taken some photo's now, but didn't think of it at the time.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Apollo XIII didn't need these stupid add-ons, I don't know why Rush should be different.

Because unlike Apollo 13, Rush is not intended to be an historically-accurate representation of its subject. In fact, it's not intended to be a representation of Formula 1. Rush is more of a character study than anything else. It is intended to be about the personalities. It is about two men who were wildly different in terms of personality and their approach to their racing, and yet they both chased after the same goal.

Before you see Rush, I suggest you go and see The Queen and(/or) Frost/Nixon, both of which were also written by Peter Morgan. They are about their characters - and how those characters experience the world around them - first and foremost. They are character-driven films, rather than event-driven. So, when you're worried about this:

I can only HOPE this is some kind of "nightmare" scene from Hunt (normal clothes and bare feet hint that), and not the distorted depiction of a real accident with a real driver.

Assuming that this is an actual picture from the set and not something shot between takes, I would say it is far more likely to be that "distorted depiction of a real accident" than a dream sequence (because the dream sequence is a lazy technique). The reason being because Lauda's accident at the Nurburgring was such a pivotal event to the 1976 season, that the film needs to explore the characters' perceptions of such an accident. I'd hazard a guess to say that this is Hunt in the aftermath of an accident involving a back-marker, wrestling with the question of whether the accident was the result of a driver error, or if the sport really is life-threateningly dangerous. He probably decides that driver error or inexperience is to blame for the accident, an idea he would be forced to re-examine when Lauda has his accident.

 

[Hun200kmh]

Even as a recreation, it's still impressive.




PS - Don't think Fittipaldi was one of the guys that took Lauda out of the car though (although he took care of him when his body was already lying on the floor), but that's not very important.

 

[United6694]

Looking forward to this coming out.