Tag: Daniel Brühl

Here we are, the epitome of strange film franchises.

Cloverfield was brilliant with its advertising, although it did leave a lot of people pissed off at the final product. 10 Cloverfield Lane came out of nowhere, announced about a month before it was released, and then ended up being pretty stinking good, thanks to great acting performances.

And The Cloverfield Paradox, originally was supposed to come out in April, got pulled from the release schedule. It then got bought by Netflix. And as we all found out on Superbowl Sunday that yes, it had a release right after the game, with only rumors released earlier the same day that it might happen. And of course a 30 second advertisement letting the viewers note that its release date was very soon.

It was brilliant, but again, it was dropped from the calendar and sold to Netflix for a reason. I knew that going in, I knew that I shouldn´t expect much. And I also knew that the fourth film in this franchise is coming out sometime in October, so no matter how bad this one ended up, it wouldn´t kill the franchise.

No matter how many times these characters scream, no one will hear it in a theater.

Aboard the Cloverfield space station, we have a team of international scientists working together to try and save the Earth. From what? From a global energy crisis. They have a large particle accelerator up in that space station to hopefully figure out how to get some sort of permanent, renewable, energy source that can save the world.

And they do not have a lot of time. Countries are ready to go to war for the limited resources left, and they only have three shots left of fuel to get things right. We have scientists from all over ( ) working to just make this thing work.

But wait! It finally reaches the good levels before shutting itself off! Did they solve the crisis? Maybe. Something still went wrong, and when they look around they notice that the Earth is completely missing. Did they move to a different part of the galaxy? Did the Earth disappear due to their science? Their compass is broken too, so they find themselves lost in space, where strange events start to take place on their space ship. People appearing, items missing, and a lot more paranoia.

Starring Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Daniel Brühl, David Oyelowo, John Ortiz, Chris O’Dowd, Aksel Hennie, Ziyi Zhang, Elizabeth Debicki, and Roger Davies holding himself together on Earth.

You got to hand it to this scene, it really strong arms the point.

I want to say that The Cloverfield Paradox is a film with a good idea and bad execution, but in reality, maybe it was a bad idea as well.

It is very obvious that this film was never intended to be connected to Cloverfield. More so than the previous film. Basically, everything on the space station was a different movie, but we had a character they added on Earth to communicate occasionally with, which connected the film to the previous Cloverfield. That and the last 30 seconds or so. So for the most part, this is just a space ship thriller movie.

But it did not do a good job of really deciding what it wanted. Was it a thriller? A drama? A strange comedy (Which was mostly O´Dowd. And his jokes/puns got annoying quickly, unfortunately)?

It featured a scene very early on of a news report that felt like a flashing neon sign letting you know what the movie was about to do, a very weak plot device. It then had our characters running around, coming up with solutions to problems that are never really fully explained. The viewer can understand the main problem, but most of the problems that happen in the film are just plot devices and never feel natural.

This film spent most of its time trying to set up something and just failing to deliver over and over again.

It was pulled from theaters for a reason, and put on netflix with no warning for a reason. Everyone everywhere has now seen it (Which is why I did not rush the review out) and it is a clunky, lame mess. Not even the several high caliber actors could save it. Instead, this film is more likely to be remembered for its stunt, not for adding anything valuable to what is turning out to be a very stupid franchise idea.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier before 2016 was the best Marvel movie to date. It was solid all around, had the best action, the biggest stakes, and was nearly perfect. Before that, Captain America: The First Avenger was probably the second most solid solo film of Phase 1, behind Iron Man and also behind The Avengers.

Despite the resounding success of Captain America films and the Russo Brothers at directing, I was worried about Captain America: Civil War. Like, really really worried.

First of all, it is one of the only full plot lines I have actually read the comics for, so it holds a special place in my heart.

Second, I had seen a few trailers and I was worried about a lot of things. If the trailers gave too much away. That the plot felt forced (unnatural) and the big fight between the two groups would be cheesy. That the previous films didn’t set things up enough for the resentment to be believable.

A huge list of worries. I only need to state them out clear so I am not shown to be a fanboy. Especially after Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice, I was ready for disappointment.

And no matter what happened, I would be Team Cap all the way.

This movie will make more sense if you saw Avengers: Age of Ultron and Ant-Man. I assume you did, because come on, Marvel.

The film actually starts out, after some flashbacks, in Lagos, Nigeria! Some current avengers (Captain America (Chris Evans), Falcon (Anthony Mackie), Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson), and Scarlet Witch (Elizabeth Olsen)) are staking out important buildings, looking for Crossbones (Frank Grillo). Needless to say, not everything goes perfectly and some civilians get hurt. Namely, a group of missionaries!

Based on those events, the events in NYC, in Sokovia, and more, the world has decided to stand up in unity and demand action. Over 100 countries have signed the Sokovia Accords, which states that the Avengers will now only act if they have permission from a UN Panel, and of course, have to act if they deem it necessary. A few of the Avengers agree with these accords. Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.) is feeling guilty and War Machine (Don Cheadle) is on his side. Hell, even Vision (Paul Bettany) feels it is necessary to avoid problems in the future.

But not Captain. He has trust issues with these sorts of groups now, and doesn’t want to be forced to step aside if he sees wrong doing, or be forced to do something he sees as wrong. So he doesn’t sign the papers. The papers are led by the King of Wakanda, T’Chaka (John Kani), who is especially pissed that their primary export was used to make Ultron. And sure enough, more bad things happen. Apparently The Winter Soldier (Sebastian Stan) is at it again!

Fuck, so much shit. Captain believes Bucky is just brainwashed and wants to protect his old friend and not let the government kill him. So yeah, there is some conflict here. Captain and a few others agree to help him out, to get to the bottom of all of this, while the other guys have to stop them for negligently doing bad things to the UN and other officers. Fuck, who is right, I don’t know?!

Also featuring the return of Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner), Ant-Man (Paul Rudd), and Agent 13 (Emily VanCamp). And of course, introducing Chadwick Boseman as Black Panther, Tom Holland as Spider-Man, Marisa Tomei as Aunt May, and Daniel Brühl as Baron Zemo. William Hurt plays the Secretary of State and Martin Freeman as the head of the UN Avengers Council thing.

Shit Spider-Man, why do you gotta go and steal my boy’s shield like that?

Captain America: Civil War is two and a half hours long, but I found myself wanting more. I needed more. More of everything! I could spend the next 500 words just comparing it to BvS, but that wouldn’t be a review of this film, it’d just be a shitty comparison. So I will keep it short: Civil War did a lot of things right that BvS did not.

Civil War turns out to be a fanboy’s wet dream. The action is incredible throughout most of the film. For each and every spout of athleticism, you can understand the fight. There aren’t a thousand quick cuts or shaky cameras. You will not only see well choreographed fighting skill sets before your eyes, but each character fights true to their persona and powers, so no one ends up fighting the same. Of course, a lot of heroes end up fighting and battling with other heroes. We also get tons of team ups you haven’t seen before. All of this creates for some intense scenes with a whole lot of fan service.

Now now, I know what you are thinking. If basically everyone is a good guy with future films, the tension can’t be real. Well, for the most part you shouldn’t expect people to die. Because it is a comic book movie and all that reason. I am not saying people don’t die, but I am saying for sure a lot of people do get hurt, both physically and emotionally. This is not a movie that wraps up everything with a nice big bow, it changes the future landscape of the films…much like The Winter Soldier did.

On another note, Civil War doesn’t go the obvious route throughout the plot. It didn’t go the typical Marvel movie route. It didn’t just keep escalating the odds to ridiculous levels. It had emotional backing behind it, on every side and even on the villain side. Some can complain that the villain is too calculating, but when I compare his plan to someone like Lex Luther’s (fuck I did it again), his makes a lot more sense without ridiculous stretches.

Thank’s Black Panther. You are clearly just aggressively giving the shield back here.

Now here, allow me to hype things.

Black Panther HYPE! What a great introduction to this guy. He was shown to be strong, agile, moral with conflicting issues given his royal upbringing. His inclusion in this film was well written and explained, along with why he chose to fight. He is in this film a bunch, more than most of the other Avengers. I am so excited for this eventual film and future roles.

Spider-Man HYPE! Spider-Man was in this film a lot more than I expected as well. We got to see him as Peter Parker a bit as well for an introduction. His fighting was very spider like, along with his normal combat quips. They also showed his age really well, when compared to the old ass fuckers on the team, giving a clear and distinct gap in knowledge bases and general attitude.

Future films HYPE! I can’t wait for more. Like I said originally, I wasn’t looking forward to Civil War. After BvS, I certaintly wasn’t looking forward to Suicide Squad. All of my hopes were riding with X-Men: Apocalypse, which I don’t see as being good as the last two, and Doctor Strange, which I am pretty excited for. But now I have higher hopes for the future of Marvel films. Higher than I already anticipated.

On a final note, despite the large cast and significance of the plot, Civil War was worthy of being called a Captain America film. It wasn’t just Avengers 2.5. His characters was largely the focus of the film, but at the same time he wasn’t a simple protagonist. Chris Evans is GOAT, hooray movies.

Thank goodness this film is called Burnt. Based on the title and poster, of Bradley Cooper in a chef’s outfit, I can make inferences though. It is about a angry chef, that was wronged and he wants revenge. Maybe. He could be a Gordon Ramsay like character and his life could come crashing down.

I am happy it is called Burnt, because it used to be called Adam Jones. Movie titles where it is just a fictional characters name are already bad ideas, because they don’t mean anything. And if you character is Adam Jones? One of the plainest damn names of all time. It didn’t feature a cool name like Enrique, Pierre, or Sadrik. Just Adam. Jones.

Naming aside, it turns out Adam Jones wasn’t the original name either. The original name was Chef, and we all know why that title was eventually changed. Hell, the plot of Chef was the first thing I thought of when I heard the word Burnt. As long as it is as good as Chef, we should have nothing to worry about.

Hey, it has food in it! Another similarity!

If you didn’t already guess it, this film is about Adam Jones (Cooper)! Turns out Jones used to be a big deal. He lived in Paris and worked for one of the finest restaurants and eventually its head chef. While he was in Paris hear earned himself TWO Michelin Stars. Which is a pretty big fucking deal. But he did some bad things. He was on almost every narcotic, and it messed with his brain. He burned bridges and disappeared from his friends, his coworkers and lovers.

He actually put himself into exile. He shucked oysters for two or three years in New Orleans, getting clean, sober, and his focus back. And now he is ready to take the cooking world by storm again. This time: London. He wants the third Michelin Star. He wants to be one of the all time greatest chefs. He just has to try and reconcile a lot of relationships and find good talent to help him get there.

Obviously it won’t be easy to fix all the issues. He left Tony (Daniel Brühl), a Maître D’ and close friend, in a shambled restaurant. He ruined his good friend and former sous chef, Michel’s (Omar Sy) new restaurant. There is the daughter of his former mentor, Anne Marie (Alicia Vikander), who he was dating at the time. He has a now rival chef, Reece (Matthew Rhys), who used to be a coworker and is now a Three Star chef. And there is Helene (Sienna Miller), a great young chef who he wants to take under his wing, but refuses to work with the guy based on his reputation. She also has a daughter, Lily (Lexi Benbow-Hart).

Here are some more important-ish people. Some of his new chefs are played by Riccardo Scamarcio and Sam Keeley. Emma Thompson is a psychiatrist who has to monitor his blood for any narcotics. Uma Thurman plays a big deal food critic in London. And Sarah Greene is the Hostess for their new restaurant, basically a little Tony.

If I get a plate that has fingerprints on it, I send the whole thing back, personally.

It turns out that my guess on him just being Gordon Ramsey was pretty accurate. Not British Gordon Ramsay, but American shitty TV Gordon Ramsay. He owns like 3/4 of Fox reality shows at this point, and Fox has the worst reality shows. They commercial break at tense moments or cliff hangers, they encourage language just so it can be bleeped out, and half of the episode is a recap, or the intro/outros that transition with the commercial breaks, which tell you what you will see and what you just saw. Except this is a movie where adults can see adults do adult things, so we get to hear the glorious Fucks and so on. One long scene early on during a particularly upsetting service, it is like just a big Hell’s Kitchen break down.

But thankfully after that moment, it gets better. He becomes less Ramsay and more actual character. He has growth in this film, he does’t yell 100% of the time, but he maintains the same passion and drive throughout. It was nice to see his highs and his lows. It was not as nice to see his stunt double clearly in one scene, and in another scene, have his face bloody with a piece of skin falling off and in the next scene a minute or two later, magically only a small cut. Those were dumb moments.

I think Cooper did a good job leading a film that wasn’t a straight up comedy. His French was also surprisingly good, that is, to a lame American’s ears at least. Thankfully, the rest of the cast was really great as well. Let’s give them their own sentence, shall we?

Miller was good as the main female lead, and she wasn’t a typical romance pretty face – she rocked it. I usually see Brühl in more interesting roles, but he helped carry the film and the restaurant with his simplestic and seemingly perfect performance as the best Maitre D’. Sy I don’t see in a lot of films, but this is the second French-ish role. His character had nice surprise and intense moments. And Rhys was a limited role, but brought his own unique intensity to it all.

Yay acting! Are there cliches? Sure. But it is a well done cooking movie that doesn’t make one feel stupid for not knowing how the fancy foods work. It tells a fun story and doesn’t turn into a sappy romcom ever. Yay food!

I felt a bit bad, reviewing Self/Less, talking about how it was Ryan Reynold‘s forth movie for the year, and realizing that I skipped two of them in the process, only reviewing The Voices.

I’m sorry Ryan. We’re still cool right? I am going to make it up to you by reviewing Woman In Gold right away (whenever this gets posted). For your non-Ryan Reynolds readers out there, yes, I am almost certain Ryan reads these reviews. Don’t be jelly.

Despite the lateness of this review, after watching two disappointing films about a Woman in Black, I am excited to see what one wearing Gold can pull off.

Oh no, she has some black on her as well! Oh nooooo!

Tie your shoes, folks. There are Nazis in this movie.

This film takes place during World War II and during modern times! As you may have heard, the Nazis stole a lot of artwork during the wars. There was a very mediocre movie about protecting that artwork. And at least one Simpsons episode about having stolen artwork! This is about one woman’s true story to get a painting back.

You see, Maria Altmann (Helen Mirren) is from Austria, but when she was a young girl she was played by Tatiana Manslany. Her Aunt was beautiful and also the subject of the very real Woman In Gold painting! Well, to make a long story short, they had to flee the city thanks to the Nazis, some people were killed, and in a will from the Aunt, the painting was donated to an Austrian museum and is now considered a national treasure.

But the will shouldn’t be legal, as it wasn’t the Aunt’s painting to give! And since Maria is the only family left, she wants her dang painting back, because it belongs to her family and it is the right thing to do.

However, she needs help. So she gets some random inexperienced lawyer (Reynolds) to work on their case. And so they have to go back to Austria, then America, then a lot of American courts, then Austrian courts, and eventually hey they win and she gets the painting back the end. This is the only expected outcome, if you didn’t know that this true story would end happy, you are silly.

Also staring Daniel Brühl, Max Irons, and Katie Holmes in the role of “wife to important character that isn’t an important role” that is quite common in…so many damn movies.

In this movie, Reynolds acts as a man with imperfect vision.

Woman In Gold is not everything you’d expect it to be, but actually a bit less. If anything, the trailer makes it looks like it would be an exciting courtroom drama, about freedoms and the right thing happening. About taking down the big bad country lawyers with a small town boy, in a trial worth millions!

Unfortunately, the whole story seems to take a backstage to a few flashbacks in Austria, about love, war, and paintings. Very little characterization is given to the now. Instead it is all set in the past, with characters the viewer will care a lot less about. We already know what more or less happens in Austria at the start of the film. Our main character lands in America, her family has to die for the painting to be taken, and you know, World War II. But at least a third or more of the film takes place in the flashbacks, leaving me bored and ready for excitement.

And excitement I thought I was finally about to get with 40 minutes left! We had a real court scene coming up. Time for witnesses, deliberation, objections, and yelling! Maybe some bribes too. No, none of that. All of the court scenes are incredibly short, dealing with maybe one issue, and then they move on. The reason we get so many court scenes is just because of all the levels of court they have to go through: to the USA Supreme Court then back to Austria.

And it is the dullest of experiences. The real life story probably has some exciting moments, but they go an incredibly safe route with the entire film and instead we get a boring disaster. And the worst part is, Reynolds and Mirren do a fine job acting in this movie. Too bad no one would care by the end.

I hope I am not a wanted man. To be more specific, I don’t want to be wanted for like, violent awkward crimes and have to go on the run. I wouldn’t mind being wanted for my dashing good lucks, charismatic hair, or my sweet sweet movie trivia skills.

I definitely wouldn’t want to be wanted after I am dead either. Like, you know, Philip Seymour Hoffman. A Most Wanted Man is apparently his last leading role that he had completed post death, so just like fucking Brick Mansions, it will definitely increase the sales by some amount.

Clearly this will be a film about terrorism though, based on the title. Terrorism. So hot right now.

Definitely one of the most impressive “investigation walls” I have ever seen.

This movie is set in the world famous Hamburg, Germany, known for its tasty mountains of meat that appear every few blocks. More importantly, an Al Qaeda terrorist cells was in Hamburg in secret, which eventually lead to some of its members becoming key operatives in the 9/11 Terrorist attacks. Who would have thought such a magical place would have such terrible atrocities associated with it?

Because of their terror issues, Günther Bachmann (Philip Seymour Hoffman) leads a German espionage team who have been surveillancing the local Muslim community. One of those fool me once sort of situations. Which some how leads them to Issa Karpov (Grigoriy Dobrygin), a Chechen who has snuck into Hamburg. Chechens are the new North Korea.

Issa is using an immigration lawyer (Rachel McAdams) to help him out. Apparently his dad has a large sum of money in a bank (run by Willem Dafoe) and he wants to get it, but he is an illegal citizen.

Günther and his team have heard from Russia that he is associated with terrorism. And now he wants a large sum of money. They also have a suspect, Dr. Abdullah (Homayoun Ershadi), who they believe is funneling money into groups but without any proof. Hmm. This is very interesting again.

Some terrorism shit must be going down!

Also featuring Rainer Bock, Robin Wright, and Daniel Brühl.

A most wanted lawyer, amirite?

A Most Wanted Man ends up being a sort of political thriller/drama. But is it the political drama/thriller that we need or deserve? That question doesn’t really make sense.

To me, I am a bit disappointed by the film. I liked the plot, it had a bunch going for it, but in the end, it felt like it was going too slow for me. The acting was fine, not spectacular. The plot ended up being only fine as well.

I am also finding it hard to really explain what in particular I liked and didn’t like. Again, only because the film seemed to drag. Not to imply that I have any form of adult ADHD, but I just wish more happened throughout the film instead of a lot of waiting.

It is an okay movie, but not Hoffman’s best work. At least it is better than Brick Mansions.

Movies based on true events are always a tricky endeavor, especially if those events are within the last few years. If they are based on a single person, who happens to be alive, then it can get all sorts of awkward.

Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks is currently living in the Ecuadorian Assembly in London. If he ever leaves, London is going to send him off to Sweden for what he claims are bogus charges, who are then going to send him back to the US for all sorts of “War crimes.” If you never heard his name, and don’t know who he is, then The Fifth Estate is probably the movie for you!

I wouldn’t describe this as a thinking movie, but there are a lot of thinking scenes.

Despite being about Julian Assange (Benedict Cumberbatch), this film is told from the perspective of Daniel Berg (Daniel Bruhl, who was also just in Rush). Daniel started to work with Julian in 2007, drawn into the idea of Wikileaks, which was a way for whistle blowers to anonymously report wrong doings and keep their identity secret so that they can not face repercussions.

A nice idea. They want to make the world more transparent, allow everyone to have secret information, and protect those that give that information. But what if WikiLeaks becomes more about Julian Assange than the original message? What if they don’t care about protecting lives anymore?

It should be noted that the movie is based on two books that came out in 2011, one written by Daniel, who was no longer with the company, both with a negative bias towards Wikileaks. Because of that, it is hard to say how much of the events in this film are accurate in their portrayal.

Despite their now aggressive relationship with each other, we get to see into the workings of the early years of Wikileaks, their volunteer army, their expansion of servers across Europe, their battle against banks and in the courts for free speech and some of their biggest scoops. It also tells the story up to including the famous Afghan War Diary, its biggest scoop, that was taken from the government by Bradley Manning.

As far as other actors, I guess they are important enough to mention. Laura Linney, Anthony Mackie, and Stanley Tucci all play various US Government employees, Lydia Leonard and Moritz Bleibtreu (from Run Lola Run / In July fame!) play other members of Wikileaks, and David Thewlis the main reporter for The Guardian who is covering Wikileaks.

Bunch of lookers too, but not in the way that phrase normally means.

Needless to say, Julian has gone on record to say he doesn’t agree with his own betrayal in this movie, calls it one sided and a smear campaign against Wikileaks. He has at least one point going for him: If powerful organizations want to discredit Wikileaks and cause it to lose trust in citizens of the world, then discrediting Julian as a bad person is one way to go about it. They mention it in the movie, and he says it in real life a lot.

In fact, the ending of the film is Benedict recreating an interview that was done with Julian, about his thoughts on the film. Sure, it made the movie end weirdly, but encouraged the viewer to do their own research on the subject. Kind of meta, kind of cool.

Of course, Julian also hasn’t seen the film, just read several scripts, so I can’t take his word completely either.

The Fifth Estate definitely makes Julian look like a dick, but also a guy who more or less has his heart in the right place. He wants to make the world a better place, but at the same time he is only human.

I think the main problem with this film is they made this story far too melodramatic that it almost made it seem either over the top, or just no longer real. The film even comes complete with “visual metaphors” because making movies about the internet and data is pretty hard without making it look silly. So there are many scenes of a warehouse, almost infinite in size, with desks and computers showing the Wikileaks army at work. What I am getting at is they still end up just looking silly.

Benedict did an excellent job at acting as always, really doing his best to imitate Julian and also seems to be a fan of the man from interviews. There is a documentary coming out eventually, We Steal Secrets: The Story of WikiLeaks, which may give a more accurate portrayal of events. But until then, we are only left with this okay melodrama, about a man and his website.

One thing I can say about Rush going into it, is that it sure had a lot of trailers. At least three, maybe more, in theaters. They were also very long. This gave me two thoughts.

1) There are a lot of events in this film that just seem like a more serious Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby. Dude gets burned, big rivalry, one is more foreign than the other one, lots of jealousy, comeback, whatever.

2) The trailers gave…a lot away. Sure, this is a real story, but I can tell you that most people do not know this story. It is different than Lincoln, in which we all know what happens. I am afraid I know everything that happens just from the trailers, which bugs me. Could be a cool story, but I want some mystery still you know.

Besides the mystery wondering why someone with such lush hair could think about dirtying it up.

I was wrong. The trailers didn’t give a lot away, at all. Sure, some major points, but fuck, a lot happened in this film.

The movie takes place in the 1970s, roughly 70-76. In 1970, James Hunt (Chris Hemsworth) and Niki Lauda (Daniel Brühl) were both Formula 3 racers with big dreams to race in the Formula 1. Both outcasts by their family, they took different approaches to racing. James lived life every day as if it was his last, laughed in the face of danger, and burned out a lot on races. Niki was intelligent, not a risk taker, but good at driving. He was also a bit of an asshole, because he was honest, and cared most about winning.

Years later, both men were in F1 and constantly at the top of the pack, a fierce rivalry between the two, although both racers definitely respected each other.

1976 was the year when the most dramatic events occurred. Fiery crashes, a close finish for world championship, rain storms, disqualifications, you name it.

We also get some insight into their personal lives. Both had wives, James with Suzy (Olivia Wilde), Niki with Marlene (Alexandra Maria Lara). Pierfrancesco Favino played the role of a teammate of Niki’s, and he rocked the mustache well.

Our other star? No lush hair for him, so they can cover it up more.

Holy fuck. I really do mean it, a lot happened in this film and in this rivalry, and I didn’t feel like anything was really spoiled. Sure, that think that happened to Niki? That was kind of spoiled, but that was a big selling point to the movie, and they hinted about it right at the beginning.

I don’t know a lot about F1 racing, but I didn’t have to in order to enjoy this film. Major props to Ron Howard, who’s last film was The Dilemma and well, lame. I felt the fear that those riders must have felt during those difficult races. The way it was all set up really put you in the drivers seat at times. The dialogue was also really great, for both main characters, and I could hear them talk all day.

I think Daniel Brühl was the better actor of the two, putting his whole self into the role, although Chris did fantastic as well. Doing research, I was even more shocked to find out that Brühl was the main character in Good Bye Lenin!, one of the few German movies I own over ten years ago. The film was very graphic when it came to the crashes, accidents, and deaths, so when Niki got injured, it was incredibly cringetastic, yet I could not look away.

But here is the most amazing thing about this film. How close it matches the reality. These events were widely filmed in the 1970s, so I was able to actually watch a lot of the final race, of the race with the crash. I watched these soon after the film, and literally, the film filmed them EXACTLY as they happened in real life. The accident was like, frame for frame recreated the exact same way. How fucking nuts is that? Every race, I have to assume, was equally as correct and not made up. It is mind blowing that Ron Howard went into that much detail, and I am in awe of that ability.

The overall film experience is why it got the review. Sure, some parts I wish they explained better, like the different tire types, and other terminology. I had to ask a friend for some clarification, but holy fuck. Rush was an experience.