Ford v Ferrari
2/4
Starring: Matt Damon, Christian Bale, Tracy Letts, Caitriona Balfe, Josh Lucas, Jon Bernthal
Rated PG-13 for Some Language and Peril
"Ford v Ferrari" is yet another historical docudrama with hopes of Oscar gold. Movies like this are beloved by the studios. They have brand name quality, the audiences want to know how everything went down, and they're cheap to make (at least compared to the superhero behemoths that are unleashed every two months). Unfortunately, "Ford v Ferrari" is so obsessed with hitting every note that it loses sight of the story itself.
Lee Iacocca (Bernthal) proposes that Ford needs to revamp its image. Younger consumers prefer sleeker, faster and sexier cars than the safe, bland cars that Ford makes. After a merger deal with Ferrari goes bad, owner Henry Ford II (Letts) tells Iacocca to do whatever it takes to build a car that will beat Ferrari at the next Le Mans race. To do this, he enlists an American racer who has won Le Mans, Carroll Shelby (Damon). But Shelby can't race anymore due to a heart condition so he pegs the brilliant but temperamental Ken Miles (Bale) to race the car.
The problem with "Ford v Ferrari" is that its a mess. One of the long running bits in the film is the importance of the individual versus the risk averse groupthink. That's ironic, because this movie was clearly written by committee. This plot is all over the place. There is so much plot going on that the run time balloons to about 45 minutes longer than can be reasonably justified. A narrower focus could only have helped things.
It's a shame too, since it hampers the stellar work by its two leads. Matt Damon and Christian Bale are both excellent. The role of the brilliant but fiery star is something that Bale could do in his sleep, but it's a testament to the actor's gifts and talent that he doesn't do so. Bale might well get another Oscar nomination since he's more or less the male version of Meryl Streep. But for me, the one who stood out the most was Matt Damon. By design, Carroll Shelby isn't a flashy role; he's the straight man to the wild card. But that doesn't make Damon's performance any less stunning. As the super-contained, gutsy straight-shooter, Damon nearly steals the film from Bale. Which is saying a lot. The actor hasn't been this good since "The Departed."
One thing that distinguishes "Ford v Ferrari" is its point of view. A lot of movies are about the little guy going up against the big corporation (in fact, Matt Damon played that kind of character in "The Rainmaker"). But here there is definitely a bit of rural, salt of the earth type versus the clueless big city elite. It isn't highlighted, but it comes through in subtle ways such as Carroll's attitude and way of speaking. It is also never mocking. In fact, Carroll is the smart one where as the suits like Lee Iacocca and Leo Beebe come across as overly cautious and naive.
So while the start of the movie is abrupt and without a good foundation, and the middle is overlong and sluggish, the final act has some suspense. The film is too muddled and drawn out to achieve any substantial tension (certainly nowhere near the level of, say, "Rush"), but the race sequences are well done and exciting. But the film needed a better editor.
Starring: Matt Damon, Christian Bale, Tracy Letts, Caitriona Balfe, Josh Lucas, Jon Bernthal
Rated PG-13 for Some Language and Peril
"Ford v Ferrari" is yet another historical docudrama with hopes of Oscar gold. Movies like this are beloved by the studios. They have brand name quality, the audiences want to know how everything went down, and they're cheap to make (at least compared to the superhero behemoths that are unleashed every two months). Unfortunately, "Ford v Ferrari" is so obsessed with hitting every note that it loses sight of the story itself.
Lee Iacocca (Bernthal) proposes that Ford needs to revamp its image. Younger consumers prefer sleeker, faster and sexier cars than the safe, bland cars that Ford makes. After a merger deal with Ferrari goes bad, owner Henry Ford II (Letts) tells Iacocca to do whatever it takes to build a car that will beat Ferrari at the next Le Mans race. To do this, he enlists an American racer who has won Le Mans, Carroll Shelby (Damon). But Shelby can't race anymore due to a heart condition so he pegs the brilliant but temperamental Ken Miles (Bale) to race the car.
The problem with "Ford v Ferrari" is that its a mess. One of the long running bits in the film is the importance of the individual versus the risk averse groupthink. That's ironic, because this movie was clearly written by committee. This plot is all over the place. There is so much plot going on that the run time balloons to about 45 minutes longer than can be reasonably justified. A narrower focus could only have helped things.
It's a shame too, since it hampers the stellar work by its two leads. Matt Damon and Christian Bale are both excellent. The role of the brilliant but fiery star is something that Bale could do in his sleep, but it's a testament to the actor's gifts and talent that he doesn't do so. Bale might well get another Oscar nomination since he's more or less the male version of Meryl Streep. But for me, the one who stood out the most was Matt Damon. By design, Carroll Shelby isn't a flashy role; he's the straight man to the wild card. But that doesn't make Damon's performance any less stunning. As the super-contained, gutsy straight-shooter, Damon nearly steals the film from Bale. Which is saying a lot. The actor hasn't been this good since "The Departed."
One thing that distinguishes "Ford v Ferrari" is its point of view. A lot of movies are about the little guy going up against the big corporation (in fact, Matt Damon played that kind of character in "The Rainmaker"). But here there is definitely a bit of rural, salt of the earth type versus the clueless big city elite. It isn't highlighted, but it comes through in subtle ways such as Carroll's attitude and way of speaking. It is also never mocking. In fact, Carroll is the smart one where as the suits like Lee Iacocca and Leo Beebe come across as overly cautious and naive.
So while the start of the movie is abrupt and without a good foundation, and the middle is overlong and sluggish, the final act has some suspense. The film is too muddled and drawn out to achieve any substantial tension (certainly nowhere near the level of, say, "Rush"), but the race sequences are well done and exciting. But the film needed a better editor.
Comments
Post a Comment