imbluzclooby

My outlook on F1 is pretty similar to all the other reviewers here who scored this no more than 5 stars. It's a very familiar plot design with cliche' ridden characters. Since the storyline lacks significant depth and character development, this film simply drags on a threadbare script and mediocre screenplay. Brad Pitt has matured into the aging pro who is on a comeback mission, but his cool and smooth demeanor just can't carry this film in an enthralling way. I honestly didn't care what the outcome would be once they tried to build up the climax which isn't that exciting. I can also say that I am not any more interested in F1 racing than I was before. And I still think it's a cool and exciting sport. Unlike Top gun which spurred a widespread interest in flying. Some people have remarked on what a cinematic achievement this is and how breathtaking the action sequences are. I would say the action sequences are competent, but nothing extraordinary. Another aspect that deserves criticism is that they spend too much time on things that don't really matter to the average audience. Showing how the Racing team operates with all of their High-tech equipment, simulators, Virtual LED's, communication gadgets, etc. Is okay to show us briefly just to give us an idea of the nature of their business. But they show all of this to the point where it grows tedious.

What amazes me most, is the magnitude of brand name sponsorship being revealed. I don't think I saw one scene that didn't feature a Brand name advert from: Oracle, Ferrari, Mercedes Benz, BMW, Porsche, Pirelli, iCloud, Red Bull, Tommy Hilfiger, Expensify, McLaren, Workday, Aston Martin, etc. Etc. The list goes on.

See Ford Vs. Ferrari instead.

Believe it or not, this forgotten film is even stupider than its title. Filmed in 1976, it obviously had a hard time getting its initial release which was late in 1978. The story was written by A Jewish/Canadian author, Mordecai Richler. Never heard of him. It borrows very much from the CS Lewis theme "Alice's adventures in Wonderland. Unfortunately, it's not as charming or engaging as the famed CS Lewis' classic. It contains many creepy and sinister characters that are so laughable you can't take them seriously. The cast is nearly all Canadian with the exception of ex-Pro Wrestler, Alex Karras. His portrayal of the 'Hooded Fang' is so awkwardly overacted that he's more of a caricature than a real serious villain. Sounding just like the Lion in Wizard of OZ and mugging uncontrollably, It was painful to watch him. And instead of having a little girl, we have a little Boy, Jacob Two Two, who is traumatized by people, because he often repeats his phrases. I like if a story can show how bullied children stand strong within themselves in the face of adversity, but the rest of the story is so demented that we hardly ever appreciate and buy into it. And whoever did the music for this movie needs to never work again in show business. It's absolutely excruciating.

This is a poorly designed story based on some Semi-Legendary Western character. I'm not sure how much of this is even true, but I am certain, based on other comments, that this is far from factual. I am not a John Huston fan and I will watch Paul Newman if there is some other attraction or great storyline. In my case, it's the former, a very young Victoria Principal.

This off-beat Western that cannot decide whether it wants to be a comedy or a serious Drama. It flagellates its tone quite rampantly without giving us any directive purpose. This story of a lowly outlaw who exacts revenge on the people who wronged him gets off to a promising start. However, the main character commits his own form of vigilante justice, takes over the town and instills his unorthodox malicious justice all in honor of his idol, Lily Langtry (ava Gardner). I can't accept Paul Newman as a real tough guy. He could play brave or crazy, but never a Hard-core badass. This screenplay is as odd is the title with inserts of unnecessary scenes. Schizophrenic and frenetic is the pace, but it still seems to drag. The music is also execrable. When a film attempts to establish the premise in a prologue, it has already failed. That is an enormous error a film maker makes, because it's a cop-out from having the screenplay and acting do that for itself. There are also characters breaking the fourth wall and addressing the audience which evokes weak storytelling. It looks annoying and stagy. The constant narrative throughout the screenplay grows redundantly dull and monotone.

Our tall, blonde and most handsome star ever in the world, Paul Newman, is matched with the captivating and very young Victoria Principal. Their on-screen chemistry is palpable. In her movie debut, Principal proves to be, not only a stunning young lady, but also a fine actress capable of showing emotions without even trying. Every time she looks up at him, you can see her genuine adoration and nubile desire for him.

The film is a sprawling mess of weird characters, a poor background score, uneven plot and some action scenes. But the presence of Victoria Principal is by far the best asset and maybe, the only asset to this forgotten film.