What isn't interesting is anything involving actors, including the superstar actor who spear-headed the project for Warner Bros., Steve McQueen, initially with director John Sturges* (they had worked together on three other pictures, including the classic The Magnificent Seven and The Great Escape), and when the two had those pesky "creative differences" (he stopped by executive producer Bob Relyea's office and said "I'm going home" not mentioning that he was going back to the United States and quitting the movie), TV director Lee Katzin came in to over see the production.
McQueen was passionate about racing and wanted desperately to make a film about it and the professional drivers committed to a life of making left turns. He had a chance when John Frankenheimer approached him to star in his production of Grand Prix, but the two did not get along—their meeting lasted 30 minutes, it is said—and McQueen, instead, traveled to Taiwan to make The Sandpebbles. McQueen's friend and fellow TV-western star and racing enthusiast James Garner took the role*, which made McQueen's desire to make "his" racing film even more obsessional, determined to make "the ultimate racing film," which, at the time of Sturges' participation was entitle "Day of the Champion." But, there was one element missing—a script. McQueen's "vision" was to be unencumbered with a narrative that might limit the racing footage, ala Haskell Wexler's Medium Cool with the style of a film he particularly admired Claude Lelouch's A Man and a Woman.
With his back-to-back successes of The Thomas Crown Affair and Bullitt, McQueen achieved superstar status and had enough power to make any film for any studio in Hollywood, as long as he starred in it. He started prepping for his film of Le Mans, by going to the annual race in 1969 and plotting out camera angles and logistics for an event that only lasted for 24 hours and only once a year. McQueen's big plan was to actually race in Le Mans in the 1970 race, but Warner Bros. prohibited it due to insurance concerns—if McQueen was injured in a crash, they would lose $6 million. Professional driver Jonathan Williams would drive the "camera" car***—one camera facing forward, two cameras facing back. McQueen and crew filmed the race and crowds garnering enough documentary footage that they could work around the lack of crowds (and race) by focusing on the pit area and the track itself for subsequent filming.
The studio flew in Katzin, who brought in a lot of technical skill with cameras, but knew nothing of cars or racing. McQueen and crew were resistant, but McQueen eventually liked what Katzin was bringing to the film and the film wrapped in the fall as the leaves of the trees had to be painted green, lest they betray the season difference, and $1.5 million over budget. They had a million feet of exposed film that needed to be whittled down to theatrical length, with a semblance of a story. That process took a year, the film debuting in June 1971.
But, during the race there is a major crash that distracts Delaney who, to avoid hitting a slower car, causes his own car to pinball between guard-rails, totaling it. He's out of the race. But, the crash has caused ripples among the racers, and Delaney is called upon to replace a driver who quits during the middle of the race, giving him a chance to redeem himself finally.
As one can see, there isn't much of a story. It's all in the images and the racing and jockeying for position. All the energy of the movie is of the kinetic mechanical variety, with nothing moving forward, certainly not the lives, careers, or relationships of the characters who could be crash-test dummies for all they advance or evolve.
When one watches Le Mans, one sees a curio of film-making, from a time when there were facile experiments in style, editing, zooms and focusing, that came out of the late 1960's and studio strictures were going out the stage double-doors as younger, more experimental film-makers were given chances to attract "the youth market." At the time, television was only too happy to adapt such trends as they came from necessity due to smaller budgets and Katzin after Sturges veers in that direction. These experiments did not stand the test of time or of fashion and were tossed for the indulgences they were, instead of examples of communicative film-language. But, they remain in films like Le Mans...because you can't out-race time.
Precisely. If it's cars you want, Le Mans is a dream come true for aficionado's for its accuracy in depicting racing in that particular era. If it's drama you want, skip it. If it's a good film you want, it will be frustrating unless you're a McQueen "completist." This was Steve McQueen's big disappointment in his career, but it still accomplishes a bit of what he wanted—to give audiences a sense of what a thrill racing was for him. But, if you're not driving, a film of racing is merely left turns.
*
***—interestingly, the camera car came in 8th in 1970.
No comments:
Post a Comment