This movie is more of adventure and a lot of it shows the difference in speed from one car to the next to the next. The rest is primarily why thrill seekers loved Le Mans in the 70s - the danger and American actor Steve McQueen and German actress Elga Andersen, nee Elga Hymmen, reflect on that and pray one team makes a mistake or has a mechanical problem.
If you have a couple mathematicians in your house you want to make engineers, with any luck, you may get beyond the "stupid oh they're just going around in circles" crap (anyone thinking like that doesn't understand what racing is), forget the danger because that's mostly gone, although former Aston Martin Racing driver Allan Simonsen still proves it lingers around to this day.
Le Mans is man and machine, however these days the machine is what makes the man, in the past it use to be the other way around, because these cars are much better than they were in 1971 in all aspects of the word.
If your daughters after watching this movie are not asking yourself, how the hell do they build these damn machines and the 5,000 components they require to make them run up to 225 miles an hour 4 times an lap nearly 400 times in a 24 hour race with very little mechanical or electrical problems, then they'll never fully grasp this movie, racing in general, or how complicated cars can be. For me, Formula 1 got me interested in racing thanks to my dad's doing in 1996, but 2003 is what made me an engineer when I discovered 24 hour endurance racing at Le Mans and the Rolex 24 at Daytona. This is the pivot of technology. Love sprint racing, watch F1, love machines that go fast and last, watch endurance. Endurance racing is in fact 16 1 1/2 hour F1 races molded in one event back to back to back and just wait for something to happen. That's the name of the game.
reply
share