If you watch back the Senna film, you'll notice that they do a lot of very similar techniques to Drive to Survive, such as using footage from different years/events. (I.E. Monaco 1990 onboard footage is used for Monaco 1988, some footage of Ayrton talking to the FIA about the grid positions at Hockenheim is used for Suzuka 1990) Another thing is the way some of the interview audio is edited, especially for Alain Prost. If you watch the extended 4 hour cut of the film on the Blu-Ray, you get a lot more of Prost's unedited thoughts and you get a much better understanding of where he is coming from. A good example is how the theatrical cut very heavily implies that in 1993 Prost put it into his contract that he did not want to be teammates with Ayrton because he thought that would rob him of the opportunity of a 4th title. (I.E. That Senna would beat him because he knew he was better) What he actually says in the extended cut is that he was worried about bringing a toxic atmosphere to Williams given that things did not really cool down between Senna and Prost until midway through '93 when Prost was very clearly on his way to the title. At no point does Prost say he doesn't think he could beat Ayrton as his teammate, he just didn't want the hassle and to tear the team apart. Given that a lot of the same people (like Pandey and Box to box films) worked on both Senna and Drive to Survive, I think it's reasonable to compare them; Senna was in many ways the historical trial run for Drive to Survive, although what I would say is that Asif Kapadia's direction elevates the Senna documentary in a way that suits the format of a theatrical drama. Drive to Survive by contrast is schlocky reality TV with the occasional unique or interesting behind the scenes insight; In the footage of Senna you never really get the sense that Senna is playing to the camera; the only exception is his interview with Jackie Stewart where he attempts to defend Suzuka 1990, and it's cleary performative from Senna; he knows he is 100% in the wrong and chose to deliberately crash into Prost, but he cannot admit it, (He pretends there was a gap, but he knows full well there wasn't and admitted as such a year later) and it's a deeply uncomfortable scene; the direction and the score portrays it as a tragic scene where Senna betrays his own values to win the title. Elsewhere he comes over as authentic and passionate, rather than someone playing to the cameras, whereas the Horners and Steiners of DTS are the exact opposite; they know they are being filmed for a documentary and absolutely play into it, which makes everything feel staged and inauthentic. I think both of them are manipulative and ignore/bend the truth in service of their narratives, the Senna doc is just better at hiding it whereas in DTS if you have watched the actual sport then the fake rivalries and such are completely transparent.

Why’s that?

Historic as in his first F1 win - no-one is suggesting it was an era defining drive or win. Historic is a reasonable definition

@@allezlesrouges "F1's youngest points scorer soon became its youngest race winner - at the age of 18 years and 228 days - with an opportunistic but controlled drive on debut for Red Bull in Barcelona 2016." Found on the web, referencing Max's first win for RB. This I would consider to be an event that garners the adjective historic. To each their own though on where one sets the bar for using the adjective historic. Also I am not a die hard Max fan.

Your life is 💩

Erm! Where is RBR team base? What nationality is Newey? 😂

Silly child.

@Quagmire925 I'm a ferrari, so ask the red bull followers where they're at. Also, what does newey have to do with the brit media whining and complaining about the evil dominance that red bull has these days...?

@@MooncricketsInc I know for a fact you can’t provide any evidence of any Brit media company describing Redbull dominance as “evil”.

​@@MooncricketsInc if you don't know what you're talking about then maybe it's best just to keep quiet because you're making yourself look rather foolish with your little rant

Agree he's been extremely poor for multiple seasons now I don't see what the obsession is

I get really fed up of pundits who say "Formula 1 needs Daniel Ricciardo, we need that smile on the grid", just says it all really. I don't hate Daniel, but he's definitely overrated and definitely in F1 because of his marketability.

@@liukin95 Its only Brits, Australians nd DTS losers that keep advocating for him. During the spring Ted literally said 'At the front is where he belongs"... The disrespect Yuki get is utterly infuriating

Pretty sure Lando stole everyone's thunder yesterday and its funny to suggest someone being forced into F1.. if you implied it was for commercial reasons then fair enough although the same could be said when it comes to Yuki and Honda. That said, I hope he continues his good form, he's maturing into a solid driver and I'm all for a happy Yuki

@@kondjanegongo796 I'm British and I don't advocate for Daniel at all.

How?

@@samueljackson5346 that’s what I want to know. Max was 11 seconds behind lando and would have easily passed him when he pitted. However the only car not behind the safety car was lando and the gap went out to over 30 seconds as he was able to maintain a much much higher speed than the cars stuck behind the SC. Completely changed the outcome of the race

​@MV2024WDC That's what I was also wondering. Wasn't the SC supposed to fetch the leader and not 2nd place. The gap between Lando and Max was way too big if you think about it

@@notorious_nrsa yep, I believe there was a mistake made.

@@MV2024WDC Drive through penalty for the SC

Fanboys in the media is cringe mate. A lot of the Sky F1 lot can't help themselves

@@allezlesrouges Sky F1 is proper tabloid F1 journalism. Some of the experts are decent, like Naomi, Martin & Jenson ... but Turd Kravitz, Craig Slater and Simon Lazenby are shocking gutter press journos.

I think he'll keep his seat at RB. That's all you need to know re his performances

Hamilton has beaten 3 world champions in the same cars, with two teams. I'm no fanboy but people need to stop conveniently removing the context from his wins

@@daftgowk1 2. and he didn't really beat alonso, mclaren and fia did. they finished on equal points anyways. so, the only WDC that hamilton beat was button. cheers!

@@Stantube1000 nonsense

@@daftgowk1 just facts. rosberg wasn;t a world champion when he raced againt lewis.

@@Stantube1000 but, he was a world champion, and was beat by Lewis in the same car. Playing games now aren't we?

He was robbed today with that penalty. He had pace yesterday. He and Oscar actually stopped before the SC. They could've ended up ahead of Lando.

​@@notorious_nrsabefore the Safety car Lando was the fastest driver on track, he was pulling away from everyone (including Max) who had new tyres.

@k1ngcab00se In free air. He struggled to get by Checo. Do you think it would've been easy to get by Max. Without the SC , Lando would've had to get by 5 or 6 cars. A win wouldn't have been on the cards, then

Didn't say anything about a win, you were talking about Sainz and Oscar being ahead of Lando. Think it was pretty clear Lando was saving tyres and going long behind Perez, that's why he dropped 2 seconds back and just stayed there. My point is that Lando was quicker than Carlos and Oscar even when they had new tyres. He could've just stayed out and continued building the gap/tyre advantage.

@k1ngcab00se Once again, because Lando had free air. The no.1 position on the race track benefits from full 100% downforce. Their tyres don't overheat ,bas well as their engine.Lando would've struggled if he came out behind a group of cars because there would've been a DRS train.