Joseph Kosinski’s F1  throws the audience straight into the cockpit, immersing us into the life of an F1 driver. Through sound design and kinetic visuals, Kosinski makes the viewer feel like they’re in the film, rather than just watching it.  F1 is one of those films that is a must-see in theaters. The immersive qualities that the film offers are only elevated through the theatre experience.

Kosinski, known for films like Top Gun: Maverick and Tron Legacy, offers his signature ability to showcase stunning visuals and beautifully choreographed action. One of my favorite aspects of the film is the nearly seamless correlation between directing and driving, especially in the first half. Kosinski aligns his directing almost perfectly with the driving sequences: when the brakes are hit (literally), so does the intensity of the directing, whether that be in character development, cinematography, or plot points. This alignment allowed for the over two and a half hours of runtime to run pretty smoothly throughout.

However, the first half of the film was way more enjoyable to watch than the second half for a multitude of reasons. Despite the perfect pacing within the first half, keeping the viewers captivated and engaged throughout, the second half fell behind. I personally believe this was due to the redundancy in racing, as well as the flatlining in narrative and emotional connection between the audience and the characters. What made the first half so great started to wear off in the second half: the alignment. For example, the character drama within the second half between Sonny and JP  lacked the momentum to keep up with the high-intensity on-track sequences, losing some of the alignment that made the directing wonderful in the first half. Secondly, despite the high-octane setup that the first half utilized and executed decently well, the second half lacked a clear use of the setup, leading to an underwhelming conflict. Without a strong lead conflict the film started to feel unpurposeful and tried to show off just the racing sequences rather than attempting to build bonds between characters and/or the audience. The subplot with Peter Banning trying to kick Ruben off the board felt thrown together and just there to fill plot holes, not anything that packs a punch or is special. Another issue, the characters. The performances were great, but the characters themselves weren't.

Firstly, Brad Pitt plays the old, tough, carefree lead well; not only does he portray himself as the stoic, strong individual that is expected of a world-winning champion, but also balances the vulnerability within his character subtext well. The performance itself was executed truly well. I believe he gave the audience exactly what the writers intended him to do. However, I think the character, Sonny Hayes, himself was lackluster. There were glimpses of vulnerability and a deeper character subtext, but there wasn’t much explored - something I wish they had done a little more of. At the end of the day, the movie was about Formula 1, not internalized problems of a racer; however, I still believe the film could have benefited from some more heavy-hitting character emotions.

The little I have seen Damson Idris do has been exceptional. F1 is not an exception. Personally, Joshua Pierce was my favorite character. Damson Idris does a wonderful job playing a conceited, naive racer who slowly turns into a class act, teammate. Although not directly focused on, through his performance alone, Idris gives insight into his character through both dialogue and actions that add more emotional connection between the audience and himself. Overall, a great performance that worked quite well in collaboration with Sonny Hayes, played by Pitt.

Javier Bardem’s character, Ruben, was somewhat disappointing. The problem wasn’t Javier; it was the character. Despite Bardem’s ability to make his relationship with Pitt feel authentic and genuine, the character itself felt shallow and short, just like Sonny Hayes. Once again, the movie was a depiction of Formula 1, not a drama, but it still could have offered more character impact - especially with the two and a half hour runtime. The other performances in the movie were great; they didn’t shine, but they also did exactly what they were intended to.

My last critique would be concerning Sonny Hayes' injury-prone ordeal. I understand the film was trying to depict injury and the possible horrific effects that come with the job of being an F1 driver; however, in the end, they didn’t do anything with it. For example, the final race sequence where Sonny starts seeing double did nothing except cause distress amongst me as an audience member. Questioning if he was going to pass out and not finish the race, or if he would die once he got out of the cockpit, wasn’t the issue; it was the follow-through. I believe that implementing the double vision scene in the final race sequence was quite frankly useless; nothing happened, and it added unnecessary distress to the audience.

Despite the many critiques I have of the film, I still believe that Kosinski’s F1 was a great depiction of Formula 1, offering an immersive experience for viewers through its great visuals and amazing sound design. The performances were spectacular at key points of the film, and there were still at least some glimpses of character subtext and more emotional aspects that kept the film interesting beyond racing. An overall great watch that I would highly recommend everyone watch, especially in theaters if possible.