Senna

"Senna" is part of a new trend of documentaries which have the excitement of Hollywood thrillers. These movies, which include "Project Nim" and "The King of Kong," work like so many Hollywood films: by setting up a battle between hero and villain.

In "Senna" the protagonist is Ayrton Senna, a brilliant Brazilian Formula One driver. The antagonist is Alain Prost, Senna's main rival. Prost frequently beat Senna by using his political connections with the sport's governing body to obtain favorable rule interpretations and better technology.

"Senna" is composed entirely of archival footage. Much of it comes from races, which provide the film's main source of excitement: Will Senna triumph, lose, or meet a fiery end?

Critics hailed "Senna"--it has a 92 percent "fresh" rating on Rotten Tomatoes--and with good reason. But I wonder how it would have been received if it were a traditional biopic. Everything depends on execution, of course. But a "based on a true story" version probably would have been derided as corny by some, even if it advanced exactly the same argument: that Senna was a great driver and a great man frequently thwarted by the conniving Prost.

Documentaries are more "real," in other words. But a documentary, just like a biopic, can leave out important details to create a better narrative. At the end of "Senna," we don't really know the two main characters. We have only seen what the director has chosen to show us.