Let’s imagine the best picture award was given to the film that was most well-liked. Then, this year, Ford v Ferrari would win. That’s not to say it’s liked universally or that those who take issue with aspects of it are wrong; but still, it would win.

James Mangold’s motor-racing movie got an A+ with CinemaScore audiences and on Rotten Tomatoes there’s an unusual situation whereby a high critics’ score of 92% is actually superseded by that given by the public, at 98%. People love Ford v Ferrari, and there’s reasons for that.

First among them is a customarily stellar turn from Christian Bale. He plays British expat Ken Miles, a man obsessive about cars to the point where you begin to feel sorry for him. His accent – could be Yorkshire, could be Lancs, almost certainly not Brummie, despite the real Miles having been born in Sutton Coldfield – is mined for comic effect. The same goes for Miles’ bony features, whether he’s gurning his way around a racing track or ruminating carefully over the best way to insult a Ford executive. Bale is always worth the admission money and Miles’ eccentric intensity is reminiscent of The Fighter’s Dicky Eklund (albeit without the crack addiction), a performance for which Bale won an Oscar.

The story of Ford v Ferrari hits a sweet spot, too. It is a craftily truncated version of the real-life rivalry of the mid-60s, and structurally it’s as sound as a flathead V8. In a satisfying first act, our outsider leads, Miles and veteran racer with a dicky ticker Carroll Shelby, played by Matt Damon, overcome a low-stakes challenge. The pals are then presented with a greater test, working with the Ford corporation to overthrow the artisans of Ferrari. Miles has the talent to unlock the challenge but he rubs the suits up the wrong way. He is exiled, only for Shelby to contrive his return, a moment that occurs precisely halfway through the film. The final act presents the big race at Le Mans, 24 hours of risk-taking boiled down to a half-hour. It has a climax that looks set to underwhelm, until it ends up satisfying in a way you had not expected.

If that all seems a bit by-the-book, then you’d be right, but that’s the way people like it. The same goes for the central relationship; a mid-century grease-monkey version of Lethal Weapon’s Riggs and Murtaugh. Miles is the problematic talent, Shelby the one who’s too old for this shit. Any similarity is further enhanced by a fight midway through the movie involving a bin lid, some tin cans and a packet of sliced bread.

A conventional set-up, effectively delivered. Protagonists who have enough about them to be real, but never stray too far from the familiar. Secondary characters who conform to type (Miles’s wife, Mollie, stands redoubtably behind her husband. His son, Peter, idolises him). It’s a story that’s been told a million times before. To land a connection, which director Mangold most certainly does, is itself an artistic achievement that ought not to be dismissed lightly.

But Ford v Ferrari does have a killer extra thrumming under its bonnet. And that is nostalgia. Like Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, Ford v Ferrari is a paean to the 1960s, and specifically the California of that time. But while Tarantino’s movie is in love with the movie business, celebrity and the Hollywood hills, Ford v Ferrari is seduced by a more everyday dream.

Miles, a second world war veteran, has come to the west coast for a new life. His skills not only make that possible, they break records, too. Shelby is a stoic, a quiet member of the greatest generation who stays true to his values. Despite the throttling tentacles of the corporate world, the pair succeed. Audience members watching the film may feel differently about their lives today.

Ford v Ferrari conjures a world of freedom and opportunity. It’s also one without consequences, where gleeful petrolheadery can focus on the revving on the engine and not the contents of the exhaust (another parallel for Miles and Shelby is Clarkson and May). It’s a conservative vision, far from progressive, and one utterly disconnected from the world in which we live today. It may not have escaped your attention, however, that a lot of people find such things attractive.