Invictus

Rating

Director

Clint Eastwood

Screenplay

Anthony Peckham (Book: John Carlin)

Length

134 min.

Starring

Morgan Freeman, Matt Damon, Tony Kgoroge, Patrick Mofokeng, Matt Stern, Julian Lewis Jones, Adjoa Andoh, Marguerite Wheatley, Leleti Khumalo, Patrick Lyster, Penny Downie, Sibongile Nojila, Bonnie Henna

MPAA Rating

PG-13 for brief strong language.

Review

Technical efficiency is something director Clint Eastwood excels at. He understands the general concepts of filmmaking, but occasionally, the films he creates lack clarity and purpose. Invictus excels in so many ways, but doesn’t really achieve anything.

When word came down that Clint Eastwood was taking Morgan Freeman and making a film about Nelson Mandela, the internet was abuzz with Oscar possibilities and the power of such an emotional period in South African history. The results, however, is nothing like anything we imagined, focusing insufficiently on the turmoil in South Africa following the abolishment of Apartheid and the election of its first black president. What we receive is a small segment of that country’s history surrounding Mandela’s use of the Rugby World Cup as a backdrop and impetus for creating unity in his country.

So, the concept on its surface is a unique way of looking at history, giving us an opportunity to explore a watershed moment that embodied the country’s tumultuous events. Yet, the film still feels incomplete. We have the requisite references to Mandela’s marital trouble, his internal conflicts about the direction of the country and his position as one of the most important leaders in South Africa’s history. And Freeman certainly delivers a performance worthy of all our previous attention. Yet, the audience comes away with a superficial vision of Mandela, one that doesn’t delve as deep as many would want and focused less on the man than on the sport.

And, even as a sports film, the joyous celebration of victory and the remorse of defeat seem distant and inexpressive. And that’s not to fault Matt Damon and his fellow Springbok teammates. They do an admirable job conveying the necessary emotions, but we still feel uninvolved in the story.

While we could jump on screenwriter Anthony Peckham’s adaptation of John Carlin’s book, an easy target who left far too much out of the narrative while simultaneously including too much extraneous material, but the fault must lie with Eastwood. His proficiency behind the camera is ill suited to the material. The movie feels like one-part historical drama, one-part sports film and one-part inspirational story. Combined, the three units don’t seem to gel under Eastwood’s direction.

Were you to combine John Lee Hancock’s (The Blind Side) ability to relate his story to an audience with Eastwood’s cinematographic prowess and capability of generating non-stereotypical performances, you might have ended up with a more successful film.

Invictus works. It just takes its time getting there and ultimately fails in connecting the characters and the situation to the audience in any measurable or admirable way. Those expecting any of the aforementioned three styles of films will find something lacking in this production resulting in frustration.

Review Written

January 20, 2010