Secondhand Reviews: "Invictus"

There can be at most only a handful of public figures who could be put in the same category as Nelson Mandela as far as their importance to recent world history are concerned, and few if any who would be worthier subjects for a biographical film. Furthermore, I cannot think offhand of any actor who could be more ideal to play Mandela than Morgan Freeman. And to have the film directed by Clint Eastwood, who for the past several years seems to have been at the absolute peak of a distinguished career... well, on a number of levels I was highly anticipating "Invictus". I'm sorry to say that it delivered on only a few of those levels.

The film isn't really the story of the life of Mandela... it is, rather, about a brief moment in time shortly after he became president of South Africa and found it nearly impossible to unite the black population (many of whom were eager to finally get even with the white minority who had tormented them for so long under the system of apartheid) and the distrustful and resentful whites, who after all still controlled much of the country's financial and business interests even though they were no longer in power. He decided on an unlikely course: The South African rugby team, the Springboks. Hated by the black population because of their association with the old regime, Mandela made it his task to arrange to steer them on course to win the rugby World Cup, thereby uniting the nation behind their suddenly beloved team.

Upfront admission time: one of the problems I had with the film is one that, quite possibly, might not bother many other viewers. Other than baseball, I am just not a fan of any sport at all, and I generally avoid sports movies like the plague. I particularly dislike American football. And not only did "Invictus" turn out to be a sports movie as much as it is anything else, but its portrait of rugby made the game look uncomfortably similar to American football... uncomfortable for me, anyhow. At least it managed to avoid being your standard "team of colorful misfits comes from behind to finally show its stuff when it competes in the big game"... hey, wait a minute, it actually kind of WAS that kind of movie. NEVER MIND.

I understand that the film wasn't meant to cover Mandela's entire life up to this point, but unfortunately a lot of younger viewers (and, for that matter, older but just as ignorant adult viewers) are going to approach the film not knowing precisely why the South African government felt so threatened by him that they imprisoned him for 27 years. They won't find that out here. The racial tension that still exists between various factions is well established near the beginning of the film and made to feel very real, but then these barriers just seem to collapse and old injustices forgiven once the Springboks begin their impressive winning streak. Hollywood loves stories about race when it seems that it takes only the simplest things to make racism vanish like it never existed (it's probably part of the same thing about the American character that made so many people think that we live in a "post-racial" society now that Barack Obama is president). But the rose-colored glasses through which this movie looks at major, difficult issues made for a significant disappointment to me.

I definitely cannot complain about the acting on any level. Morgan Freeman was everything I could have hoped for as Mandela, the embodiment of power and strength blended with dignity and seriousness of purpose, and a determination to build a better nation. Matt Damon deserves his Oscar nomination, too, as the player/coach of the Springboks... of the many characters who go from being suspicious of the new African National Congress government to patriotic admiration of them, Damon is the only one who does so believably. The scene in which the team takes a tour of the prison that was Mandela's home for 27 years quietly impresses, particularly during the moment when Damon walks into Mandela's cell, closes the door, and is clearly trying to picture living in that tiny space for nearly three decades. That Damon is able to convey as much emotion as he does with no words or grand gestures shows what a fine actor he is. He even does a decent accent!

But ultimately too much of the film is still your basic, standard "get on your feet and cheer for the team in their moment of triumph" sports movie. I've seen it before, way too many times, that phony, artificially pumped-up feel-good stuff. I've never seen it from Clint Eastwood before, though, and that was a real let-down. In recent years, Eastwood has been showing a very admirable willingness to get bolder, more daring and experimental as he grows older, instead of delivering the safe, tame big-studio stuff that most directors would, provided they were still working at his age. "Invictus" is exactly the kind of movie that he has avoided, and having taken one on now, he's plunged right in and delivered one that pushes all the standard buttons. I still have enough faith in his originality and imagination (and, yes, courage) to feel sure that he won't be repeating this pattern in his next film (which I understand will be called "Afterlife") and I'm looking forward to that. But for right now, this moment and this film, well... it's not exactly "Letters From Iwo Jima" or "Million Dollar Baby" or "Gran Torino". It's also not exactly a movie that you really need to see.