The Rugby Really Brought the Room Together

Yesterday, I went to see Clint Eastwood's latest directorial effort, Invictus. It's the real life story of Nelson Mandela, in the early part of his momentous presidency in South Africa, and how he encouraged and used the nation's rugby team as a means of addressing post-apartheid racial tensions in his country.

I was a bit on the fence about seeing the movie. In the plus column, I find I've enjoyed most of Clint Eastwood's other films. I really like actor Morgan Freeman, and it seemed like he'd be the perfect man to play Mandela. I also like Matt Damon, and he'd been receiving some acclaim (and award nominations) for his role in the movie.

There was really only one thing in the minus column, but it was kind of a big one. This looked like a "sports movie." I don't care much for any professional sports in real life, and it's a rare film that dramatizes them in any way I find engaging. But in the end, this minus lost out, and I went to check out the film.

In turns out, perhaps not surprisingly, that this is really two movies in one. For the first hour, I found it excellent. It's a fantastic look and Mandela as a man, and an even better look at a savvy politician who understands the "game" of not only politics, but appealing to people and making his message understood. It reminded me of the best episodes of The West Wing, where you happily slip into the dream of a world where people in politics truly act for the public good, behave with nobility, and get things done. And of course, it's all the greater knowing that this wasn't fiction; though perhaps dressed up a bit for the screen, this is a true story.

Then, for the last half, Invictus became a sports movie, filled with all the boring clichés that send me running from such films. Well, maybe all but one; I don't believe there was a "training montage," as such. But this was the most conventional underdog movie, of the sort we've all seen a hundred times before, made no more interesting by the fact that the sport in question here is one less than familiar to most Americans. (You could even argue that a lack of familiarity with rugby makes it even less interesting.)

The first half of the movie was inspirational, uplifting, and engaging. Morgan Freeman is excellent in a quiet performance that pulls you in. The second half of the movie was dull, slow-paced, and rote. It wasn't even a good sports movie. Matt Damon isn't bad, but isn't really given anything meaty to do. Would you have nominated... oh, I don't know... Ralph Macchio from The Karate Kid for award consideration?

All told, I'd still rate the movie a B-. It's just that I was ready for the end credits long before the predictable final act. And I really wished that the movie had instead been a Nelson Mandela biopic all the way, giving that extra hour of rugby to something else -- perhaps a look at his time in prison before becoming leader of South Africa.

I suppose my "cut" of the movie would be a bit strange.