Invictus tells the story of South Africa during the 1995 Rugby World Cup. Before you read any further, be aware that there will be spoilers.
The film opens with the release of Nelson Mandela, played by Morgan Freeman, from Robben Island in 1990. Then jumps to the South African election of Mandela as president in 1994.
This was the first election where the black South African population was able to vote. It was a turning point in South Africa history. From there we move quickly to Francois Pienaar, played by Matt Damon, and the Springboks, South Africa’s Rugby team.
It’s 1995 and South Africa is hosting the Rugby World Cup. The Springboks are so bad that they wouldn’t even make it into the competition if they weren’t given automatic entry as the host nation. We follow Mandela and Pienaar as they try overcome the odds and win the World Cup.
From the previews and the pedigree of people involved I expected a much better film. Clint Eastwood was at the helm and he has grown into a great director with films like Mystic River, Million Dollar Baby and Unforgiven, one of my all-time favorite westerns. But Invictus is such poor storytelling that I was afraid he’d lost his touch.
Morgan Freeman has been waiting to play Mandela for years he has said, which makes it so much more heartbreaking that his great performance was lost in a poorly scripted film.
For a film about how Rugby united a nation the audience isn’t allowed to see much Rugby. By the time we get to the final match I cared very little for the outcome. I had no personal connections with any of the players because the film gives us only Damon and Chester, the sole black player on the team. IMDB Invictus and you’ll see that the Springbok players are of such little importance that they don’t even warrant names. They’re simply: South African Springbok.
The film briefly touches on Mandela’s personal life but never fully examines it, begging the question why even bring it up? The filmmakers expect the audience to be versed in the history of Mandela which defeats the purpose of the film. If the audience is supposed to know everything, then why even tell the story?
The same is true of the game of rugby. I personally know very little about the sport and I know most Americans are in the same boat. The film fails to educate the audience on the rules of the game. So during the final match, all drama was lost on me, because I didn’t really know what was happening.
Anthony Peckham wrote the script based on a novel by John Carlin. I’ve not read it but I’m sure it was a great book. Peckham obviously tried to fit a lot of the books content in the film but failed to understand that two hours doesn’t provide as much time to develop a plot as a novel.
It would have been nice if they would have at least included the poem that the title is derived from. The only time I remember it being recited was by Freeman during the preview.
Bottom line: Rent this one. Morgan Freeman and Damon turn in great performances but that didn’t save the film from it’s poor direction and writing.
