INVICTUS
RYAN: Hollywood heavyweight Clint Eastwood’s new offering is “Invictus” with Morgan Freeman playing Nelson Mandela, and Matt Damon as a South African rugby player. Let me just say Clint is without a doubt one of the best directors out there.
CAROLINE: I cherish him. I have loved his recent movies; but sadly I can’t say I loved this one.
RYAN: It’s definitely not as good as “Gran Torino” or “Million Dollar Baby,” but I thoroughly enjoyed it, mostly because of all of his touches.
CAROLINE: I just couldn’t get myself to care about the story. It’s totally my problem because the rest of the audience seemed to really enjoy it. I’m sure this rugby match was very exciting when it happened, but I don’t know that I needed to see a full-on recreation of it.
RYAN: I’ve always been intrigued by South Africa so I liked that it took place there. I like the accents too, except for Matt Damon’s. He did some kind of accent, but I’m not sure it was South African.
CAROLINE: I thought he was fine but I also wondered if they really needed him in this role. He looks like such a meathead in this. But it didn’t have to be him. It could have been just some random decent actor.
RYAN: Well, it just adds another name to the marquee. I was very impressed by Morgan Freeman; his voice, the way he walked. He has such an identifiable voice, but I felt like he found a new one to play Mandela.
CAROLINE: I read that he’s actually spent a lot of time with Nelson Mandela over the years and I think he really captured his spirit. But this isn’t a biopic about Mandela; it’s about a very specific sporting event and Mandela’s involvement in it. As a result, it just didn’t engage me.
RYAN: I was engaged, but I think that was primarily the result of Clint’s direction. Let’s be honest, I don’t care about sports, particularly rugby. But the movie had so many inspirational moments, and Mandela’s speeches were so poignant. I really loved those parts.
CAROLINE: I hear you, but I just wasn’t feeling it. There were a few emotional moments that got to me though. I even welled up a little. What I really didn’t need though was an hour-long re-enactment of a rugby match that takes up the entire second half of the movie.
RYAN: It didn’t bother me as I was watching, but now that you say it, I agree it was a little much. Clint definitely could have shaved some time off that section.
CAROLINE: I also found the movie a tad confusing. Some of the accents were hard to decipher and I wasn’t always following the action. I took a little nap too, so that didn’t help either. And at the game, during the big rugby climax, I wasn’t even sure if it was the finals or the semi-finals or what was going on.
RYAN: OMG me neither! That’s either a coincidence or just poor movie-making.
CAROLINE: I just wish some things had been explained better. Of course, Clint Eastwood is a great director and the film is therefore well made and well acted; but I didn’t feel connected to the subject matter. And for the last half, I felt like I was watching ESPN.
— BOTTOM LINE —
RYAN: As you know, I would never watch ESPN; but because of Clint Eastwood’s technique, I really liked this movie. I was totally engaged throughout.
CAROLINE: I wish I could recommend this movie because I love Clint, but I think he’s made many better movies than this one. And while it’s certainly not bad, I didn’t like it much. It’s a rental at best.
RYAN: I think it’s more of a boy movie. I liked it and would definitely recommend it. I was so inspired by what Mandela said; his speeches are beautiful and moving. I’d say it’s worth seeing for that.
— RATING —
