Invictus (2009)

Hollywood finally gets around to casting Morgan Freeman in the role few would doubt he was always meant to play- Nelson Mandela. This Clint Eastwood-directed biopic is not what you might expect. Rather than a straight biography of Mandela’s rise to power, the larger focus here is sport and diplomatic relations. It may seem like an odd choice for Eastwood to pursue but it all makes sense in the end.

South Africa, 1994: apartheid has fallen and Nelson Mandela has been elected president in the nation’s first truly democratic elections. Whites, accustomed to being the ruling class, find themselves overwhelmed by the country’s black majority. The newly empowered black populace wants to make up for years of oppression by punishing whites and whites are terrified that this is their unavoidable fate. As president, Mandela steps in to unite both sides, determined to serve all South Africans and not just those who put him in office.

Mandela looks to the near future for a chance to bring the country together. In 1995 South Africa will play host to the Rugby World Cup. Mandela meets with the South African team captain François Pienaar (Matt Damon) and asks him to help unite their people through sports. They take the skeptics and dissenters head on. The team, despite being despised by blacks as a symbol of apartheid, makes in-roads with many as they travel the country and teach young black children how to play rugby. The lone black player on the team serves as the children’s rallying point and hearts across the country begin to warm to the scrappy set of underdogs as the tournament grows closer.

Biopics like this are a slippery slope. History has documented Mandela’s successes and failures as President of South Africa, so I can’t judge this film based on Mandela’s push for diplomacy and unity. That’s historical fact. It’s easy to get caught up in the emotion of his plan but that’s not what makes this film good. It’s the presentation of this story that matters.

The story itself is true, so very little can be said about the writing. However, the pace moves pretty well, with only a few slow spots along the way. Thankfully, the fact that it’s based on true events eliminates the bitter taste of what would otherwise be called clichés. Sports dramas are particularly vulnerable to clichés- underdogs, come-from-behind wins, powerful and tide-turning speeches by a coach or player. All of these things have come to be predictable, sometimes to the point of rolling our eyes.

The difference is always whether the story is true or not. True underdog tales may feel predictable but why would anyone make a movie about a team that remains terrible or falls far short of its lofty goals? The way I see it, if it’s a true story, you can’t say that it’s full of clichés; only that it is filled with truth.

Matt Damon (bulked up even further from his Jason Bourne days) does well as the South African rugby captain. He seamlessly portrays Pienaar’s journey from wide-eyed and overwhelmed by Mandela’s vision to a confident leader pushing his team toward greatness. Morgan Freeman is still the big draw here though. He captures all of Mandela’s sly wit and craftiness that reminds me of Ben Kingsley’s more charismatic moments in Ghandi.

Eastwood proved he could capture sports in action with Million Dollar Baby’s boxing scenes and he doesn’t disappoint here. We don’t just watch the action from the sidelines. Clint finds ways to take us on the field, giving viewers an up-close look at a brutal sport that is still foreign to most Americans. The physicality and pacing of the games work to the film’s benefit, giving us a healthy dose of adrenaline in the midst of diplomatic scheming.

I was caught off guard with the final match of the World Cup though. Unless I missed something, it wasn’t made clear that it was the final match until the trophy presentation. A little more clarity could have helped hammer home the importance of the action. Other than this, there isn’t much to complain about with Invictus. Audience familiarity with underdog sports dramas may water down the impact of the rugby team’s accomplishments but only a cynic could brush off the diplomatic triumph.

RATING: 3.5 out of 5