“Invictus” Do You Like Rugby? I don’t

Genres: Drama, Adaptation, Biopic and Sports
Running Time: 2 hrs. 14 min.
Release Date: December 11th, 2009 (wide)
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for brief strong language.
Distributors: Warner Bros. Pictures Distribution


Director: Client Eastwood

JJ Rating: B

South Africa got a new President who was named Nelson Mandela (Morgan Freeman) and he had a heck of a job on his hand. He was praised by blacks and dissed by whites. He wanted to be a person that united. How was he going to do that? Rugby. Duh. He called on Francois Pienaar (Matt Damon), a great rugby player, to help bring the country together. Invictus.

I rarely care for sports. I have fun with the Super Bowl or the World Series, but not like ‘out of this world’ fun. It’s not a fun topic for me. So sports movies are rarely that interesting because of the sports that are involved. I understand football (American) and soccer, as well as baseball. But rugby? No. I watched Invictus and just got lost on what the hell was going on with the rugby parts. I understood when they scored, but not how they score or why they are all huddled together like a disturbing orgy. I couldn’t touch that many guys in that position, ever. I would be so uncomfortable and it has more to do with me not liking to be touched than the assumed idea that it has to do with it being men. Then they hit each other so freakin’ hard. People complain about football protection that barely protects the players who can still get head trauma, but god knows what goes on with rugby player insides when they get hit.

I wanted to see this film because I like hope that is brought about by people that want to bring people together and they do so without violence. I was even going to see this film though I would have no clue what was going on with the rugby. But it didn’t work out that way. I thought Morgan Freeman and Matt Damon did a great job. I just got bored and fell asleep. I was not tired, I was bored. It wasn’t as interesting as I thought it was going to be.

Client Eastwood is a very good director. I think he does a great job in getting actors to do their very best. Their very best being what is best for the film as a whole. I think he takes his time with telling the story and that sometimes works, but I think this time it does not. Though I know I’m not going to get a lot of people that agree with me on this, I still feel it is a bit of a snoozer at times. I like how Eastwood used humor and drama together. Mandela is a powerful figure. He was very smart in how he wanted to integrate the President’s office and get people in the country to work together via rooting for a sports team. This film does a great job of showing that.

Invictus is now nominated for a few Golden Globes. Exciting. I think that it’s nice that it was nominated. I don’t think it has a great chance of winning. I wouldn’t really recommend people to see it. I found it to be too slow. But I guess if that is something you enjoy you might enjoy it more than me and then get that warm heart feeling at the end. I think it’s difficult to work with history that some already know and weave it into a story that is interesting and an entertaining movie. Invictus did not go that route for me. Maybe it went that route for you or could go that route for you. I could not sit through this film again because there’s not much I would want to see again. Once was enough for me.

No comments:

Hollywood Dump on Facebook

In addition to the articles we post here, we also link to stories we think are interesting and post them to our Facebook page. If you're on FB, become a fan!