I am a South AFrican and was outside the stadium when the final game in the movie was played. This was a real event. Only someone who was there can tell you the emotional impact of that game and what Nelson Mandela and Francois Pienaar (captain of the Springbok rugby team) achieved. For several hours after that game there was not a single crime in South Africa. The whole country united as one to spur our team on. I, unfortunately, did not attend the actual game but I was outside that stadium and the fellowship and goodwill that emanated from it had to be experienced. I went to see the movie with my youngest daughter here in the USA. She was only 8 years old at the time of that game. She could well recall the impact of the emotion and, for me, it was a pleasure moment relived. The movie did it justice and the two actors performed very well in their roles as two South Africans. I loved the movie and definitely want to see it again. Always a South African. We are a nation of such spirit.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
No jope if you can't forgive yourself ... and others
Added 3/7/2010
Clint Eastwood was probably the only filmmaker who could produce a film on Nelson Mandela that centered on a side event that became a major initiative in the history of South Africa and the world. He chose to center the film on the Springboks and their victory in the World Cup of 1995. That was a brilliant idea since it showed Mandela as a real transformer of human beings. It also brilliantly proves man does not make history. A certain thickness of imbecility was needed to pile up in the minds of some not to see that the enslaved majority of the South African population could not remain slaves for ever. Let my people go. The choice, if it is a choice and not the only logical sequel of the fifty preceding years that Mandela does was to center his own action on a sports event that could unify the people in a victory. And we can see how little it takes to attract the attention and the heart of the other, a cup of tea for instance served by the President to his guest François, like Jesus washing the feet of his disciples before the Last Supper, though forgiveness is not that easy, and yet easier for the victims of the bad treatment than for the people who inflicted that bad treatment. Those had to become aware of the hardship of that treatment to finally be conscious enough to forgive themselves and to forgive the victims. Clint Eastwood then adds some symbols to strike our eyes: the little black boy carried by the white cops on their shoulders after the victory. The green Springboks cap Mandela is wearing at the end, not as a provocation of the All Blacks, but as a symbol of his support to his team and as a symbol of the unity of the country around their team. This film is first of all emotional for us who have lived these dark years and harbored for a night or several some AWOL special force soldiers who were deserting apartheid. And how many pages of ANC press releases have we translated for the whole world to know about their fight. And yet we wonder at the end who is the main character of this story. Nelson Mandela or François Pienaar. This appears clearly in the remarks these two exchange when Mandela gives the cup to François. "Thank you François for what you have done for South Africa." "No, Mister President thank you for what you have done for South Africa." And the green Springboks cap Nelson Mandela wears all the time is not a provocation to the All Blacks, but the sign of his support to his team, and the symbol of the reunification of South Africa thanks to that sports event. Then the answer François makes to the journalist when this one asks him if he was encourage in his fight by the 63,000 people in the Stadium, is prophetic: "We were not supported by 63,000 people but by the 43 million South Africans." That makes us very humble in front of history that no one can stop, than some can only slow down, ,and some others encourage and help in its own direction. And we will forget Henry Kissinger's answer when he refused to support Nelson Mandela, the political prisoner that he accused of being a communist. One of these details in history that get lost in the pages of some encyclopedia and then is forgotten by humanity.
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne, University Paris 8 Saint Denis, University Paris 12 Créteil, CEGID
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Is it just me?
Added 3/5/2010
Or did Clint Eastwood, Nelson Mandela, Morgan Freeman, and Matt Damon conspire to make a boring and politically correct movie?
The film stands on two legs: politics and rugby. In 1995, Mandela was still new in the job as President of South Africa and as nation builder. South Africa was hosting the rugby world cup. Rugby was a white game. The black South Africans were used to cheer the opponents. Mandela managed to turn that around and united the nation behind the team, the springbocks. The springbocks, improbably, win the tournament. All is ship shape.
Unfortunately, all is also boring and undramatic.
Sports movies are not my favorite genre, but I do remember that I watched some which managed to transport some level of excitement about the game, some suspense about the action. Not here. If you knew nothing about rugby, you still don't. You know who won only because they tell you, you can't follow it in the match itself. As a sports movie, this rates 1 star.
As a political movie, I am willing to 'grant' 3 stars. Just in respect for Mandela.
I hope Clint has some good stuff in him yet. Here he wasted his time.
1 out of 3 people found this helpful.
|
Inspirational story turned into Cliche central.
Added 2/21/2010
This is a movie that could have made itself. Inspirational characters, an uplifting story and a nation united.
One would have thought a director like Clint Eastwood would have had a field day with it. Instead he plays it super-safe and draws from every known sports movie cliche out there. Would it have been to difficult to find two South African actors who can play the lead roles? This is not to say Freeman and Damon are not good in the movie. Damon in particular is wonderful.
That being said, the movie stumbles around too much to build any kind of intensity. That is a pity given the inspiration nature of the story. Too often we come across movies which fail because of a bad or non-existent story line. But this is a case where the movie failed the story.
I am sure this movie will garner some awards just like the other Oscar fodder which Clint Eastwood has been putting out in the last couple of years. It is time for him to rethink his movie making approach. Maybe he is constrained by studios or public perception. If that's the case, he should stop making movies. That last thing we want to see is Dirty Harry himself becoming the punk.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Invictus or how to drive change
Added 2/20/2010
Make no mistake, this movie is not about Rubgy, but about how the world can be changed to be a better place.
Using a David vs. Goliath plot for sure makes the movie interesting (South Africa's rugby team), but the change that took place in that country, and how a man had the vision to drive it is the real message.
By the way, this movie for sure will become a reference in leadership trainings, as Apollo 13 did some years ago.
In a nutshell really, really worth to watch, if you want to better understand how change takes place.
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
I am a South AFrican and was outside the stadium when the final game in the movie was played. This was a real event. Only someone who was there can tell you the emotional impact of that game and what Nelson Mandela and Francois Pienaar (captain of the Springbok rugby team) achieved. For several hours after that game there was not a single crime in South Africa. The whole country united as one to spur our team on. I, unfortunately, did not attend the actual game but I was outside that stadium and the fellowship and goodwill that emanated from it had to be experienced. I went to see the movie with my youngest daughter here in the USA. She was only 8 years old at the time of that game. She could well recall the impact of the emotion and, for me, it was a pleasure moment relived. The movie did it justice and the two actors performed very well in their roles as two South Africans. I loved the movie and definitely want to see it again. Always a South African. We are a nation of such spirit.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
No jope if you can't forgive yourself ... and others
Added 3/7/2010
Clint Eastwood was probably the only filmmaker who could produce a film on Nelson Mandela that centered on a side event that became a major initiative in the history of South Africa and the world. He chose to center the film on the Springboks and their victory in the World Cup of 1995. That was a brilliant idea since it showed Mandela as a real transformer of human beings. It also brilliantly proves man does not make history. A certain thickness of imbecility was needed to pile up in the minds of some not to see that the enslaved majority of the South African population could not remain slaves for ever. Let my people go. The choice, if it is a choice and not the only logical sequel of the fifty preceding years that Mandela does was to center his own action on a sports event that could unify the people in a victory. And we can see how little it takes to attract the attention and the heart of the other, a cup of tea for instance served by the President to his guest François, like Jesus washing the feet of his disciples before the Last Supper, though forgiveness is not that easy, and yet easier for the victims of the bad treatment than for the people who inflicted that bad treatment. Those had to become aware of the hardship of that treatment to finally be conscious enough to forgive themselves and to forgive the victims. Clint Eastwood then adds some symbols to strike our eyes: the little black boy carried by the white cops on their shoulders after the victory. The green Springboks cap Mandela is wearing at the end, not as a provocation of the All Blacks, but as a symbol of his support to his team and as a symbol of the unity of the country around their team. This film is first of all emotional for us who have lived these dark years and harbored for a night or several some AWOL special force soldiers who were deserting apartheid. And how many pages of ANC press releases have we translated for the whole world to know about their fight. And yet we wonder at the end who is the main character of this story. Nelson Mandela or François Pienaar. This appears clearly in the remarks these two exchange when Mandela gives the cup to François. "Thank you François for what you have done for South Africa." "No, Mister President thank you for what you have done for South Africa." And the green Springboks cap Nelson Mandela wears all the time is not a provocation to the All Blacks, but the sign of his support to his team, and the symbol of the reunification of South Africa thanks to that sports event. Then the answer François makes to the journalist when this one asks him if he was encourage in his fight by the 63,000 people in the Stadium, is prophetic: "We were not supported by 63,000 people but by the 43 million South Africans." That makes us very humble in front of history that no one can stop, than some can only slow down, ,and some others encourage and help in its own direction. And we will forget Henry Kissinger's answer when he refused to support Nelson Mandela, the political prisoner that he accused of being a communist. One of these details in history that get lost in the pages of some encyclopedia and then is forgotten by humanity.
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne, University Paris 8 Saint Denis, University Paris 12 Créteil, CEGID
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Is it just me?
Added 3/5/2010
Or did Clint Eastwood, Nelson Mandela, Morgan Freeman, and Matt Damon conspire to make a boring and politically correct movie?
The film stands on two legs: politics and rugby. In 1995, Mandela was still new in the job as President of South Africa and as nation builder. South Africa was hosting the rugby world cup. Rugby was a white game. The black South Africans were used to cheer the opponents. Mandela managed to turn that around and united the nation behind the team, the springbocks. The springbocks, improbably, win the tournament. All is ship shape.
Unfortunately, all is also boring and undramatic.
Sports movies are not my favorite genre, but I do remember that I watched some which managed to transport some level of excitement about the game, some suspense about the action. Not here. If you knew nothing about rugby, you still don't. You know who won only because they tell you, you can't follow it in the match itself. As a sports movie, this rates 1 star.
As a political movie, I am willing to 'grant' 3 stars. Just in respect for Mandela.
I hope Clint has some good stuff in him yet. Here he wasted his time.
1 out of 3 people found this helpful.
|
