Invictus is a satisfactory film with two significant flaws which should be addressed. The film does not decide if South African President Nelson Mandela and Springboks captain François Pienaar are equals – different leaders with their own style – or whether Mandela is at the centre of a complicated power structure as he rebuilds his country after Apartheid. If the former is the case, then there is not enough time devoted to the rugby player; he should receive equal screen time as the President. If the intent is to focus upon the latter, there should be more instances showing how Mandela changed the perspective of the average South African.
It is a pet peeve of mine how “sport” movies often follow a stereotypical format. The best moves are those that make sport a complement to the main message of the film. Invictus succeeds frequently along those lines but also falls into common traps. People like sport because it is intense — slow motion sequences and play by play commentary dilute that effect. The action should speak for itself.
South Africa evolves throughout the film. Mandela is conscious that he must eliminate bitterness and anger after years of white oppression and preaches forgiveness over vengeance. He believes that a successful run in the upcoming World Rugby Championships will unite the country. The film makes its point as people come together, illustrated by microcosms such as the rugby clinics held by the Springboks, Mandela’s personal body guard, and encounters between whites and blacks during rugby games.
Morgan Freeman delivers an effective performance as a leader attempting to model the way. Mandela personifies forgiveness as he attempts to rebuild the South Africa that imprisoned him for twenty-seven years. As usual, Freeman demonstrates an appropriate degree of gravitas. Mandela’s personal demons and family problems are introduced but there is no follow-up. More plot development along those lines would have allowed Freeman to provide more depth to the role. ***