Invictus (2009) - Biography, Drama, History

Hohum Score

5

Breathtaking

Nelson Mandela (Morgan Freeman), in his first term as President of South African, initiates a unique venture to unite the Apartheid-torn land: enlist the national rugby team on a mission to win the 1995 Rugby World Cup.

IMDB: 7.3
Director: Clint Eastwood
Stars: Morgan Freeman, Matt Damon
Length: 134 Minutes
PG Rating: PG-13
Reviews: 40 out of 274 found boring (14.59%)

One-line Reviews (168)

Rugby is also a sport I detest because I get bored easily from it.

It's another World Cup this year, football's that is, which will be held in South Africa, but before that swings by in Summer, make time for Invictus, and you'll be rewarded with yet another fine film from a director whose craft ages like fine wine, with masterful performances and an engaging storyline.

Luckily for Invictus' predictable story, it is handled by a real master of cinema.

Was it because he turned Nelson Mandela into a Yoda-like character sputtering out banal philosophy that would embarrass even the flightiest of New Age nit-wits, or even a serious New Age nit-wit like Deepak Chopra?

What we have are inspiring speeches and many exciting rugby matches, and wide shots of crowds celebrating, all the way to its predictable conclusion.

This film is simply mind blowing.

Containing no plot turns or twists and surprisingly very little emotion, it's worthwhile even though it's toothless.

The game at the end is too long.

Two spectacular performances by Damon and Freeman made of "Invictus" a really great picture, that also has a magnificent screenplay joining together a real event story with a sport themed film (with a exciting final match in the last part).

However there are some flaws with this film and it's mainly the excruciatingly slow pace it works for the rugby scenes but outside that it's just makes scenes drag in majorly and it did bore me at time and make me just want them to get back to the rugby.

Even if, like me, you know practically nothing about rugby, this movie is still very enjoyable.

Even though the plot is known/predictable the theme "TO UNITE THE PEOPLE" was effective from the start to the end.........

What really sunk this film for me, though -- I mean, I rarely ever turn off a movie, and I could only handle this one for 20 minutes, after which I used FF and skimmed a few scenes along the way to see it through to the 'exciting' conclusion -- was the incredibly awful dialogue.

But, when the whole damn fool audience is cheering at the most cliché of sport movie banalities, it is easier to just flow with the crowd.

2) The dialog is dull, you remember almost none of it after the movie.

it all adds up to one engrossing,compelling experience.

Freeman has the sense of the wise compelling leader.

As a South African who saw this film on Friday morning, I can tell you you the entertaining, inspiring and enjoyable "Invictus" exceeded all my expectations.

In conclusion, Invictus is a very interesting, inspiring and enjoyable movie.

Eastwood went out of his way to create a country that at the time was struggling with politics and race issues and makes you feel for the people involved in the movie and the World Cup final match is an added bonus to the intriguing scenes depicted in the movie.

The film is soooooo boring.

The Rugby World Cup is not just the backdrop used to reveal character in the protagonists, but it is filmed as a thrilling sporting event in and of itself.

Eastwood directs in a solid and professional manner but, like the material, it is perhaps all too obvious and predictable.

The Rugby scenes are very exciting It (to me) is a rougher sport than Soccor or American Football.

He was engrossing to watch.

However, I think it deserves a recommendation, because it is entertaining, it is well directed...

Predictable : The action/training scenes could be transposed from any college/ice hockey/baseball pitch in any number of tedious movies to the miraculously recovering South Africa .

Even the rugby scenes shown here are uninspiring.

Fascinating story behind an iconic moment in sports .

Only Clint Eastwood can make a rugby match last for 30 minutes and make it suspenseful all the way.

My husband and I saw this movie yesterday and thoroughly enjoyed it.

Clint Eastwood has done, once again (but it was highly predictable), a great job, in this unusual bio-pic, in the way the story of Nelson Mandela, being now the president of a country which had kept him prisoner for 24 years, is seen through the adventures of the national rugby team, now become the binding element of whites and blacks.

The film, for teenagers will be more like an educational video rather than a film, but as a college and/or high school graduate, see Invictus at home so you can skip through the 10 or 15 minutes of vague and boring moments.

It had great scenery, and an intense Rugby match.

And the movie is very predictable, looks like a sports like Disney movie & doesn't leave any memories behind.

Clunky, chunky, cliché...

The temptation to make a film about someone as iconic as Nelson Mandela must have been huge, and to tie it in with a rousing story of sporting courage against the odds was likely to be a successful formula.

** Possible Spoiler** This is still a Cinderella story, but rather a very compelling piece one where the stakes are much more than a championship.

The team's players are listless and unmotivated, while their level of play is evocative of the Bad News Bears.

"Invictus" isn't something the average escapist moviegoer will camp out to see; frankly, it sounds boring.

Of course the acting is top level and Clint Eastwood's direction is solid but the story itself is straightforward and often bland.

Thankfully, after that scene, the movie finally woke up and picked up the pace, and became an entertaining film.

It is not on my number one favourites list or anything, but it was enjoyable to watch.

Since it follows the script of what actually happened, it has a much more powerful effect than those fictional sports movies where the underdog scores in the last seconds for a stunning victory.

Still, Clint Eastwood directs the heck out of this only slightly compelling script by Anthony Peckham based on the John Carlin book.

By the final Rugby match, the movie has built up such good-will that any predictability or confusion on screen becomes an afterthought to the joy and excitement on display.

This is not your usual run-of-the-mill biopic, and you can trust the award winning filmmaker to weave yet another wonderful, engaging film.

There are several instances of intense violence(the games) and brief strong language in this.

One could nitpick about the decision to film this "documentary style," with only limited (extremely limited) glimpses into Mandela's past, and I'd have to agree that it leaves a little bit of a hole in an otherwise absorbing movie.

The climactic scenes of the World Cup final are actually a bit of a mess and could be confusing to someone not familiar with the game.

Strong themes overcome predictable plotting .

This factual social activist melodrama with its liberal perspective seems rather predictable at times, but it is remains nevertheless as reassuring as it is absorbing.

much more enjoyable if you know The story .

The film feels flat even though the subject matter is intriguing.

Dull Ghandi meets Remember the Titans and Rudi .

Every character changes in a predictable direction, the movie even ends without surprise – in triumph, of course, as befits an inspiring true story.

What could have been a riveting, though formulaic, exercise in underdog political and athletic achievement plays more like a tribute video to a country whose growth seems inevitable.

The film moves along well as Eastwood paces the action field shots well as the rugby scenes are entertaining as you cheer for victory even though you know the Springboks are gonna be winners.

This is a very enjoyable movie.

This movie may not be very accessible for those who don't understand rugby, but if you are willing to ignore that, I would consider this to be a enjoyable, uplifting movie, with some great performances.

Plus, as someone whom knows nothing about rugby, it just made it boring watching all those scenes.

In principle it's a very compelling story (Mandela and the Springboks, writ small as it were).

Unfortunately Eastwood has a deliberately slow style which is simply not suited to a story of Mandela as well as a story about a sporting miracle at the same time, when clearly he does not know how to capture the excitement of sport never mind a code of football alien and peculiar to many Americans and the mainstream audience granted how scrum shots are over-elaborated on and drop goals are excruciatingly slow-mo'd.

Every angle is predictable; the storyline develops the way we expect.

The catalyst for this particular tale is rugby; a sport that many Americans know nothing about (admittedly, I knew little about the game going into the theater, but I did feel as if I had a better grasp of the sport as a whole when I walked out).

I find it interesting that the first real story we get about Mandela dramatized on screen is more about rugby than it is about the man, but Eastwood presents it in such a fascinating way that it manages to work as a depiction of him.

Like I stated earlier, the film is close to being boring because of the lack of any loud sounds or surprise dramatic developments.

But it made for an engrossing and interesting watch.

The film is a winner, an awareness piece and a sports movie you've already seen that depicts a somewhat incompetent squad of sports stars coming-good, this is true, but a really engaging piece of drama told eloquently and reassuringly as if it were some kind of bedtime story.

As a South African, I can tell you the entertaining, inspiring and enjoyable "Invictus" exceeded all my expectations.

Where it falls short is in being constantly engaging and complex.

Invictus is an enjoyable film, Morgan Freeman is great as Mandela and it's an inspiring story.

It was very well directed, and has some important themes (Just like many "Oscar-bait" films, but the main difference is that this was actually good) Matt Damon and Morgan Freeman are excellent in this film, both made a incredible work in this movie, which it is not only inspiring and well made, but also entertaining and enjoyable (Not like tedious and ugly films as "Slumdog Millonaire") "Invictus" is not overrated at all, in fact, this was way underrated: It wasn't even nominated for the category of best picture in the 2010, while overrated movies as "The Hurt Locker" and "District 9" got the nomination.

Yet I found the rugby scenes engrossing, even if I did not really understand all the mechanics of the game.

In the end the Springboks win the World Cup match with added time, scoring 15-12, Mandela and Pienaar meet on the field together to celebrate the improbable and unexpected victory, as Madela leaves and watches the South Africans celebrate, his voice is heard reciting the poem "Invictus".

Though the movie is primarily about South Africa's challenge in winning the rugby World Cup against insurmountable odds, I found the story of Mandela's emergence from prison to prominence and power equally as fascinating.

We can always count on his films to be technically well made, interesting and entertaining.

The noise of the crowds also brought an intriguing feel about the sport (Barber, Freeman, Moore, & Eastwood, 2009).

Eastwood, Freeman and Damon equals BOREFEST .

I left the theater mildly entertained.

Where the movie gets most outwardly exciting it gets more ordinary--at the Rugby World Cup.

Invictus is a movie I avoided for a while due to the uninteresting subject matter that was at hand for me.

Enjoy this film, it's both inspirational and enjoyable.

The pacing was incredibly slow, with far too much padding.

The reason this matters is that the movie was just really boring.

This film also does lack some subtlety characters just seem to immediately say what their thinking instead of conveying it through a performance despite the fact that they could have used some of the dragged out scenes to build up some more investment.

But I feel disappointed mostly due to the lack of originality and distinction in the visual language: boring shoots, slow edition, poor camera movement, not to mention the lame dialogs or conventional sound.

This movie is so dull, so lifeless, it clumsily plods along from one meeting to another with barely an emotional center at all.

I thoroughly enjoyed it nonetheless.

It was one of those matches where afterwards the cliché "You couldn't make it up" was frequently used.

Very disappointed, the ending was like a long drawn out conversation with a dirty wall.

Invictus has a similar compelling story, drama, a little humor, and exceptional performances by the cast (especially Morgan Freeman and Matt Damon) who make this movie worth the time to watch.

I very much enjoyed it as I have all of Mr. Eastwood's latest.

Even with the political subtext, and even among sports movies (which themselves are usually very evocative), this is a highly emotional film.

If you want a good sport film go watch something like "Million Dollar Baby", Clint got it all right then and mostly wrong now but if you are bored of watching paint dry then I suppose this might be an improvement!

Eastwood has made an entertaining if conventional film about the South African 1995 rugby World Cup winning team and their relationship with President Nelson Mandela.

The first 45 minutes about various political meetings was so boring I almost gave up!

Yes it's not as good as other Eastwood movies such as Million Dollar Baby or Gran Torino, but still this movie was worth watching.

The film is a powerful and engaging drama; another one of those 'gentle' Eastwood entries into the directorial canon of his, as he sways against his acting 'type' of the 1970s and 80s with another film dealing with violence; bigotry and such rather than use as a means to propel stuff.

The rugby game scenes are truly well shot and put together scenes that really make you sit on the edge of your seat with anticipation of what'll happen next.

Even though it's not a perfect film, "Invictus" is still provocative and entertaining and raises a lot of questions and if a movie can generate food for thought, it ranks high in my grading system.

Inspiring and entertaining .

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

You are kept on the edge of your seat the entire match.

But Eastwood's film is thuddingly boring, not translating one ounce of the inspirational vigor this story should.

Through an excellent plot and strong story telling, it is very engaging throughout the entire film.

This one simply showed the stereotype that rugby is a brutal, pointless sport.

One of the best movies of 2009, "Invictus," written by Anthony Peckham and directed by Clint Eastwood, takes us to a fascinating moment in modern history.

Whatever it is, this is definitely worth watching, though if you really are looking for some insight into Mandela, I guess there will be some books out who will be more helpful

Boring .

I have to say that the football is not the most engaging piece of work in the film (this is coming from a rugby player and avid rugby fan), but it's the themes derived from this film that make it worth watching.

They are a bore.

Eastwood's first good movie since Gran Torino (Changeling i found was very dull and boring (due to Jolie being in it)) captures the image of Mandela's first acts as president of South Africa.

Morgan Freeman's portrayal of Nelson Mandela is very good though and Matt Damon puts on a decent South African accent (and certainly got in shape for this role) but the story itself was kinda tedious.

But when the movie began, it gripped so much that I was fully immersed into the scenes.

The scene of the plane reaching out to wish goodluck was unexpected and great......

If you want a truly compelling, well directed movie with it's basis in Rugby then watch Invictus.

So unite and free yourself from the oppressions of boredom and visit "Invictus" today!

The action on the field just soon gets tedious.

The inexcusably slow pace is further aggravated by a surprising lack of suspense or obstacles that even maintain the facade of insurmountability.

Other than that it's an engaging film, there's some nice character development threads amongst Mandela's staff, the security forces and the Springbok players, the script is strong and there's a definite positive energy about the film, it leaves you with that sense of hope South Africa had back then.

It may not be a masterpiece, but it makes for some compelling drama.

For a really compelling film about one of the great men of the last and current century and the time he lived in, you must absolutely see and be informed and educated by Invictus.

It reminded me a lot of what I can only explain as the 'Gatorade' sequence from Spielberg's Munich, where one of the most intense scenes in the film is ruined by a goofy slow motion sequence.

There also the Hollywood cliché of the guards overcoming their dislike for each other, playing rugby and again feeling staged.

Invictus will be respected and remembered personally by those who feel historical importance of the events occur in the movie,but it will also be enjoyable movie for others too from different part of the world.

I think there's actually a proverb somewhere that says "On one of three things a film contends for Oscars: Clint Eastwood directing, Morgan Freeman acting and a compelling historical figure as the lead role.

The movie is pretty slow moving at the start, and though it picks up, all you want it to do is to end.

I must emphasize though, that rousing second half is well worth the wait.

It is sometimes vague and boring, but mostly it is an inspirational, and entertaining sports film.

That last match of the Springboks vs the New Zealand All Blacks was very exciting.

Far too slow, flimsy plot and uncoordinated direction.

inspiring and engaging .

That Rousing Second Half is Well Worth the Long Wait .

In many ways the film is kind of boring in that it is relatively quiet and free of any kind of loud sounds, drama, or music.

All very intriguing, all very absorbing.

It's so fascinating to see someone reach it's goal with success, so much of belief and intelligence.

There are some powerful scenes in this movie, as well as some intense and suspenseful ones, and even ones that'll make you smile.

A Solid Yet Unbearably Slow Drama .

That is all one needs to know to see Invictus, and if you have any knowledge of modern history (which unfortunately mine is very limited), then you probably know what is going to happen, but it's the journey there that makes Invictus worth watching.

The dawn was only the herald of the day with so many unexpected may occur.

Not only has he captured the themes of the story, but also the poverty of South Africa as well as the intense rugby sequences.

It is interesting, fast-moving, does not contain gratuitous violence or sex or C.

In other words, there is absolutely fascinating material on Mandela's life, and I do not think that a simple rugby match was the best way to examine it.

The movie drags along at a snail's pace for about an hour.

Invictus, a pretty enjoyable sports film.

Whatever your politics, Mr. Mandela was a fascinating man who survived an excruciating ordeal (for almost 30 years).

The lingering racial tension, for instance between the white and black bodyguards, is well captured, as is the slow process of the Boks realising they're more than just a rugby team.

Damon has had far better roles and in fact his "subtle" performance in this movie could also be considered quite dry and kind of uneventful.

As an American who is unfamiliar with the rules of rugby, I was bored watching scene after scene of grown men groping one another without protective equipment.

Dripping in Good Intentions; Lacking Anything That Would Actually Make It Entertaining .

The event itself starts to overshadow the characters, and Eastwood grasps for something a bit more thrilling with a number of red-herring assassin moments.

The whole story of movie was so plane and predictable,but i felt movie very interesting and entertaining as it was great experience for me to see a movie based on great leader Nelson Mandela.

Knowing that the film was about a certain thing that happened during Mandela's Time as a president of South Africa dragged my attention toward the film, and that was the reason for me to watch it.

In the hands of a lesser director & writer this would have descended into cringe-making backslapping & we're-all-brothers-under-the-skin proclamations, but Eastwood is too good a director to fall for this & the slow recognition that both teams are on the same side simply develops organically, without ever seeming forced.

Uninteresting unless you like rugby or are South African .

Invictus: Some Compelling Drama .

Clint Eastwood, though always somewhat politically correct, failed to make an "artistically enjoyable" movie this time.

Constantly trying to throw in some type of adrenaline type shot that completely fizzles.

The straight face and emotionless acting by damon made the movie somewhat confusing – was it a sports movie or a movie about leadership and political up-lift?

The remote should be in hand, though because at 2 hours and 15 minutes, it drags too long, and the boring and vague parts should be skipped through.

I had hopes that with Morgan Freeman and Matt Damon, it might rise above the cliché formula.

His presence is more interesting and entertaining than any of the rugby scenes.

The final game dragged a bit.

The relationships between the South Africans in this movie was a pleasure to watch it was done perfectly you understood all that these two peoples had been through and watching them gradually come to trust each other was fascinating and satisfying.

Even without it, Invictus shines as a beautiful piece of filmmaking, being an entertaining film that defies convention and manages to uplift the soul while at it.

Bland Retelling .

The Springboks surpass all expectations and qualify for the final against South Africa's arch-rivals, the New Zealand team the All Blacks, New Zealand and South Africa are regarded universally as the two greatest rugby nations, up to this point the Springboks are the only side to have a winning record against the All Blacks, the intense rivalry between the two countries began in 1921.