Fanatstic scenes and fabulous rugby sequences. Ignore the disappointing politics. They are a bore.

Whenever I see the name "Clint Eastwood" associated with a new moving coming to theaters, I automatically think of such incredible films as Million Dollar Baby, Changeling, and Gran Torino. Perhaps I am just spoiled by Eastwood's spotless track record, but that is the reality of the situation. With that in mind, Invictus does not live up to the billing...but it still is a very honorable effort.Basically, the film takes place primarily in the country of South Africa, where Nelson Mandela (played superbly by Morgan Freeman) has come to power and is striving to bridge the gap between blacks and whites after decades of apartheid rule. Mandela seizes upon the country's terrible rugby team, stocked primarily by high-brow, burly white men, as a symbol of unity for the country. He tabs Francois Pienaar (Matt Damon) to captain the team and make them respectable (if not a whole lot more) heading into the World Cup. The rest, as they say, is history.Now, I can't say that this film was outright bad in any way. The race-relations message is one that resonates, the rugby team is certainly inspirational, and the acting is pretty good as well, led by the remarkable Freeman as one of the world's most storied leaders. Yet, unlike "Torino" or "Baby", the word I would use to describe this film is "understated". Instead of walloping viewers over the head with such heavy topics as euthanasia, religion, or death, in this effort Eastwood takes a much more low-key approach. There is drama, yes, and plenty of inspiration, but it just doesn't feel as epic as it could have been. Whether this was Eastwood trying to "follow the facts" as much as possible, or the real-life story just not providing the high drama of a fully scripted film, I'm not sure.Thus, if you are heading to the theater expecting utter greatness like I was, you will likely leave disappointed. However, if the topics/events/times in the film are of significant personal or cultural importance to you, then Invictus will automatically garner a five-star rating for its factual portrayal of the events that transpired.

Appropriately, this dramatisation of South Africa's famous Rugby World Cup victory in 1995 in their own country, just a few years after Nelson Mandela's release from prison and the nation's re-admission to international sport, was shown while the present competition is occurring (Come on Scotland!). Actually I'm no rugby buff and so without a full working knowledge of the events of the time, bar the conclusion of course, let myself be swept along in a green and gold wave of sporting triumph and nation-building under the aegis of Mandela's benevolent presidency.The three narrative viewpoints centre on Mandela himself naturally and his transformation of the hard-line body politic in South Africa, the national rugby team captain Francois Pienaar and his evolution from relatively ignorant white Afrikaner to an inspiring one-nation sports idol, inspired by the humanity of Mandela and as a counterpoint microcosm of the new South Africa, the fractious, grudging melding of the established white security detail with Mandela's new black team which naturally goes from mutual dislike and mistrust to eventual respect and cooperation if not outright affection. In truth there wasn't too much drama to get excited about, as there usually isn't in sporting dramas and I have to say that while I enjoyed the triumph of the underdog and the respected the magnanimity of Mandela's conciliatory vision for his nation, director Eastwood didn't exactly rouse me out of my seat in so doing. I also never quite believed that I was watching Nelson Mandela, as Morgan Freeman, game as he is, just always looked like Morgan Freeman in the film. Damon benefits from being based on a less widely-known character although I understand that physically he resembles Pienaar just about as little as Freeman does Mandela. As ever he engages totally with his role, especially physically so that you believe in his part.The crowd scenes, especially recreating the stadium-full atmosphere of the Final and the later euphoric street celebrations of black and white alike are well done, even if you don't quite get the full blood and guts effect of fully engaged sport in the matches itself. Eastwood also, as ever, takes plenty of time out for reflective silence and rumination with some obvious exposition inserts too, no doubt with the American viewer in mind (say, how does this extra-time work again?).Still, it had to be said he does a relatively good job with an assignment which must have been somewhat alien to him and pays proper respect to one of the more notable sporting and national triumphs of recent times.

None other than this movie could have portrayed those events in a better way. It is indeed a wonderful movie. But, it is a lot more than a movie for me. It inspired me to learn more about South Africa and specially about Nelson Mandela. Planning to read the book on which this movie is based on.As Nelson Mandela himself had said once that only Freeman could portray him. Freeman proved him right. Brilliant performance by him.Though the actual events might not have been so dramatic but still I wish I could be part of that final match. It was filmed in a way that for last 3o minutes, I felt I was part of that crowd of 62 thousand.This is the first time I am writing a review on IMDb and it is the movie which made me do so. Only one word can describe this movie in the best way, Perfect!