---
title: "Invictus"
year: 2009
kind: "film"
canonical: "https://film.one/film/invictus"
fi1m_id: "invictus"
imdb_id: "tt1057500"
tmdb_id: 22954
wikidata_id: "Q689842"
fi1m_score: 61
critics_score: 62
critics_reviews: 20
published: "2026-10-09T19:31:02.075203+00:00"
updated: "2026-10-09T19:31:02.633943+00:00"
region: "US"
licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL."
---

# Invictus (2009)

Directed by Clint Eastwood · 2h 14m · MPA PG-13 · Drama, History, Sport

## Identity

Invictus

- **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/invictus
- **Type:** Film
- **Fi1m ID:** invictus
- **IMDb ID:** tt1057500
- **TMDB ID:** 22954
- **Wikidata ID:** Q689842
- **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1057500/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/22954, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q689842

**Fi1m score: 61** · Critics 62 from 20 reviews

*In a sentence:* Freeman does the forgiving, Damon does the scrummaging, and the script does the explaining, twice

> Clint Eastwood tells the story of Mandela and the Rugby World Cup plainly, without fuss and without much curiosity. Morgan Freeman is the reason to watch; the film around him repeats its one idea until it is worn smooth.

## Synopsis

South Africa. Nelson Mandela (Morgan Freeman) is driven out of prison past a road where white schoolboys play rugby on one side and black boys play football on the other. Four years on he is president, and on his first morning tells the white staff clearing their desks that he needs them. His head of security, Jason Tshabalala (Tony Kgoroge), is handed white officers who served the old government, and does not like it. The Springboks, hated in the townships as the team of apartheid, face a vote to strip their name and green jersey; Mandela drives to the meeting to stop it, and invites the captain, Francois Pienaar (Matt Damon), to tea. The World Cup is a year away; the president wants the whole country behind one team.

## Review

Clint Eastwood’s film takes a fine true story and tells it as though it were afraid of breaking it. Nelson Mandela, a year into the presidency, decides that the Springboks, the rugby team black South Africa has spent decades cheering against, can be made into something the whole country owns, and that the World Cup the nation is about to host is the place to do it. Anthony Peckham’s screenplay lays this out clearly. Then it keeps laying it out, for 134 minutes.

Morgan Freeman is why you watch. He has the walk, the hands clasped behind the back, the pause in which you can see a sentence being chosen, and a smile that arrives a beat before its joke. On his first morning in office he gathers the white civil servants packing their desks and tells them, without raising his voice, that he would rather they stayed. We were moved by that scene more than we expected to be: Freeman plays it as a man asking a favour, not a saint granting one, and the camera stays on the faces of the people deciding whether to believe him.

The bodyguards are the film’s best idea. Jason Tshabalala (Tony Kgoroge) runs the president’s security and is handed white officers from the old regime, Etienne Feyder (Julian Lewis Jones) and Hendrick Booyens (Matt Stern), with Patrick Mofokeng’s Linga Moonsamy alongside him. Four men sharing a corridor and a job, each sure the others will get the boss killed: it is the whole country in one office, and the film is wise enough not to say so out loud. These scenes are short, funny and tense, and there are too few of them.

Matt Damon plays Francois Pienaar, the Springbok captain, with his shoulders set and an accent he holds onto carefully, and he makes a decent, quiet man interesting to look at. His tea with Freeman is the one proper conversation in the film, two people working out what the other wants. Patrick Lyster and Penny Downie, as his parents, give the Afrikaner household a sourness the script needs; Marguerite Wheatley has little to do as his girlfriend Nerine. Adjoa Andoh, as Mandela’s chief of staff Brenda Mazibuko, is the only person allowed to think the rugby is a distraction from running a country, and she is right more often than the film admits.

Tom Stern shoots it in hard sun and deep shadow, the government offices brown and dim, the pitch bleached nearly white, and James J. Murakami gives the presidential office a borrowed grandeur of dark wood and heavy curtains. Deborah Hopper’s loud patterned shirts and the green jersey do a fair share of the storytelling. Joel Cox and Gary D. Roach cut the office scenes cleanly and the rugby badly. On the field it is all slow-motion collisions and grunting faces in close-up, and if you did not know how a match is shaped going in, you will not know coming out.

Then there is the music. Kyle Eastwood and Michael Stevens supply a score that is mostly tasteful, until it swells over a montage, and we sat there irritated, because the pictures had already said it and the strings said it worse. It is the film’s habit in miniature. Mandela explains the plan to Brenda. Mandela explains the plan to Pienaar. Pienaar explains it to the team.

Against Eastwood’s own recent work this is the cautious one. [*Million Dollar Baby*](https://film.one/film/million-dollar-baby) (2004) and [*Letters from Iwo Jima*](https://film.one/film/letters-from-iwo-jima) (2006) were made by a man willing not to be sure how he felt; [*Gran Torino*](https://film.one/film/gran-torino) (2008) was at least rough enough to be alive. Here he admires his subject so much that he refuses to let anything go wrong near him, so the film has little to do.

The second half is the tournament, and we will not say how it goes. It is a fair Sunday afternoon at home, where its calm reads as comfort rather than caution. It runs 134 minutes, carries a 12A, and will not surprise anyone over twelve, which may well be what it set out to do.

*Fi1m score 61, published 9 October 2026.*

## What the critics say

Most critics find Invictus decent and dutiful. The praise clusters on Morgan Freeman, whose Mandela nearly every review calls convincing, and several reviewers add that the film is worth watching chiefly while he is on screen. Matt Damon’s Pienaar gets quieter approval, and the staging of the World Cup final is picked out more than once as the point where the film finds some tension. Eastwood’s plain, steady direction is noted with respect rather than enthusiasm.

The reservations are about everything around Freeman: a predictable arc, spelled-out storytelling, and a reverent view of South Africa that several critics call sketchy or timid. The spread is wide. The Guardian dismisses it as a constrained fable with little dramatic motion, and IndieWire objects to a staged airplane scare it considers exploitative, while Variety finds it a good story well told. Few critics are indifferent; the split is between those who are stirred and those who are bored.

## Straight answers

**Is Invictus worth watching?**

*Invictus* is worth watching for Morgan Freeman's Mandela, and we scored it 61: decent, flawed in ways that matter. The film around him explains its one idea three times over and shoots the rugby so you cannot follow the match. A fair Sunday afternoon at home for anyone who likes a true story told gently.

**How long is Invictus, and what is it rated?**

*Invictus* runs 2h 14m and is rated PG-13 by the MPA in the US. It is a drama and history film.

**Where can I watch Invictus in the US?**

*Invictus* is available to rent from Amazon Prime Video and Apple TV from $5.99. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service.

**How violent or frightening is Invictus, and is it suitable for children?**

*Invictus* is a 12A and about as mild as a sports drama gets: no frightening scenes, and the roughest moments are slow-motion collisions on the rugby pitch. There is tension between bodyguards from opposite sides of the old regime, but it is played for wit as much as menace. Children of twelve and up will be fine; younger ones may simply be bored.

**How does Invictus compare to Chariots of Fire?**

[*Chariots of Fire*](https://film.one/film/chariots-of-fire) is the better film: its runners have convictions worth arguing over and its races are shot so you can see who is winning, which *Invictus* never manages with its rugby. Eastwood's film has the stronger central performance in Freeman, but it repeats itself where Hudson's trusts the pictures. Choose *Invictus* for Mandela; choose *Chariots* for the sport.

**What should I watch after Invictus?**

After *Invictus*, try [*Chariots of Fire*](https://film.one/film/chariots-of-fire) (1981, Fi1m 78): Sport as a stand-in for a nation’s arguments, with the running shot properly. Then [*Lincoln*](https://film.one/film/lincoln) (2012, Fi1m 82): Another great man doing politics by charm and patience, with more teeth in the script.

### Reviews we read (20)

- **Variety**, Todd McCarthy (90/100, inferred): McCarthy calls the film a very good story, very well told, praising its rich accumulation of history, cultural detail, and emotion despite a predictable trajectory. He particularly singles out Morgan Freeman’s compelling portrayal of Mandela and the bodyguards’ revealing scenes. [Read](https://variety.com/2009/film/reviews/invictus-2-1117941681/)
- **Los Angeles Times**, Kenneth Turan (80/100, inferred): Turan finds the film a stirring, old-fashioned drama that delivers dependable audience satisfaction. He praises Eastwood’s confident storytelling and Freeman’s nuanced portrayal of Mandela, though he notes the rugby action could use more explanation. [Read](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2009-dec-11-la-et-invictus11-2009dec11-story.html)
- **Radio Times**, Colin Prior (4/5): The critic describes the film as a heart-warming drama about Mandela using rugby to help unite a divided nation. The review singles out the tournament’s role as a catalyst for reconciliation. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-z3ske3/invictus)
- **RogerEbert.com**, Roger Ebert (3/4): Ebert gives the film a favorable but measured verdict. He singles out Morgan Freeman’s performance as Nelson Mandela for praise. [Read](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/invictus-2009)
- **The New Yorker** (70/100, inferred): The critic finds the film stirring and warmhearted, though somewhat official and sketchy in its view of South Africa. Freeman’s dignified portrayal of Mandela stands out for praise. [Read](https://www.newyorker.com/goings-on-about-town/movies/invictus)
- **Empire**, Ian Nathan (65/100, inferred): Nathan finds the film noble and expertly made, but less personal and resonant than Eastwood’s strongest work. He especially praises Matt Damon’s quietly authoritative portrayal of Francois Pienaar, while noting that the rugby action can feel generic. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/invictus-review/)
- **The New York Times**, A.O. Scott (65/100, inferred): The review finds the film earnest and broadly effective, though not fully inspired. It singles out the story’s portrayal of Mandela using rugby to help unite South Africa. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/11/movies/11invictus.html)
- **Screen Daily**, Mike Goodridge (64/100, inferred): The page identifies a review of Clint Eastwood’s 2009 film, but the review text is behind a paywall. Its verdict and any specific praise or criticism cannot be determined from the visible material. [Read](https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/invictus/5008772.article)
- **Time Out** (3/5): The review finds the film insistently honorable but too often overexplained. It praises a subtle moment that stands out amid the spelled-out storytelling. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/invictus-1)
- **Total Film**, Philip Kemp (3/5): Kemp finds the film predictable and sometimes slow, but worthwhile while Morgan Freeman is on screen. He especially praises Freeman’s charismatic, convincing portrayal of Nelson Mandela. [Read](https://www.gamesradar.com/invictus-review/)
- **The Hollywood Reporter**, Kirk Honeycutt (45/100, inferred): Honeycutt finds the film temperate and worthwhile, but too timid to give its political story or protagonists much depth. He praises the rugby sequences while faulting the lack of a human relationship to carry the emotional story. [Read](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/invictus-review-movie-2009-93782/)
- **Slant Magazine**, Nick Schager (2/5): Schager finds the film dull and overly conventional, reducing a significant history to a clichéd sports drama. He praises Eastwood’s sturdy visual style and restraint from mawkishness, but says the story lacks depth and surprise. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/dvd/invictus-dvd/)
- **The Guardian**, Xan Brooks (30/100, inferred): Brooks finds the film a reverent, constrained sporting fable that lacks creativity and dramatic motion. He praises Morgan Freeman’s diligent, nuanced portrayal of Mandela as a glimpse of the private man behind the public image. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2010/jan/31/invictus-film-review-damon-freeman)
- **Evening Standard** (25/100, inferred): The critic finds the film unconvincing, arguing that its uplifting approach sacrifices subtlety and credibility. They single out its swelling music and grand gestures as overwhelming the complex history it tries to portray. [Read](https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/film/nice-try-clint-eastwood-but-invictus-is-unconvincing-7418509.html)
- **IndieWire**, Michael Koresky (25/100, inferred): Koresky finds the film impersonal, conventional, and unsuccessful as either a portrait or a sports movie. He particularly objects to a staged airplane scare that, in his view, exploits terrorism fears and undermines the film’s themes. [Read](https://www.indiewire.com/criticism/culture/review-ready-set-heal-clint-eastwoods-invictus-55664/)
- **HeyUGuys**, David Sztypuljak (85/100, inferred): The critic found the film moving and inspiring, despite some slow stretches and reservations about Matt Damon’s casting. They praise Morgan Freeman’s portrayal of Mandela and the film’s focus on rebuilding a divided nation. [Read](https://www.heyuguys.com/review-invictus/)
- **Digital Spy**, Simon Reynolds (80/100, inferred): The review finds the film a rousing, triumphant blend of political biopic and sports drama, despite predictable genre conventions. It particularly praises Morgan Freeman’s portrayal of Mandela and the film’s account of his power to inspire forgiveness and unity. [Read](https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a199353/invictus/)
- **Eye for Film**, Leanne McGrath (80/100, inferred): McGrath finds the film an emotional, inspiring and historically detailed account of Mandela’s effort to unite South Africa. She particularly praises Matt Damon’s performance, while calling Morgan Freeman the film’s real star. [Read](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/invictus-film-review-by-leanne-mcgrath)
- **/Film**, Lee Adams (75/100, inferred): The critic considers Invictus an earnestly rousing, if low-key, sports film and a respectful Mandela biopic. The tense, carefully built-up World Cup final stands out for recreating the excitement of the match. [Read](https://www.slashfilm.com/1849515/clint-eastwood-sports-movie-underrated-invictus/)
- **Den of Geek**, Simon Brew (3 out of 5): Brew finds the film watchable and competently made, but says it never becomes as compelling as its extraordinary story deserves. He praises Freeman’s portrayal of Mandela and the staging of the final rugby match. [Read](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/invictus-blu-ray-review/)

## Details

- **Director:** Clint Eastwood
- **Director:** Clint Eastwood
- **Screenplay:** Anthony Peckham
- **Cinematography:** Tom Stern
- **Editor:** Gary D. Roach, Joel Cox
- **Music:** Michael Stevens, Kyle Eastwood
- **Production design:** James J. Murakami
- **Costume design:** Deborah Hopper
- **Producer:** Lori McCreary, Robert Lorenz, Clint Eastwood
- **Cast:** Morgan Freeman as Nelson Mandela; Matt Damon as Francois Pienaar; Tony Kgoroge as Jason Tshabalala; Patrick Mofokeng as Linga Moonsamy; Matt Stern as Hendrick Booyens; Julian Lewis Jones as Etienne Feyder; Adjoa Andoh as Brenda Mazibuko; Marguerite Wheatley as Nerine
- **Runtime:** 2h 14m
- **Certificate (MPA):** PG-13
- **Release (the US):** 11 December 2009
- **Genres:** Drama, History, Sport
- **Budget:** $60 million
- **Box office:** $122 million

## Where to watch in the US

- Amazon Prime Video: rent $5.99, hd
- Apple TV: rent $5.99, hd
- Amazon Prime Video: buy $12.99, hd
- Apple TV: buy $12.99, hd

*Checked 2026-10-09.*

Also available in: AE, AR, AT, AU, BE, BG, BR, CA, CH, CL, CO, CZ, DE, DK, EC, EE, ES, FI, FR, GB, GR, HK, HR, HU, ID, IE, IL, IN, IT, JP, KR, LT, MX, MY, NL, NO, NZ, PA, PE, PH, PL, PT, RO, RS, SE, SG, TH, UA, US, VN, ZA. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country.

## Awards

- Academy Awards 2010: Best Actor (nominated); Best Supporting Actor (nominated)

## If you liked this

- *Chariots of Fire* (1981), Fi1m 78: Sport as a stand-in for a nation’s arguments, with the running shot properly. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/chariots-of-fire.md)
- *Tsotsi* (2005): Johannesburg after apartheid, seen from the township rather than the president’s office.
- *Lagaan* (2001): A village plays cricket against its colonial masters; longer, louder and more fun.
- *The Damned United* (2009): A football manager who is nobody’s saint, and a sports film that admits it.
- *Lincoln* (2012), Fi1m 82: Another great man doing politics by charm and patience, with more teeth in the script. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/lincoln.md)

---
© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/invictus