REVIEW : "Lawrence of Arabia" (1962) - Movie by David Lean

I will admit outright that I have a soft spot for epic movies. There is just something fascinating about the filmic medium and its possibilities to visualise grand stories, which is unparalleled by any other media. And when we talk epic movies, there is one that stands out as the epic of all epics, in my opinion, and that is Lawrence of Arabia.

It seems to me that everything comes together here. An alien but deeply fascinating scenery, an enigmatic central figure, that of T. E. Lawrence, one of the 20th century's most strange and unlikely central figures. A director, who has a visual style and daring, quite unparalleled of his time. A film medium that had reached just about its technical pinnacle. And it is at the tail-end of what we could call the classic cinema, which was to start undergoing radical changes in its expression with new waves and experimental forms etc., rather than going down the "epic" route.

The real T. E. Lawrence is not that well understood, probably because he himself did not want to be understood or put into a specific category or associated with a particular political movement or politicians. On the other hand, he was an English soldier and acted very much as that. But he was also a queer outsider who did not fit in anywhere even in the conflict that made his name.

Lawrence, educated in Middle Eastern archeology, ends up in Cairo during the First World War, drawing maps and gathering intelligence about the Arabs and Ottoman Empire nearby. At some point, he is given the task of connecting with the Arab prince Feisal, to stay on top of the intelligence flow from the rising Arab "revolt".

He quickly finds sympathy for the Arab cause and their will to fight the centuries old Ottoman suppression back. He receives their respect when he, against impossible physical odds, manages to take Aqaba, with a small force from the landside.

After convincing the British army back in Cairo that he has actually managed the feat, he is given lots of ressources to keep the Arab Revolt going, which is both in the British and the Arabs interest. but this is at the same time the problem for Lawrence as his leaders promise that they will give the Arabs an independant Kingdom from Syria to Arab peninsula after the war, but he knows that that may not be the actual truth of what is planned in the case the war ends favorable for the Allies.

But in the hope that things will work out in the end, he convinces the Arabs that they will get their freedom and this leads to a combined war effort between the british and the Arabs, where Lawrence to some extend is used as a diplomatic figure in the campaign to secure the participation of the Arab tribes, lead by Feisal.

Lawrence is torn between his own emotions about the dark side of war - the amount of killing he is more or less responsible for and that of both living out to his responsibilities towards Britain and the Arabs who he has promised their freedom which is a lie.

This will take an enormous toll on him, from which he will not really recover. The film ends as he leaves Arabia but there are a lot of post Arabia stuff with Lawrence that is equally interesting about the end of the war and the years after where he keeps trying to make things right in Arabia. The film is called Lawrence of Arabia, so it makes perfect sense to end the movie as he leaves this place.

It is split in two parts, the first one introduced by a 3 minute black screen with a score, before the credits roll in, and dealing with a short intro to Lawrence and his Cairo years. Then deals with the Arab revolt until the return to Cairo after the battle of Aqaba.

The second part deals with the return to the Arab revolt in the desert, his guerilla warfare towards the supply lines of the Ottomans, the taking of Jerusalem and Damascus. Then follows the disparity of the eventually failed establishment of the Arab Kingdom and how he kind of realises that he has just been used as a tool for France and Britain to establish their interests in the Middle East - not to secure the interests of those who fought for them.

This is not a story about "heroism" in a traditional fashion or a tale of historical aspects of Arab revolt or anything like that. In fact the ambivalence of the story is an important part of why I keep coming back to this movie. I feel confident that there is no particular story that I am suppose to follow, yet there are a multitude of them, both directly and also some more subliminal.

I see the way the cinematography and story work together, as a way of seeing this "Arabian fantasy" as how the director thinks Lawrence himself saw it. The british is in many ways somewhat caricatured. The posh, stuckup general, the obedient and serving under officers and the ridiculous sudden turn towards hailing Lawrence as a hero, when things seem to go his way and those who previously thought ill of his manners suddenly see the hero they will never themselves become.

It has long been established that the plot is at time pure fiction or at least modified with a large amount of artistic license. But I have no problem with that. I prefer movies that take a subjective route to tell the plot so that it does not encumber the stories that needs to be told, which is much more important. If you want the true details of Lawrence history, there are several biographies and documentaries, I am sure.

A part from the overlaying "heroic" tale and the war angle of the Arab revolt, that is the obvious story that most people are lured by, there are the stories of finding out who you are and what you stand for. Then there is the story of being an outsider, who wants to help but also wants to manipulate and dominate. There is the story of - "am I doing this for myself, or for the people who believes I am helping them"?. And then there is the most hidden story - that of the sexual deviant who is torn inside because of it.

The pacing of scenes, in the first part is at times, deliberately, very slow. Most famously the scene where Lawrence (Peter O´Toole) is introduced to Ali (Omar Sharif) at the well, where a mirage shot of Ali approaching from far away on his camel, is drawn out to emphasise the size of the landscape, the emptiness of the desert and the suspense of not knowing who is approaching, friend or foe.

Another drawn out sequence, that could be said to be easy to remove without much lost, is the recovery of a beduin of the campagne to Aqaba who Lawrence goes back to find and bring back. It establishes his trust with the Arab´s and earns him a complete suit of princely Arab robes and a dagger. In this first part though, it is lovely to see how Lean has no problem taking his time to establish personality traits to justify the incredible endeavours Lawrence managed, from a pure logistic standpoint.

The second part has a much faster pacing as the overlaying plot has to be completed somehow and there is some forth and back between campaigns and british headquarters, that do make me loose a bit of oversight with where we are. But that is not important as I have stated, as it is the personal development of Lawrence that is in focus and we clearly understand that he is suffering more and more from what could only be called PTSD and a lot of disillusionment - as he learns how he is being used as a tool of far away diplomats and politicians, for whom he has lied to the people who has helped fight back the Ottomans.

It is worth noting that there are no women in the movie, and I mean NO women, at all. This is a story about men and how they act under war and distress. And I must admit, I am quite happy that there is no romantic aspects here at all, as it creates a particular "singular" feel, that may both serve as a hint of probable homosexuality of Lawrence and as a statement of how the world of men was, back before the idea of suffragettes and modern days waves of feminists demanding social justice everywhere.

The most important aspect of this movie though, is the cinematography, closely followed by a glorious sweeping score by Jarre. The 65mm film medium, the impeccable huge vistas and the attention to details in creating a truly epic vision, is pretty much unparalleled in the history of movies. The most famous bit is the "match"-cut, where we go from Cairo to the desert when Lawrence blows out a match (basically creating a match-match cut). It is my favourite part of the movie and both because of it being just about the most bold and surprising cut in history but also because of how the sunrise dissolves into a majestic desert shot while the Lawrence theme sweeps over the scene. It is truly breathtaking, even more than 50 years later.

The acting can feel a little stiff and overly done at times. back in the early 60´s I think this was how it was "supposed" to be in epic stories of this kind, but looking at it now it feels slightly overacted and stiff at times. But at other times, it is fitting and adds to the sort of dreamlike, legend like personality of Lawrence, who is still such an enigmatic and misunderstood figure a century on.

This movie has to be seen, and the better quality you can get it in the better, preferably in a large theatre, which is not something I have had the change to experience yet. But the 50th anniversary blu-ray is pretty spectacular still. It is a cinematic milestone in cinema and an absolute must see, even if the story and the plot does not strike your fancy. Just to enjoy the cinematography is a delight and it earns my highest recommendations, even for its little faults here and there.

10/10