a great film that i respect more than i enjoy

Rating: 8/10 (5 October 2012)

Lawrence of Arabia follows the exploits of TE Lawrence (Peter O'Toole), a British army officer who served in the Middle East during the First World War. the film begins with a mystery, like Citizen Kane. after a prologue about Lawrence's motorcycle accident, we are transported to his funeral where he's discussed as "a poet, a scholar, a mighty warrior but also an exhibitionist". this hook works, and the film then takes us to Cairo years back where he's about to begin the greatest adventure of his life: to go to the desert and come into contact with with the local tribes concerning the fight against the Turks. as Lawrence becomes the centerpiece of the Arab revolt against the Turks, the rise and fall of his character becomes the film's main focus.
Lawrence of Arabia is not simply a biopic or an adventure film, although it contains both elements, but above all, it is a marvel at the ability of David Lean to make the desert an effective character with equal or even greater importance than the major players. Lawrence is a unusual hero, David Lean portrays him as someone who combines charisma and madness, which was very different from conventional military heroes, as Lawrence is able to unite Arab tribes by earning their respect.
Through the events that followed, we see Lawrence's character mold and evolve; at one point, he has believed himself to be some sort of a demigod, but after receiving brutal treatment, he becomes bitter, doubtful and seeking revenge, showing his darker side in exercising killing. Lean's film dazzles visually and raises interest around everything surrounding Lawrence; delving, although rather abruptly, more into his eccentricities, phobias and desires. but here's my major problem with the film: it doesn't explore nearly enough his motivation and drive. clearly there's something wrong with him psychologically, but the film never makes an effort to discover what that is. instead, it's content to present us with a Lawrence that is simply flawed for no discernible reason; is he a man with simple ideas who just loves the clean desert while disappointed at his surroundings? was it O'Toole's fault and his being unsure about his place in the film's timeline? or was it the uncomplicated script? i don't know, but the result is a character who the audience never sees as three-dimensional with motives and honest emotions.
There are lots of reasons to love Lawrence of Arabia: the excellent cinematography, the direction, the score, the script, the performances, the symbolic imagery and the sheer boldness and vision of making a film that's nearly four hours long, with no stars, no women, no love story and not much action either, filmed in the desert. however, I can only speak from my experience when I watched it on DVD at home late at night, rather than a glorious 70mm print that, i imagine, would add a much greater effect to the vastness, harshness and majesty of the desert. at the end, i felt i respected the film more than i enjoyed it