"The man who gives victory in battle is prized over every other man."

Rating: 7/10 (29 October 2006)

With it's epic sweep and stunning visuals, "Lawrence of Arabia" has earned it's position among the greatest films of all time. That's a subjective fact I can live with, but at the risk of offending some of the more eloquent supporters on this site, there wasn't a lot that I could warm up to in this movie. More than once I wound up saying to myself 'I get it already' after repeated close ups of the baking desert sun and the limitless expanse of sand. Nor was I inspired to empathize with Lawrence's cause to unite the Bedouin tribes. One might contend that the story is far enough removed from modern history both chronologically and geographically to be of interest, but I would point to two films of the 1930's that took a similar tack and worked for me a whole lot better - 1935's "The Lives of a Bengal Lancer" and 1939's "Gunga Din", both taking place on the Indian sub continent.
Nor would I characterize the performances of the individual leads as less than significant. Peter O'Toole's portrayal of T.E. Lawrence is singularly noteworthy in capturing the essence of the man, while Alec Guiness, Omar Sharif and Anthony Quinn are all credible. Still, I had difficulty in relating to these characters, who seemed neither likable nor meaningful beyond their relationship to their tribes. What was essentially a defining moment in the story, the defeat of the Turks at Aqaba, seemed to be glossed over entirely as if the enemy simply rolled over and gave up.
Perhaps the thing to do would be to give the film another chance, but at an investment of nearly four hours, I don't feel that's going to be a priority. I've considered the argument some have offered as to viewing the film on the big screen for it's maximum impact, but that opportunity doesn't seem likely. I'd like to keep an open mind about it, but for now, I'll have to remain a member of the minority on this film.