Very Good Film, but...Perfect? That's Debatable

Rating: 8/10 (30 October 2019)

There are way too many reviews here labeling this film as "the greatest ever," "perfect" and/or containing similar such effusive praise. And while I can't argue with the cinematography (which truly is impressive), or the acting (++), there are a few issues I have with 'Lawrence of Arabia' that prevent me from joining others who want to put it on the highest shelf. Hear me out.
Plot In a Nutshell: British officer T.E. Lawrence (Peter O'Toole) aids the Arab cause in their struggle against the Turks during the Great War.
For starters, this is a flawed hero at best, and not an emotionally attractive one. It's easy to get behind the cause of Ben-Hur, for example, or Spartacus (which, by the way, are veritably epic films in their own right which preceded 'Lawrence of Arabia,' and which most reviewers here seem to have forgotten). Both Ben-Hur and Spartacus are wronged, we see it happen and we feel for the characters. Then they spend the rest of their films trying to right those wrongs, which they largely do. The same can be said for more recent epics like Braveheart and Maximus in 'Gladiator.' What exactly is so emotionally appealing about Lawrence? He hasn't been wronged in any way. He's just a soldier doing his job. OK. That's nice, but it lacks the powerful impact of Maximus getting revenge on Commodus or the slaves all standing up and saying "I am Spartacus" in a show of unity with that titular character. LOA just doesn't have this. There's no impetus to care about Lawrence as there is for the 'heroes' in those other epic films.
Secondly, the depiction here is wildly inaccurate. Lawrence's own brother said he couldn't recognize the character that was supposed to be his kinsman, and he actually went 'on tour' appearing on talk shows to denounce the film! That's not good. No one is around to tell us who Spartacus really was, or William Wallace, but we do know about Lawrence. And what we get in this film is, simply put, a very loose interpretation of reality. I was surprised to learn that several other British officers were already embedded with Arab tribes and were already carrying out commando raids prior to Lawrence's arrival. Watching this film you get the idea this was his brainchild and it absolutely was not. Anthony Quinn's character (Auda abu Tayi) does not abandon the cause as is shown here. It goes on and on. You can read all of the many inaccuracies in the Wikipedia article of this film.
Lastly, the film limps to a conclusion. The 2nd half, or specifically the last hour, is not very captivating. It portrays the political differences and difficulties between the various Arab tribes and the British Army as they all vie for control of Damascus. It's actually kind of tedious. And then....it just ends. Lawrence decides to go home. Credits roll. That's uh....interesting. But one thing it's not is perfect. Anyone watching knows this.
"Lawrence of Arabia" was a highly influential film (for George Lucas, Steven Spielberg and others), and it certainly deserves a place in cinematic history, but beware of those stating that this film is 'unmatched' or that it's 'the greatest film ever.' That's extremely high praise and difficult to prove. In my book, having just watched it, it's neither.
8/10. Very good but has some baggage. Would I watch again (Y/N)?: Because of its length and less-than-satisfying ending, not for a long time.