The greatest *some spoilers*

Rating: 10/10 (10 May 2003)

Clocking in at a little over the 4 hour mark(in the remastered director's cut), David Lean's finest film chronicles the experiences of T.E. Lawrence(Peter O' Toole) on the Arab front during WWI. After a short prologue depicting Lawrence's premature death and funeral. We are cast back in time(more than 20 years) to Cairo, where Lawrence is about to begin the greatest adventure of his career: his commanding officer instructs him to liaise with Prince Feisel(Alec Guiness) of the Bedou people, in a bid to make an 'appraisal' of the fortunes of the Arab forces in the struggle against the Ottoman Turks. A concise summary of the movie would outline five key events: i)Lawrence's journey into Bedouin territory and his meetings with Feisel and Sherif Ali Ibn El Kharish (Omar Sharif) - Omar Sharif's entrance alone has become legend in the annals of movie history ii)The ardous trek across the Nefud Desert and subsequent attack on Aqaba iii)Lawrence's torture at the hands of the sadistic Turkish Bey in Deraa iv)The massacre at Tafas. v)The final success in Damascus.
Robert Bolt's screenplay stretches beyond the typical fare of historical blockbusters by offering a graphic portrayal of Lawrence's character rather than depicting the combat in detail. When we first meet Lawrence, he is 'out of place' among his peers in the army - even his uniform is ill-fitting - a desire for greatness burns within him(`I cannot fiddle but I can make a great state out of a little city') and the opportunity to leave for Arabia is welcome relief from the tedium of cartography. His encounter with Ali(Omar Sharif) and the friendship that follows is crucial to the movie in that it offers a foil to the viewers against which they should draw contrasts to gain an understanding of Lawrence's psyche. Ali and his people accept Lawrence as one of their own, effectively adopting him as their leader - he wears Arabian clothes, eats their food etc. It would appear that this 'rebirth in the desert' appears to be Lawrence's true calling......until.... his capture in Deraa where his brutal treatment and degradation, causes him to becomes a sadistic, doubtful man with an insatiabe desire for revenge. Following the capture of Damascus, Lawrence beceomes redundant and leaves for England while the politicial resolution continues.
`I never knew him well you know...', the words of General Allenby,Lawrence's commanding officer, at the movies opening. By the end of the picture, one wonders whetther they have gained any insight into this remarkable character.....do we really know him? Did he even know himself? Lawrence of Arabia is, above all else, a movie concerned with identity. Lawrence was a man who never truly 'found himself'. Detached from his compatriots-he labelled them as a `fat people' and followed with the line `I'm different'. He never really found peace among the Arabs either, brief happiness perhaps, but not peace. His happiness largly resulted from delusions of grandeur that were rooted in the godlike-status in which the Arabs held him. Indeed it was a mild hypocrisy that a man who believed that he was 'destined' for greatness would boldly declare that `Nothing is written!' before attempting the impossible(there is an ambiguity in this wonderful line which hints at an underlying scorn for the beliefs of the Arab people). Lawrence deterioration following his torture is well-contrasted against the reformed Ali(who initially appeared as a savage). Ali would now like to `learn politics' andis disgusted at Lawrence's bloodlust(`You speak to me of bloodshed?!'), while Lawrence `enjoyed' his execution of Gazim and no longer believes in taking prisoners in battle. Indeed Lean's illustration of the dark side of both men as well as such scenes as the one in which a mob scramble for a pistol would indicate that Lean believes that evil is an inherent part of man's nature. Another aspect of his character which was mildly referenced(and understandably so) was the possibility that he may have been homosexual. The total absence of female characters, his relationship with the young male servants and camp exhibitionism offer the audience slight hints regarding this. Obviously it would have been impossible to directly address this in a movie of this nature - it was an era when homosexuality sneered upon and creating an overtly gay hero would have been commercial suicide. But again this reinforces Lawrence's inability to define himself. As a final note there is one scene in which a motorcyclist shouts `WHO ARE YOU?' across the Suez canal with Lawrence standing in shot....the voice is that of David Lean.
As a spectacle few movies rival Lawrence of Arabia, special effects are non-existent because the set-pieces were performed for real....trains were derailed...hordes of camel riders stormed across the sand(which was kept immaculate on a minimum of takes) etc. Shot in cinemascope with a predominantly left to right camera movement the viewers get a genuine sense of a cinematic journey, added to this is Maurice Jarre's sweeping score inspires awe in the viewer for the vast desert landscapes. The glorious cinematography and spectacular set-pieces enrapture rather than overwhelm the characters on screen. And what characters they are....aside from O'Toole(whose performance is one of the greatest of all time) and Sharif, Alec Guinness, Jack Hawkins, Anthony Quayle and the ever wonderful Claude Rains complete an astonishing leading cast. I could talk about this forever so I should probably shut up.
Lawrence of Arabia could not be made again, a studio would not allow a blockbuster to be released without a female lead, the effects would be digitised to cut down on cost, it's running time would be butchered, an newcomer like O'Toole would probably not obtain the lead etc. etc. Shame really.