By Amelia Lozano
It is difficult at times to accept when someone tells you that a film is truly worth watching.
For my first ever viewing of “Lawrence of Arabia,” this is the feeling I had to come to terms with. My expectations for films have admittedly been set quite low nowadays due to all the less than stellar outcomes – on more than one occasion lately, I’ve found myself wanting more from the movies I’m watching.
For David Lean’s most acclaimed film, however, I could not say I felt even a shred of dissatisfaction.
“Lawrence of Arabia,” released in 1962, is loosely based on the real adventures of the British army officer T. E. Lawrence who actively participated in the Arab Revolt, as well as the Sinai and Palestine campaign during World War I. Lawrence became a controversial figure since some people felt he involved himself in conflicts of which he had no right to participate in.
The film stars Peter O’Toole as the titular Lawrence, with Omar Sharif, Alec Guinness and Anthony Quinn in supporting roles.
“Lawrence of Arabia” itself follows the British officer Lawrence as he is tasked with aiding the Arabian Prince Feisal (Guinness); Lawrence grows to appreciate Arabian culture and people, though he does not fit in with either the natives nor the British. The audience watches Lawrence struggle to find his identity whilst reckoning with the harm he has done.
I found the performances to be wonderful all around. O’Toole captures Lawrence’s naivety and whimsy with ease; the character’s turn towards blatantly ambiguous morals, and his mind, which becomes riddled with the traumas of war, are effortlessly portrayed.
It would also be remiss not to speak of Sharif, who portrays Sherif Ali bin el Karish, the advisor to King Feisal. The character is a complex one; he has an edge to him coupled alongside a particular tenderness and strong, certain virtues that balance well with O’Toole’s Lawrence.
Lean’s film is a character study of Lawrence which seeks to make sense of his actions, his fascination with Arabia, and his involvement in the Arab Revolt. Though the film has historical and biographical inaccuracies, it still prompts the necessary questions: Is Lawrence, a white Englishman, justified in his involvement in this foreign place? Are his intentions truly pure?
Lawrence’s character progression is incredibly well done. The film begins by showing his excitement and eagerness to participate in Arabian culture; when given traditional clothing, Lawrence ditches his officer uniform and prances around in his new set of garments, all-too-happy to blend in with his new companions. After experiencing the war for the first time, Lawrence begins to sober up to the reality of the situation. He cannot remain totally pacifist as he previously (and naively) believed; he must acclimate to the truth of the war and all that comes with it.
A four-hour-long runtime might seem intimidating, but for “Lawrence of Arabia,” four hours seems like light work. There is nary a moment during which I felt bored or disinterested in the content of the film, which is immensely surprising. Given the wavering attention spans that define our generation, it is with great pride that I can say there is never a dull moment during the film.
While many movies can struggle to keep a consistent pace for two hours – or sometimes even ninety minutes – “Lawrence of Arabia” is so rich and compelling that it is impossible to feel at all bored or unnerved by the runtime.
I deeply enjoyed “Lawrence of Arabia,” and I would encourage everyone to entertain this classic, genre-defining film. I give this film a full 5 out of 5 stars.