Endgame

For what this movie signifies, it's very important and great on what it's representing, but the movie as a whole is pretty okay. It lacks the budget it needs to be great, but at the same time I give it a 7 because the two main leads save the film and are quite frankly, phenomenal.

Those two main leads being William Hurt and Chiwetel Ejiofor. They give two powerhouse performances and pretty much save the movie from being a 5 and they're chemistry is real and pure as to when the final result comes at the end, it is touching to the viewer because of how great these two performances were as well as it's touching from the historical aspect of it too. Overall a pretty good movie.

I enjoyed this. It was interesting to see how a PPE graduate can use h's knowledge of politics as well as philosophy to approach a peace settlement negotiation. However, what the film missed out was the crucial role of such an undertaking. It failed to highlight precisely and factually what really happened in the mind of the regime before reaching the settlement and how concretely these meetings were related to that decision,

I wish there had been more dialogue and explanations from Micheal Young's side and how he was brought to conjur up such meetings. The writing was not as dramatic as the circumstances allowed them to be . However,there were good actors, but Jonny Lee Miller played his role perfectly in that he portrayed Micheal Young in a dedicated and yet a humble player in the meetings. It was right for him to have a low profile in amongst the others, but it would have given the film more punch had he been given more dialogue in putting forward the importance of such meetings with a terrorist group. After all, the film was as much about Micheal Young's initiative as it was about the end of Apartheid. A good film on the whole.

ENDGAME, as written by Paula Milne and directed by Pete Travis, is a thinking person's film. The subject is the ongoing crises of the Apartheid in South Africa (here during the years 1985 - 1990, with after film commentary to 1999) and the extended secret meetings between the Apartheid regime as controlled by President Botha (Timothy West), those meetings held between the African National Congress represented by Thabo Mbeki (Chiwetel Ejiofor) with prisoner Nelson Mandela (Clarke Peters) as the heart of the blacks and the increasingly disillusioned Afrikaner Apartheidists lead by Professor Will Esterhuyse (William Hurt) convened by a British representative Michael Young (Jonny Lee Miller) acting as spokesman for his entrepreneurial boss Rudolf Agnew (Derek Jacobi) of a major British industry vested in South Africa. The talks are wired by Botha's intelligence officer Dr. Niel Barnard (Mark Strong) and level of intrigue is high. The message of the film is the struggle and final victory of democracy and the end of Apartheid in South Africa, and while the cerebral discussions by this fine group of actors is illuminating, the film gains its power from fast shots of the conditions in South Africa at the time, including rioting, terrorist acts, loss of families, and the ever present intrigue and danger surrounding those men attending the secret meetings.

The supporting cast (especially John Kani as Oliver Tambo, the venerated life long friend of Mandela) is exceptionally strong, but in the end it is the unexpected fine acting of William Hurt and the always excellent Chiwetel Ejifor who remind us how small scaled dramas can have far more impact than the big epics we are used to enduring. This film is especially excellent for informing the public about the ins and outs and meanings of the South African Apartheid and why the ending of that evil regime lighted the fuse for so many other important sociologic changes.

Grady Harp

The end of the hated Apartheid regime in South Africa is an uplifting story, but also, as told in this drama-documentary, an oddly undramatic one. There was no revolution, nor even a commitment to reform from within. Instead, as the system became increasingly untenable on the ground in the face of growing popular unrest, a series of unofficial negotiations between prominent Afrakaaners and the opposition were eventually endorsed by F.W. de Klerk shortly after his appointment as leader of the country, in a tacit acknowledgement that he had run out of other options. Undramatic maybe, but this is still a worthy retelling of the mechanics of the process. It's surprising to see Thabo Mbeki, later much criticised as a later south African leader when he denied that H.I.V. causes A.I.D.S., portrayed here in such a positive light. William Hurt is completely convincing as an Afrikaaner, while 'Wire' veteran Clarke Peters captures the essence of Nelson Mandela with a delicate performance . There's an element of hagiography in the film's treatment of the men who negotiated, but it is justifiably an uplifting story, especially in the knowledge of how, in the main, Mandela has managed to justify his status as virtual deity since his release; and how, for all its continuing problems, South African society has not collapsed with democracy.

Its not a great game but a very watchable film and with South Africa somewhat topical 2009-10 (I have faith like potatoes to watch) (and Invictus in the pipeline)I enjoyed the history lesson of the film and the insight that privateers such as Michael Young helper not only the peace in south Africa but are lending a hand with Hamas as we speak and involved themselves on the Northern Ireland peace deal as well. didn't Clerk come in and steal inevitable glory from Botha and I was left wondering more about Mandelas relationship with the ANC bad guys who are in power now (the real terrorists?0 but i did enjoy the movie. it is an objective film, not over-acted, doubt if it will win any awards but don't miss it!