Lawrence: After Arabia

I know much of this story from Rodney Legg's 1988 book, so was interested to see it turned into a narrative. And I knew it would be low budget - but low budgets can often be a spur to imaginative and exciting solutions. Not in this case, sadly. Almost every department of moviemaking was shoddy. Direction was leaden. Editing was stodgy. Sound recording was mushy, and sound mixing woeful. Grading? Forget it. Continuity. Ditto. And, as for the acting... From the opening sequence, with a child actor who would have made a primary school nativity audience wince, to our hero, who was presumably trying to convey a tortured soul but only succeeded in looking mildly dyspeptic, even while squeezing out a tear. To be honest, I didn't get far enough into the movie to reach the actors we've heard of. After the second sequence of 'Arabs' running single file right to left I decided to either stay and laugh or go and do something more life-enhancing. I went. If you're interested in the story, track down the book. If you want to see a good movie, go elsewhere.

Sadly, a wasted evening. The wooden acting was matched by the poor photography, editing, sound and continuity. We were treated to an overlong funeral procession, on repeat. Even the beautiful Dorset locations were wasted by the lack of focus and lighting. The bloated script was an overlong conspiracy theory taking us up to the present day. Lawrence was a brave - even heroic - man, if confused about his identity. A shame this film couldn't do him justice.

Having watched it twice (with growing dismay) I have to say this film will probably be used by film schools to demonstrate how NOT to make a movie. The acting is, with few exceptions, terrible. Barber-Duffy as Lawrence puts in a wooden and unconvincing performance which is amply demonstrated by his first scene.

May of the scenes are framed so badly they highlight both the inadequacy of both sets and direction. (See for example the scenes where the Head of Intelligence briefs his agents, and the hospital scene later in the film).

Access to Clouds Hill was infamously limited: but why does the Director use the exact same bit of film (Lawrence arriving on his Brough to find the cottage door open), multiple times? It's just so obvious.

The blue-screen scenes which are meant to represent Arabia are simply atrocious. It would have been better not to use them at all.

I find it hard to believe the film has gathered so many awards.

On the positive side, (yes there is one) the Dorset countryside is beautiful and does evoke the landscape around Clouds Hill.

I think my heading sums it up best...

When they started with the opening scene I though it had to be part of the local adverts..... right?

Wrong.... Yes i went in knowing it was low budget & shot locally but even so I expected much better than this.

Everything about it was poor, opening music sounded like it was done on one of those toy xylophone's, sound quality abysmal, acting that would have seen those in a local production having non-speaking parts the following year, the direction... where to start.... I think you get the picture...

It really is one to avoid, i walked out after 30 minutes otherwise I would have been rolling in the aisles & watching it locally I suspect there were a few in the audience who were "extras" so I saved myself the shaming....

Looking through the reviews I suspect those giving high marks actually appeared in the film as I really didnt see anything worthy of more than a one.

It really was horrible & moreso as I admire & am fascinated by the TE Lawrence story.

I applaud the director for giving it a go but the film was very poor and terribly shot. The acting, with a couple of exceptions, was a amateurish and the shots were over egged and tedious. A couple of beacons in the mist were the inquest scene (although terribly framed) I totally believed the actor presiding over the scene, I've seen him in lots and he's very believable, and the Cameo from Michael Maloney was enjoyable.. the rest were over acting I'm afraid.