Who wants to relive the 1995 Rugby World Cup?
Right... so, with Clint Eastwood's new film, Invictus, now open in NZ (warning: spoilers!) the underdog rugby team of the Springboks are urged by Nelson Mandela to snatch country-uniting victory from the jaws of almost certain ignominious defeat at the 1995 Rugby World Cup in Johannesburg.
The mountain they have to climb comes in the form of the towering talents of an unbeatable-looking All Blacks side which features the equally towering talent of an unstoppable-looking Jonah Lomu.
The thing that will strike most New Zealanders who remember the events of 1995 is that there is absolutely no mention of the food poisoning that swept the All Blacks 48 hours before the World Cup final.
That's partly because the book Clint Eastwood's film is based on - John Carlin's Playing the Enemy: Nelson Mandela and the Game That Changed a Nation - also makes no mention of the incident.
I realise that would muck up the tidy underdog-sports-movie narrative, but there's no need to mention "Suzie the waitress" or imply it was sabotage.
It is a fact that 27 members of the 35-man squad went down with a nasty tummy bug at the worst possible time.
I talked to a few people who were there when it happened, including All Blacks coach Laurie Mains, All Blacks lock Ian Jones and rugby commentator Keith Quinn (but you'll have to buy a copy of The Weekend Press tomorrow to see what they think...)
Was it just a coincidence? Possibly.
Clint Eastwood certainly doesn't like the subject being brought up, as it was by an Australian interviewer recently (I don't think Eastwood has agreed to any NZ interviews, oddly enough, considering how much the New Zealand team features in the climax of his film).
Here was his reaction:
The mild-mannered Eastwood, whose demeanour is unfailingly charming, reacts almost viscerally when the alleged food poisoning incident is brought up.
"What?" he says, raising his voice slightly. "And Jimmy Dean's alive too, I suppose?"
What do you think? Was Suzie the waitress real?
And will you be rushing to go see the ABs beaten by the Boks all over again on the big screen in Invictus?
» Follow NZStuffBlogs on Twitter and get fast updates on all Stuff's blogs.
» Fancy yourself as a blogger? Whoever wins Blog Idol 2 will blog on contract at Stuff as well as win a new Nokia phone. Put on your blogging hat and enter!
Sponsored links
Suzie the waitress - real or otherwise - is a bit of a red herring. The fact is, as you have said Margaret, 27 of the 35-man squad went down with a stomach bug 48 hours prior to the game.
To call the 1995 World Cup Rugby final a tidy underdog-style win with an incidental side of political feel-good, is to dismiss that the opposing team wasn't at 100% (and only lost by a mere drop-goal).
That's not to dismiss the meaning of the event in the wider political context - but it's pure Hollywood to deny other aspects of historical reality that do not fit the story the producers/writers/directors want to tell.
I would have thought Eastwood would have been a bit more nuanced in response to the question about food poisoning rather than equating it to some sort of BS akin to UFOs.
It's also amusing that the All Blacks are the dominant team in Invictus when the reality is that we could also be portrayed as an underdog-style side when considering our size, distance etc etc. Oh well... I'll still see the movie!
No, I'll give this one a miss. It's a movie about rugby made by Americans. That's sabotage enough.
There are very few conspiracy theories I'd give credence after rational consideration, but I'm almost convinced Suzie is one of them. Just too much of a coincidence, it would have been easy to do, and frankly I wouldn't put it past the SA rugby administration of the time (anyone else remember Louis Leyt?). We can argue what if's until the cows come home, but we should take pride in that while it was a defeat, it was a glorious one, in that weakened as they were, the AB's still held the Springboks to extra time to decide the championship.
As you said ti weas based on that a book. New Zealanders have to get over the fact that the book and movie was about Mandela and how the win united South Africans, if England or Australia had of made the final, the movie still would of been made, it wasn't about us or an excuse about why we lost.
I saw this the other week and thought it was good - especially seeing the real footage of Jonah running over Mike Catt without Keith Quinn having his orgasm in the commentary box!
What I want to know is though how many meetings did Mandela have with Pienaar and what was the sort of things they said - did Pienar realise what it would mean for South Africa or did he just want to win the world cup for his own and his team's glories?
We all know that they weren't ever going to talk about the food poisoning as the NZ weren't the focus, the SA team were.
I wonder how much money "The Dam Busters' made in German theatres when it was originally released in 1955?
They should have made Suzie the star. She could have been a Shoshanna-type heroine on a revenge kick.
I am South African and was in SA during the RWC in 1995 - what happened had an magical effect on the country, it brought a unity that just wasn't there before.
What is sad however, is that since coming to NZ in 2002 I have met so many Kiwi's have gone out of their way to undermine what was special memory for me and in SA's history.
No Heck No I will not be going to watch this film Yes it was blatantly obvious while watching that game that something was horribly wrong when you see All blacks down on one knee blowing chunks on the side line and then getting up and running back on to the field. And as for pienaar and boks they were absolute tossers when they one at the end.
But satisfaction was received when a full strength (as in not food poisoned) all blacks went back to SA and played a test series and absolutely spanked the boks and embarrassed the South African nation
Followers of all black rugby should NOT go and see this film that would be an insult to the 1995 all black squad who have to live with that.
Parents don't want son's killer in town
Million-dollar view, shame about the house
'Naughty' toilet traps terrified toddler
Trap for burglars catches policeman
Brothel scares and stresses neighbourhood
Degrassi star died five years ago
Daily trivia quiz: February 18
Banking on return of blue magic
'Naughty' toilet traps terrified toddler
Bid to scrap race relations office
Wellington earthquake fear: No way in or out
High cost of living mars return to NZ
Cathedral repair bill intimidating
Which theme is worse: Bones or NCIS?
Newest First
Oldest First
I saw this movie a month or so ago. I enjoyed it, and wasnt expecting it to show any food poisoning etc. I thought the story was good, and enjoyed the parts where Mandela and Pienaar were talking. I enjoyed most of the movie until it came to the final. And not because NZ lost. I enjoyed the build up to the final etc. It was the actual game that annoyed me, it went on for way too long, considering it was a game with no tries. It dragged on, and spoiled the movie a little. After watching the movie, I can understand now why it was so important for South Africa to win that World Cup, and why Mandela was so keen for it. I don't believe for one moment that Mandela had any knowledge of the poisoning, but i can see how someone would have gone to great lengths to make sure they won? I read where Sean Fitzpatrick has said that Louis Luyt, the head of SA rugby at the time, told him that he would do everything it takes to get SA and NZ in the final. If that is true, it doesnt take a genius to figure out who he would want to win. Luyt is portrayed in a positive light in the film. I know there was poetic license taken here and there, and maybe even a few innaccuracies, but overall it was enjoyable.