Resurrecting the Champ (2007) User Reviews

Great movie, good morals

[kenji_tsuk · 8/10 · 21 January 2007]

I saw this film at the premier at Sundance. I went into the film expecting to see another typical action packed boxing movie. However, I was greatly impressed with the film, it was a lot better than I had expected. The performances by all the actors were solid. I was especially impressed with Dakota Goyo, who played Teddy, and apparently so was Josh, who commented on how easy it was for him to play his own role because of the level of talent Dakota has. Also, all three female characters played solid roles, which enhanced the depth of Josh Hartnett's character. This movie was able to provide a great story without the usual trash that's seen in many of the films we see today. This movie emphasized the importance of values and honesty which I think everyone needs to be reminded of.

This movie deserves more attention

[maestro-20 · 8/10 · 4 September 2007]

This movie deserves more attention that what it has now (and distribution). Samuel L. Jackson played against type and did a wonderful job. It was also Josh Hartnett's best performance. The story is thought-provoking, heart-warming, and interesting.

The writing is solid and the performances impressive across the board -- even the kid who played Hartnett's son was excellent. As a writer, I really appreciate the themes on telling the truth, fame, integrity, responsibilities, talent, etc. The father-son theme echoes throughout the entire film. Like Field of Dreams, this is a guy's chick flick. Take your husbands, sons or fathers and go see this movie.

One of the best films since "The Shawshank Redemption"

[transcendingpictures · 7/10 · 3 August 2007]

I had the privilege of seeing an advance screening of "Resurrecting the Champ" earlier tonight, followed by a Q & A with director Rod Lurie and screenwriter Michael Bortman. This is an extraordinary motion pictures. In my opinion, this film has the best writing, characterization and dramatic construction of any film released so far this year. The performances are stellar across the board, with a special mention to the film's leads, Josh Hartnett and Sam Jackson. Hartnett's character is torn between his ambition as an up and coming investigative journalist and his integrity as a man, a husband, a father and a son. Jackson plays "Champ", a one-time up and coming boxer who climbs the ranks to #3 in the world, to eventually be reduced to a homeless man scaling the trash cans of Denver.

Hartnett and Jackson create an unexpected friendship in his quest to write a magazine article about the journey of this man's forgotten life. Along the way, the film explores the themes of integrity, honesty, vulnerability, authenticity, truth, consequence, and family is an entertaining, emotional and significant fashion. The entire film breathes energy into the value and importance of responsibility and trust, and how abusing them can lead to consequences that can only be cured by forgiveness and a re-commitment to being true to one's character. The way that Hartnett's characters comes to understand the damages he could do to his relationship with his son, by living through it with champ is powerful and a important lesson for all parents.

I truly hope this film gets the respect and attention it deserves from critics and audiences alike. Comes Oscar time, I would come to expect "Resurrecting the Champ" to be on the minds of many. When it comes to films that you can sense the passion and heart of the storytelling being present in every frame, this one is near the top of that list. 10/10!

I actually knew the Champ

[ccwguy · 20 August 2007]

Hi, today I was reading the Los Angeles Times magazine and saw a full page ad on the movie. I said to myself, "that looks like the Champ, I knew". I looked at the website for the movie and found that it in fact was about "Bobby Satterfield" the Champ I knew. A little about myself that will tell you that the story is true. I was a Police Officer in Santa Ana, CA for 25 yrs and worked the area that the Champ lived in. I have not seen the movie in that it is due out on Friday, but have read the article and still have a copy of it, that was in the L.A. Times. All of us cops knew the Champ as Bobby Satterfield and knew no different until the article about him came out in the paper. The Champ was truly a homeless person even though he had an ex-wife that lived on Polplar St in Santa Ana. The Champ was a kind person who had a shopping cart(a Santa Ana Winnebago) that he kept all sorts of junk in. He was no harm unless he was drunk and then could become very aggressive. He would go to liquor stores with a little broom and sweep up and pick up around the store, and probably get a beer for it. I always got along well with the Champ and always said Hi to him and sometimes even gave him a few bucks(he never panhandled me or asked). I do know that he had some pretty good fights with some of my cohorts when he was drunk however. I hope that he got a few bucks out of this film(I don't even know if he is still alive, I retired 6 yrs ago and he was looking aged then). I can not wait to see the movie. I am not sure how or what they portray him as, but the basic facts are true. I can always be contacted if you desire. Enjoy

Better than expected

[alan-1011 · 7/10 · 25 August 2007]

Okay, the film is actually pretty good and a far cry from what I expected, though nowhere near as good as a 10 Star film that I've seen listed on many of these comments. The film is passable, and even enjoyable at times, with a good message and a meaningful story about fathers and sons at its core.

Hartnett, like the rest of the cast, do a serviceable job and the acting is pretty good throughout the film, though people thinking Jackson will win or even be nominated for a flick like this need to put down the Kool Aid. It's a nice little film, a modest surprise even, but hardly anything award worthy.

You can read my full review online at RazorFine Review.

This was a pleasant surprise

[alan_v35 · 7/10 · 12 September 2007]

Where did this movie come from? When I went to see it, I had heard nothing. No previews, no commercials, nothing. Thus, having no expectations, this small touching film, was a pleasant surprise. Director, Rod Lurie, who until a few years ago, was a - gasp!- critic, could have moved things along a little faster and perhaps cut down the subplots a little, but this is still an enjoyable film, with an Oscar-worthy performance from Samuel L. Jackson. The story is strong and there are some good characters, particularly in small roles. The project is apparently a true story (sort of) based on a Los Angeles Times article.

Josh Hartnett is Erik, a struggling sports reporter who comes across a homeless man with a tale to tell. It seems the indigent man, known around the neighborhood as 'Champ', whom Erik saves from the cruel attentions of some young idiots, was once a semi-successful boxer named 'Battling Bob' Satterfield who had been rated 3rd in the world. Erik sets out to tell the man's story, for both of their benefit. Look for David Paymer and Teri Hatcher in small roles. Alan Alda has a very good supporting role as well, as Erik's boss, Metz.

This was a pretty good drama that I saw as a kind of cross between The Fisher King and Street Smart. Some might find it too slow, but I felt that my patience was rewarded with a very good third act and a good overall viewing experience.

This work was first posted on realmoviereview.com

Good Human Interest Story With Very Good Casting

[AudioFileZ · 7/10 · 13 April 2008]

Perhaps the worst thing a journalist can do outside of fabricate a story is to not properly authenticate it. If that story generates a massive response catapulting said journalist into national prominence it's safe to say, in all likelihood, professional suicide is guaranteed.

One such journalistic story in error involved the strange saga of a boxer who masqueraded for many years as a one-time number three ranked heavyweight contender. Circumstance intervened that this "Champ" never got his big match and just disappeared. He was thought to be dead until the publication of a miraculous story revealed he was alive and living on the streets.

This is the set up for "Resurrecting The Champ". It's a true story and though it is embellished with other back stories surrounding the main character that are not true, everything has a feel of authenticity that lends this movie a certain authority. It gets better too, in my opinion, due to a stellar cast. Samuel Jackson is quite touching in his portrayal of a man broken down to life's lowest existence level yet not being K.O.'d. Josh Hartnett's character is so imperfect, yet he is redeeming in his pure love for his son. I felt even if this part was artistic license it certainly did not detract from this movie's excellence. All the cast were spot-on perfect for this one. Recommended viewing for just about anyone's taste.

It would've been a great family movie yet...

[Seraphion · 6/10 · 12 August 2014]

The story rolls out in just the right pace, keeping the focus to live up to the title, making the viewers assume the good things. Yet the twist comes and crashes all expectations. I like how the plot diverts the viewers' expectations from anticipating something good into getting curious about what will happen next. Yet the twist comes in a less surprising manner that it doesn't really depict the big disaster impacted on Erik's character. I like how the later parts of the movie where Erik reconciles his relationship with his son. Despite the child depicted here is a kid, the scenes will serve as a good educational material for teens and older children in the matters of trust and family relations. Although I must also say that the family content doesn't really focus up until near the end of the movie. Josh Hartnett acted just an average performance here in my opinion. Yet I like how Samuel L. Jackson get into character, making up the voice for the homeless champ. Kathryn Morris and Dakota Goyo did a nice job in giving the live on the family scenes that this movie critically needed.

Resurrecting the Champ

[katiebird062 · 7/10 · 3 September 2007]

Resurrecting the Champ is a movie co-starring Samuel L. Jackson and Josh Hartnett, in which struggling sports writer Erik Kernan (Hartnett) meets a homeless man who claims to be "Champ," a former boxing champion who many believe to be dead (Jackson). Kernan proposes to write a story about the Champ, hoping to give himself a much-needed career boost. At the same time he is writing the story, Kernan is also attempting to save his failing marriage and be a father his son can admire and be proud of.

Hartnett is an award-winning actor who has most recently starred in The Black Dahlia and Lucky Number Slevin (2006). Jackson was nominated for an Oscar for his supporting role in Pulp Fiction (1994) and has been nominated for and won numerous other awards in his acting career. Resurrecting the Champ is directed by Rod Lurie who has also directed television series "Commander in Chief" (2005) and "Line of Fire" (2003-04).

The actors in this movie play their roles convincingly, from Hartnett and Jackson to Dakota Goyo, who plays Hartnett's six-year-old son. Resurrecting the Champ works on a number of levels. It has boxing for those who are sports enthusiasts, it presents the issue of ethics in the work place, particularly journalism, but the movie can also appeal on a more all-inclusive level as we watch the characters struggle with the consequences of the lies they have told in order to live up to others' expectations.

This movie can appeal to anyone who enjoys a straightforward drama. It has a number of angle--boxing, journalism, family, lies, redemption-- but focuses on a universal theme so that multiple types of audiences can be entertained.

Jackson Is Fantastic Here In Yet Another Excellent Drama Involving Boxing

[ccthemovieman-1 · 9/10 · 12 April 2008]

This was a very entertaining film with just the right mixture of action, drama, romance and intrigue. The latter - a big shock that occurs two-thirds of the way through the story - gives it its unique flavor. Otherwise, it's still a nice story of fathers-and-sons and the love and respect that's so important between the two of them. It also involves husbands and wives reconciling.

I've seen Samuel L. Jackson in a lot of movies and so I am quite aware what a fine actor he is, so I wasn't surprised he was so good in this film. However, I was still stunned at his performance. It's definitely the best character I've seen him play, partly because of his sentimental role but more so simply because he dominated this film. Josh Hartnett was fine in the co-leading role of this story but it was Jackson who really got my attention in every scene.

This is a very involving story that grabs you and won't let go. What is it about boxing stories, or stories that involve boxers, that make them so memorable? I don't know, but I've seen very few bad ones and certainly no boring ones. Many of them, like this one, have more of a human element than just being a sport story. Actually, there isn't a lot of ring action in this film, so I wouldn't label it a boxing film. As a drama, or whatever you want to label it, it's a fine movie and a good way to spend two hours.

Highly recommended.

Mixed: Clichés, but some uplifting parts

[bopdog · 7/10 · 26 August 2007]

MAJOR SPOILER ALERT! Erik, a young newspaper sports writer (Josh Hartnet, in a surprisingly great acting job) is stalled in his career because, as his editor (a nicely aged Alan Alda) points out, his writing has no personality, no pizazz. It's so boring "I forget your writing even as I read it." Erik also is separated from his wife and 6 year-old son. The estranged wife still lives in their million-dollar house. I was bothered by that: How could a low-status sports hack for a local newspaper afford it?

In a series of laughable clichés, Erik earnestly strains to spend "quality time" with his son, and, one suspects, win his wife back. He and his comely wife get along so well, one has no idea how they ever separated in the first place. That set-up smelled fake. Erik lies to his kid, claiming to know all the famous sports heroes; the kid is chirpy and so innocent and Hollywood sweet you almost want to slap him (not really, but the kid character WAS annoying).

Erik then meets an old bum named Champ (Samuel L. Jackson, with a wonderful pitch-perfect acting job) who was famous in 1950s as a world-class boxer who almost won the world title. Everyone thought the famous boxer died 20 years ago.

Erik sees a chance to score big in his career by doing a major story on Champ, his old glory days, and his fall from grace, etc. He dishonestly hides the idea from his editor (Alda), and goes over his head to the Publishers, who love it, and approve it.

It takes a few days, and what looked like a few hundred dollars (where DID that bush league reporter get all that dough?), for Champ to open up to Erik, and the story is then run as the cover story for the local Sunday supplement newspaper magazine. It takes him only 3 days to be a new star commentator on Showtime's TV cable sports show, and get a stack of lucrative offers from other publications.

Then an old boxing authority figure reveals to Erik that Champ is NOT the actual old famous boxer, but merely one of the real boxer's minor opponents; one who, in fact, the real boxer knocked out in merely 2 rounds. OK. It turns out that the famous boxer who was rumoured to have died 20 years ago really DID die 20 years ago.

We've heard so much about fabricated news stories in the last 10 or 15 years, and several movies and TV shows have covered it well. Been done to death, and is old news now. Various publications have also, in real life, been duped by con artists into printing false stories. It is embarrassing for the journalists, but hardly criminal, and not fatal. Erik did MOST of what he should have to verify the Champ's story, but indeed, there were probably a couple of things he could have tried a bit harder to verify. As it was, all he was guilty of was being tricked.

The movie tries to make much more of it, and the movie throws in virtually every possible dramatic angle and tired old cliché you could imagine. They crammed in things involving the ex-wife, the kid, the lying, the Champ, the real old dead boxer's surviving son, lawsuits, possible disgrace, etc.

Then at the end of the movie, all the problems mysteriously and magically disappear! Everything "gets all better," perfect, really, out of the blue. It all gets healed in the final scene. I am not sure exactly HOW it all got resolved, but it was. Even Champ, the bum who kept getting beaten up by local teenagers, finally redeems himself by beating the crap out of his main tormentor, then dying of a heart attack. His poetically avenged soul can now ascend, evidently, satisfied and properly redeemed, to Reformed Bum Heaven. Erik gets back with Wifey-Pooh. The kid's whiny little faith in his Super Dad was restored, and Erik's journalism career suddenly takes off and he becomes respected and famous, etc. He is suddenly transformed into this new hot property--- a journalistic "Phenom," a great writer and news star.

One wondered, in addition to the million dollar house, where did Erik's writing talent suddenly come from? If he was a crap and dull hack writer on Friday, how did he come close to a Pulitzer Prize the next Friday? And become a famous and beloved hot-shot journalist the week after that? Too many contrivances for me! The movie, therefore, had a rushed and clumsy vibe about it. Half-baked. It tried to cover WAY too much.

One last thing, and one of the surest signs of a novice director (Rod Lurie), virtually EVERYBODY was eating, and talking with their mouths full of food. In real life, constant eating and grunting and gasping and gulping whilst talking and interacting with others is rude and low class. Why is it that new directors have the mistaken belief that all those body functions cranked up to full volume on the big screen equal, mysteriously, verisimilitude? It's as if those shallow directors, exhibiting a puerile "film school" mentality, think they are "keeping it real"? Can't they comprehend human life and the ironies and dilemmas of human existence any deeper than that? What's next? Farts? Picking noses? Yuck! They just don't get it.

Overall, parts of this movie WERE kind of satisfying and sweet. And a bit uplifting. But also, parts were saccharine, soppy, stilted, stoopid, and clumsy.

I will say that the actor who played Polly, the newspaper's research librarian, was great. She was both beautiful and intriguing, but also had an intelligent and captivating look about her. Her name is Rachel Nichols, and I expect we'll be seeing more of her in the future.

An Amazing Experience!

[pl11611 · 10/10 · 23 January 2007]

I saw this movie recently at a screening. Everybody's already talked about the plot so I don't need to get into those details. What I think this movie will be known for is its performances (more on that in a second...), and its how uplifting it is. You leave the movie feeling great and for reasons that I will not get into, it makes you want to call your dad and tell him how much you love him (or your son). A lot of people will talk about Samuel L. Jackson's portrayal of the worn-out boxer, but the true revelation of the film is the acting of Josh Hartnett, who I have never thought could be so believable or appealing. He has always been just kind of a pretty boy, really. But here, he plays a father, a husband, a journalist, and according to Aristotle's definition, a classic "Tragic Hero." He desires to impress his son to the degree that he sometimes bends the truth a bit too often...which ultimately annihilates his relationship with his son. The child, Teddy, is played by a kid named Dakota Goyo, who will become a big star. Teri Hatcher's cameo brought humor to the film when needed. If I had a criticism, it is that the film might be a tiny bit lengthy; however, every moment of the film was well-done. I wouldn't know how to make it shorter. I highly recommend this movie to everyone.

Good film but could have been a real contender

[judywalker2 · 7/10 · 25 August 2007]

Again writing takes second place to star placement and soapiness. That being said the film attempts to be current and relevant but it pales in comparison to "Shattered Glass" which let us connect more with a up and coming, or want to be up and coming, journalist. In Resurrecting the Champ the two main characters, Eric and Champ aren't very well fleshed out; not enough for the audience to really care about them. Eric's wife Joyce and Alan Alda's editor character let you know in just a few well written lines who they really are, but there are no just well written lines for the supposed stars of the movie. Samuel plays his character well but we really don't truly understand even in the end how he got where he was. This story seems to be about fathers and their sons but in the end the three characters that should have connected, the ones in Eric's final story, really do not connect as much as we would have liked.

Weak attempt at Shattered Glass

[dontre-conerly · 5/10 · 22 August 2007]

I saw this movie a few days ago, in screening, and was amazed at how weak the writing is. Movies, it is known, take many liberties and may not portray reality to its fullest, but give the recent Jason Blair scandal, it is almost commonsensical for journalists to CHECK their facts! Josh Hartnett fumbles in a role that Topher Grace perfected in Shattered Glass; he lacks the charisma of a journalist and his performance is overshadowed each time he shares the screen with Samuel L. Jackson, who--amazingly enough--is always overlooked for awards. In five minutes, Jackson is able to conjure the emotion that Hartnett works to achieve in several scenes.

The glaring flaws in this movie are made all the more obvious because of its painfully slow pace, which was created to expose a strained relationship between Hartnet and his on-screen wife, Kathyrn Morris--but you never know why the relationship is on the outs.

Most refreshing was a fast-talking Hatcher who, much like Samantha in Sex and the City, used her feminine wiles and quick talking to get what she wants.

The denouement was just as ridiculous as the oversights of the characters (who, we're supposed to believe, were considered for Pulitzers!) and highly unbelievable.

Wait for it on DVD, where it will undoubtedly be in a month.

young journalist meets down and out boxer

[dougbrode · 21 August 2007]

Almost a year ago, I saw the first half of this movie at a special screening for students at a major university. They were held spellbound by the superb storytelling, the fascinating characters, and the manner in which writer-director Rod Lurie was able to include complex themes about journalism, sports, and the relationship of personal integrity to both. When this movie reached its mid-point, and the lights went up so that a discussion could commence, I could feel the sense of shock among those who had attended that they were not going to see how 'things turned out' and would have to wait a year. My guess? They will all be first in line to see the film this coming Friday when it opens nationally. I know I will be! here's about the highest compliment I can pay the film and its maker: On the one hand, this is very much a contemporary film, once that addresses all the issues that are most important to thinking people, those who still try to live a moral life in what appears to be an amoral world, in a way that touches very deep at what the best movies have always been all about. At the same time, it hones to the rules of classical cinema, the great tradition of narrative storytelling that most of today's movie makers don't appear to understand. In particular, Lurie's approach reminds me of Frank Capra: His work, like Capra's, is always political, whether it's that great indie film THE CONTENDER or the superb COMMANDER IN CHIEF on TV, the show that may well have paved the way in popular culture for Americans to openly embrace a female president some two years from now. More important, though, Lurie doesn't merely make politics the subject of many of his films and TV shows, which in and of itself does not necessarily qualify a film as truly 'political.' In the tradition of Capra, who made IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT as political (if by implication) as MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON, Rod Lurie is able to give a political sensibility to a seeming action film like THE LAST CASTLE or a human drama, with sports/journalism background, like THE CHAMP. This is about politics in the broadest and deepest sense - the politics of life itself. The plot seems simple enough: an aspiring journalist (Josh Hartnett) discovers a washed up boxer (Samuel L. Jackson) and decides to do them both a favor by resurrecting the champ and also making a Pulitzer level writer out of himself. But all is not as it seems. I would die before I'd give away the mid-movie twist, but I can tell you this: it's the best since THE CRYING GAME (though this one does NOT entail anyone's sexual identity!!!). This was the point where I had to stop watching. I can't wait to see what happens and will report back just as soon as I've seen the entire movie with a further commentary. IN the meantime, here's proof that the summer blockbusters are (thankfully) receding and that it's time for intelligent people to go back to the movies. If you're one of them (You know who you are!), this is the one to see.

Jackson delivers a knock out performance in an otherwise melodramatic muddle

[george.schmidt · 7/10 · 27 August 2007]

RESURRECTING THE CHAMP (2007) **1/2 Samuel L. Jackson, Josh Hartnett, Kathryn Morris, Dakota Goyo, Alan Alda, Rachel Nichols, Teri Hatcher, David Paymer, Harry J. Lennix, Peter Coyote. Muddled melodramatic adaptation of J.R. Moehringer's LA Times Magazine article about a down-and-out homeless man whose claim to be a former professional boxer (Jackson in a terrific performance) has ramifications for the young, determined writer (a miscast Hartnett) whose dream of hitting the big-time with an exclusive story gets lost in the shuffle of what could've been a fine film but filmmaker Rod Lurie fictionalizes a father-son paradigm that is a strain on an otherwise noble attempt.

good twist not the expected sentimental movie

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 30 May 2015]

Young sports writer Erik Kernan Jr. (Josh Hartnett) for the Denver Times finds homeless Champ (Samuel L. Jackson) after he's beaten by some kids. He claims to be Bob Satterfield, a former heavyweight contender. His boss Ralph Metz (Alan Alda) isn't happy with his bland writing. He's separated with fellow writer Joyce Kernan (Kathryn Morris). He interviews secretly with magazine editor Whitley and in desperation, comes up with a pitch to write about Satterfield.

Josh Hartnett is living off of his good looks and it's very douchy. Luckily for him, it fits his character quite well. Jackson is compelling as the down and out fighter. His ragged voice is great. The twist takes the movie from a sappy feel-good story into someplace a little bit deeper.

The Champ...

[Thanos_Alfie · 6/10 · 21 July 2020]

"Resurrecting the Champ" is a Drama - Sport movie in which we watch a sports reporter finds and helps a homeless man by the name of 'Champ' only to find out that he is a boxing legend. The reporter understands that it's a great opportunity for him to become a great reporter and overcome his father's legacy by writing an article for the legend of boxing.

I liked this movie because it had a simple, beautiful and very interesting plot combined very well with a great direction by Rod Lurie. The interpretations of both Samuel L. Jackson who played as Champ and Josh Hartnett who played as Erik Kernan Jr. were simply amazing. Another interpretation that has to be mentioned was Kathryn Morris' who played as Joyce Kernan and gave a different touch in the movie. Finally, I have to say that "Resurrecting the Champ" is a nice movie and I recommend you to watch it because even if you are not a fan of boxing I am sure that you will love it.

A drama that packs a punch.

[michaelRokeefe · 7/10 · 15 April 2008]

Erik Kernan(Josh Hartnett)living in his father's shadow is rough. He is separated from his successful wife(Kathryn Morris)and his job is on the ropes. Erik is a sportswriter assigned to boxing events and his editor(Alan Alda)thinks his work is forgettable. By chance Erik comes to the rescue of a homeless man that calls himself the Champ(Samuel L. Jackson). The Champ is living in an alley and professes to be fabled boxer Robert Satterfield. Kernan sees this as a way help each others situations by writing the Champ's story. When some glory is in sight, the lights go out. The Champ is not the man he claims to be. Jackson gives possibly his best performance since PULP FICTION. Also in the cast: Teri Hatcher, Peter Coyote, Nick Sandow and Harry J. Lennix.

Overlooked Journalism Film

[Floated2 · 7/10 · 20 October 2015]

The journalist in question is a sports reporter (Josh Hartnett) who's been ground down by overwork and is about to be fired for the lack of flair in his writing when he stumbles upon an ex-boxing-contender (Samuel L. Jackson) who's now punchy and homeless. When he writes the story up for the paper's Sunday magazine, it's a sensation, ESPN comes knocking at his door and he's otherwise swimming in glory until a discrepancy appears in the old pug's story and the situation explodes in his face. As all this unfolds, director Rod Lurie laces the action with subplots and themes -- the inhumanity of boxing, the difficult relationship between fathers and sons (the reporter's father was a famous sportscaster) and more. Somehow, the movie just can't support all these competing themes. It never quite emerges as a morality tale (largely because it's never quite clear what the reporter did that was so terrible).

Fathers and Sons

[ncoddington · 10/10 · 27 June 2007]

I was lucky to preview this movie a few months back and needed some time to digest it. For those of you use to films by Rod Lurie, this movie will take you by surprise; in a very good way. I much enjoy Rod's films, and I did this one as well, but not for the reasons that I normally do. I have grown accustomed to his sharp whit and snappy screenplays as well as the fluidity of the cinematography. Resurrecting the Champ delivers all that, but in so many ways it was better than the Lurie movies I have learned to love. I think it is because Rod puts his heart into this film.

In the technical sense, the film is well directed and edited. The cast is spectacular with solid performances by all; including Alan Alda and Samuel L. Jackson. The characters are very believable and no one actor overshadows another. The film has balance. The movie is well paced and does not confuse the viewer. But what really makes this film excel is that Lurie leaves his comfort zone of the political thriller and really directs a movie that touches all viewers. This was a great risk for Rod, but it paid off because it resulted in a movie that will no doubt become the part of many film libraries.

While this move is set around a newspaper and boxing, this is really a movie about fathers and sons. It embraces the understanding that we are not all perfect and that it is OK not to be. It dwells at the dilemma of what fathers must do when their children find out that they have flaws, and the pressure sons have to live up to the heroics of their fathers. This is the kind of film that you will go and see and then talk about for hours afterwards. I have to wonder if Mr. Lurie is giving both his father and his son a gift with this film. I cannot wait for it to come out in the theaters so that I can take my sons to see it. Well done Rod!!

Resurrecting Josh Hartnett's career...

[natashabowiepinky · 7/10 · 22 May 2014]

I don't care how much make-up and rags you put on Samuel L Jackson, or that he changes his voice to sound like the cracked tones of an alcoholic: He does not look like a 70-something drunkard, homeless boxer. Especially seeing how mobile he still is, and the fact he can trounce guys much younger than him in a fistfight. Trying to convince us that he is, is almost as big a lie as the one perpetuated by his character which forms the central dilemma here. Wanna know more? Well, read on.

Josh Hartnett plays a sports reporter on the rise. He eventually finds his career in jeopardy when he puts all his chips on the table in a big story about washed-out Jackson being a former pro pugilist. Only problem is, it's all a big fib. Samuel's been telling porkie-pies... He was a boxer, true... but a MUCH less successful one. With a different name. And now Hartnett has to carry the can for it. In an amazing example of irony, in real life Josh used to be an A-list actor... until he starred in a series of flops which plummeted him down the casting director's list. Life imitating art, eh?

Of course, this being a Hollywood film, everything turns up roses in the end: Hartnett writes a 'very moving' (read: cheesy) correction article, he reconciles with his wife, his son believes in him again, he lands his dream job, he has another baby yada, yada, yada. Alas, the REAL Josh Hartnett is still struggling to even get guest spots in TV shows. Why can't life be more like the movies?! And obviously Jackson must die for the 'emotional impact' from the closing funeral speech. What a way to go though... having a heart attack after defending yourself from the onslaught of some spotty little nerk. Give the man some dignity, Dagnabbit.

Despite all the predictability and manipulation, I still thoroughly enjoyed it. The way the plot sucks you into the lives of these people and gets us interested in their struggles is first rate, and the arguments raised here about truth, honesty and ethics are weighty ones indeed. Jackson and Hartnett's scenes together are a joy to behold... so what was all the moaning about, you may ask? I dunno... maybe I need to blow off some steam. Next time, I'll just kick a pigeon instead of letting it spill over into my text. Now, where did I put that bird seed... 7/10

Resurrecting the Champ is amazing!!!!!!!

[playerpiano27 · 10/10 · 21 January 2007]

I just got home from the world premiere of Resurrecting the Champ at the Sundance Film Festival. It was everything I hoped it would be and more. The first half of the movie is mostly focused on Erik (Josh Hartnett) getting to know more about Champ (Samuel L. Jackson), a homeless man, who was formerly a well known pro boxer, for a news paper article. In a turn of events toward the end of the movie, Erik winds up having more in common with Champ's struggle in life as a child with his father and then as a father toward his son, than he thought he ever would. Erik has to re-evaluate his own relationship with his son, wife, and recently deceased father, and rectify some mistakes that were made in the past with each one of them. Everything ties together so beautifully at the end of the movie, it is very touching. The film has the perfect blend of humor, and seriousness. The casting was perfect for this movie from top to bottom and all of the acting is wonderful. I wouldn't be surprised at all if this movie does very well in theaters and also wins some big time awards. People who enjoy sports movies will love this, but there's much more depth to the movie than just that, so it's okay if your not the sports type. The deepest messages and themes of this movie have nothing to do with sports, and are centered more on making good decisions in life, and accepting that we're all going through life imperfectly. Go see it as soon as humanly possible!

In The End What You Get Is Not What You Expect

[sddavis63 · 7/10 · 21 July 2011]

"Resurrecting The Champ" is a solid movie that - if I might use a boxing metaphor - may not pack a punch, but nevertheless has an impact on those who view it. It has surprises packed within it - it's not exactly what you expect it to be and it turns out to go in a direction that you weren't expecting because it seemed to be heading in completely different directions. And in the end it turns out to be a pretty moving and powerful statement about the importance of honesty in life and how we all need to live (and die) with integrity, honest about ourselves and able to be proud of ourselves.

You get the impression (from the title and from the early direction of the movie) that this is going to be a story about a down on his luck ex- boxer and how he got there. As the homeless ex-boxer, Samuel L. Jackson was good. He's "discovered" one night by Erik Kernan (Josh Hartnett) - a reporter covering the local boxing beat for the Denver Times who dreams of bigger things and is frustrated both by his limited role with the paper and by having to live up to the reputation of his late father - a famous sportscaster. Kernan stumbles upon the homeless man after covering a fight, discovers that he's a former contender named Bob Summerfield (but who goes by the name of Champ) and decides that this is his path to greater things - he'll write a human interest story about this guy that will get him national attention. You anticipate that this is going to become the story of Champ, an anticipation that seems to come true when we start to be introduced to some flashback scenes of Champ's career, but the movie finally takes a completely unanticipated twist. After publishing the story and getting lots of attention and job offers, it's discovered that Champ isn't who he's been claiming to be. He's a fraud, and Kernan didn't investigate enough about his background, which leads to all sorts of trouble for both he and his paper.

Here's the key to the movie - it's not a boxing story and not a flashback to Champ's career and not the story of Kernan's rise to fame. It's a moral lesson about honesty. Kernan's been lying to his 6 year old son for years about the celebrities he claims to know (John Elway, for example, who Kernan tells his son he's best friends with but doesn't really know, and who makes a cameo in the movie in a very awkward scene for Kernan and his son). He's living a fantasy, and then gets taken in by somebody else whose whole life is a fantasy (Champ has been impersonating Summerfield for years.) Everything comes crashing down for Kernan, because everything in his life has been a lie.

The end of the movie becomes an ode to honesty. After being outed for his fraudulent story, Kernan still has to suck it up and attend career day at his son's school with all the kids knowing that his big story was a lie; he has to face the real Summerfield's son; he has to try to rebuild his relationship with his son. Meanwhile, Champ faces a confrontation of his own near the end of the movie with a local tough guy who's taken pleasure over the years in beating him up - finally telling the guy who he really is, decking his tormentor and declaring himself (as I presume he was) the "golden gloves champ of California.) Champ then dies, apparently having come to peace with himself and his life and having rediscovered his own pride in the things he had accomplished.

I wouldn't call this an especially powerful movie. It's a good movie and a solid movie which basically holds up the importance of the value of honesty and the importance of taking pride in who you are - whatever your circumstances in life. It's backed by solid performances from the leads, and a good supporting cast featuring a well known actor such as Alan Alda as Kernan's boss at the paper and lesser known actors who offer their own good performances. All in all, it's very well done. (7/10)

nowhere near as good as the ratings and comments

[pepekwa · 5/10 · 25 September 2008]

once again, i am writing a review of a movie that I would normally have not have bothered to because of the absurd ratings and reviews this is getting from the small number of people who did bother to hit the keyboard. This is a dull movie and in today's modern journalism era where everything can be checked on google in seconds, it does surprise me this was even a true story, maybe someone was being economical with the facts. Along with the central plot of the champion being alive and homeless and not dead as thought,there's this sub-plot supposedly linked to these events about hartnett's dad who was also a journalist but you never saw him and you're not even told fully how he supposedly "wronged" his son and then there's his relationship with his own son and separation from his wife, again that is not explained, this apparently all comes together at the end, well it didn't for me and it was all OTT and schmaltzy anyway. My problem with Josh Hartnett is he is a bore, I've never met him but I bet he's got no personality, I don;t think I've seen one film he;s in that I've liked. If there was a saving grace to this film, it was samuel jackson ( a man who definitely has a personality) who was excellent as the homeless, deceiving bum, there was also a good cameo from teri hatcher and she should definitely have had a couple more scenes. Overall, ignore the film of the year ratings on here, there's a reason you barely heard of this and it was in theatres for just a couple of weeks, simply it wasn't very good.