Saturday, August 25, 2007

"Resurrecting the Champ" (2007) - Movie Review

“Resurrecting the Champ” is based on the article written on the same title in LA Times during 1997 by J. R. Moehringer. The movie is supposed to take some spin on it to make it a film material, I guess. Before going further, Samuel L. Jackson tops himself with his previous role in “Black Snake Moan”. He looks different and we do not hear his usual commanding and controlling voice. Instead he is an old homeless guy speaking in husky voice and terrifically giving a character which is true to every bit and elevating his performance to class level throughout the movie.

The film gives Samuel L. Jackson as “Champ” who says that he is Bob Satterfield, a great boxing champ during the 50s to an aspiring sports journalist Eric Kernan (Josh Hartnett) and every one else he meets. Eric is fighting his way through the newspaper. With his wife Joyce (Kathryn Morris) as one of highly posted and respected journalist in the office, it is time for his launch to success. Making things worse is that they are separated and he visits her place to play himself in to the memory of his loving kid, Teddy (Dakota Gayo). Trying to find a place in the lime light and to be a hero for his son, he sweats on the story of “Champ”.

Eric is haunted by the thin and flimsy memory of his father. His father was a great Radio figure but desolated Eric and his mother. His memory of his father does not want to be replicated to Teddy on him. He wants him to think that he is friends with celebrities and making big in the world. While exploring the depths of “Champ”, Eric seems to realize his dream of doing that one time opportunity to hit high and soar there forever. Eric is the guy who has a family in front and he does not want to lose control of it. He wants to gel in it with his son and also given a chance with his separated wife. On the other hand, “Champ” more than losing his fame and glory, has nothing to live upon. His survival mainly deals with filling his stomach and trying to talk about his glory days to some of the people who have time to spare. He regrets him losing his son not by death but by misunderstanding and his own mistakes. These two persons are in the same levels. “Champ” sees Eric’s reality and kind of want to make up for his mistakes through him, but not quite actually.

The film has that moment of surprise which worked quite well. When Eric is done with his story and earning all credits for it, we know that things are going to fall apart. It does but not in the way every one expects it to be. “Champ” does not disappear in thin air. More than that it is time for Eric to face the realities and seriously re-evaluate his actions to not end up like his father to him for Teddy.

The film runs like straight line. It does not falter any where or at any point of time, even for a moment. At the same time it does not pulls you off the floor or give those punching moments of drama and emotions. While looking back at the movie, it stuck to its task so solid and original but also rigid that it did not compromise itself for the element of fiction. It reminded me of “Zodiac”. Apart from the journalistic investigation coming in both the movies, the detail and facts seem to be similar. I am not saying that “Resurrecting the Champ” does justice to the facts as that of “Zodiac”. “Zodiac” as such is an altogether different set of story, agenda and purpose. The mood in this movie and the faith to its material strikes similarity but still original as “Zodiac”. This gives the feel of dryness as a whole. It is so real and true to the content that the drama any one expects might not be there. The points of revelation and redemption may not suffice lot of the people not because of its lack of it but being true to the events and how it would have been scenarios.

“Resurrecting the Champ” may not be the moving, dramatic piece of fast lane person taking brakes within himself. As the film gets over, there may be moments cherished for that instant but not beyond that. It is the style employed by director Rod Lurie of attempting the fiction being to be non-fiction. And I liked it, but some times it gives the placid feeling of monotone mood all through the film. Regardless of that, Samuel L. Jackson giving killer performance while Josh Hartnett letting that to happen to clearly underplay his to perfection with stellar supporting role from Alan Alda makes this a very well made film.

No comments: