Resurrecting the Champ (2007)

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

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 Film follows a promising young reporter, Erik Kernan Jr. (Hartnett) desperate to make a name for himself and break from out of his successful father's shadow. The story that could do just that was right round the corner. 'Champ' (Jackson), a local homeless man, who is boxing legend, 'battling Bob Satterfield', a man previously believed dead. The writing of the film is complemented justly by the quality of the acting, which is true quality. What really helps this film along is how it wasn't churned up in the Hollywood machine, it was kept as true to the story as possible. The film captures the emotions and reality of the bonds between family and friendship both good and bad, truth and lies and the repercussions that they make. This is definitely an uplifting film that is worth a watch one evening and will leave you smiling in your sleep.

This is a sentimental movie with stellar performances. I dislike Josh Hartnett cause his character is usually cocky in many of his roles and that is what I see him as now, a cocky guy that gets irritating after a while, but in this role it's nice to see his character change although he lacks personality and kinda boring to watch. Samuel L. Jackson put on a great performance, his acting was a lot better than I thought. The story is basically a meeting between a ambitious journalist that wants his son to be proud of him and a boxing champ who climbed to be #3 in the world, reduced to being a homeless man scaling the streets in Denver, and they start a friendship but soon Josh Harnett's character starts to dig and find out all is not what it seems. The film shows the value of honesty, trust, vulnerability and consequences. This is a eloquent film with a good story that everyone can enjoy, unless your one of those viewers that just want things to blow up every minute. It was a good film but I think it dragged a bit and was a bit longer than necessary since at some points the film goes in a direction where the audience already consumed while not adding anything much, and the long running time doesn't add anything extra to Eric and the Champ to the point it fleshes them out very well either which makes the movie a bit slow, especially the champ cause it don't really show how he got to where he was, and so you just don't care for the characters as much and some of it is just dull while it don't explain any of the stuff the audience may have questions about. Despite the flaws it was a good movie, although Jackson carried the film.7.8/10

Just watched this film and I'll tell you straight away I am not one of these critics who will tell you all about the art of a movie, Im just a movie fan.The acting in this film is superb and if Samuel Jackson ever deserved an Oscar it is for this film, but its probably not the sort of "in" film the Oscar committee go for.The main reason I am writing on here is because this film like many others got me interested in the subject matter as it is based on truth, so I looked up on the web about the real writer (J.R.Moehringer), and it turns out one of the main parts of the story is not very flattering to him. It turns out he did know that Champ was not who he said he was before he released the article and that actually becomes a major part of the article when it is released. For those who would like to read the original go to Los Angeles Times web site and do a search on J R Moehringer for the original full article. It is a great bit of writing and it is easy to tell how it inspired a film, I'm just not quite sure why they changed this important part, it does seem a bit hard on Moehringer who did spend a lot of time checking his facts and did get to the real story......