Skip to main content

You didn't tell me your uncle was Rocky Balboa.

Creed
(2015)

(SPOILERS) Boxing movies tend to be an easy win, embracing a clear trajectory of battling adversity only to triumph with a crowd-pleasing ring-bound finale. As such, I was a little sceptical of the plaudits heaped on Creed, and the Oscar talk for Sylvester Stallone. For the most part, though, they’re deserved. While Creed is dogged in pursuing the basic narrative template set by the first Rocky, crucially it also transposes a quality that distinguishes it from many a calculated sequel machine: heart.


I can’t even begrudge Sly the Oscar nomination for his moving return as Rocky Balboa. For all that he’s been rightly mocked over the years as a monosyllabic, grunting action man, Creed evidences that he really does have the chops when it counts. This is easily his most impressive performance since Copland (nearly 20 years ago now!) and it’s a modest, generous turn, the one-time mega star content to occupy a supporting slot as the old guy now alone in the world, fortuitously given something to rekindle his enthusiasm for life, and Stallone manifests palpable chemistry with the new contender taking the Creed mantle.


Michael B Jordan is typically superb as privileged kid Adonis Johnson/Creed, arriving with a chip on his shoulder and something to prove, and the biggest pleasure of the picture is seeing these two performers bounce off each bridging the generational, class and racial divides separating them.


Jordan reteams with director Ryan Coogler following Fruitvale Station, a film I wasn’t quite as impressed by as many. Indeed, Coogler displays a few rough edges in his screenplay (co-written with Aaron Covington), including a tendency to overstate his theme several times too many and including sequences and scenarios that haven’t been finessed quite as completely as they might be. The consequence is, at times you’re aware how much the performers are transcending the limits of the material. That applies to Stallone and Jordan, but also Phylicia Rashad as Adonis’ mother (Rashad, best known for playing the wife of the now disgraced Mr Huxtable, is the third actress to play Mary Anne Creed), Ritchie Coster, and Graham McTavish as trainer of champ “pretty” Ricky Conlan (pro boxer Tony Bellew, who on this evidence is a natural actor).


Creed isn’t as tight as it might be either. It feels as if it needs another fight in there somewhere to justify both its duration and its protagonist vaulting onto the worldwide boxing stage the way he does, even given how this aspect is both addressed and intentionally integrated into the structure (Adonis as the unproven contender). Where Rocky’s relationship with Adrian in the original was essential, Tessa Thompson’s Bianca only ever feels like an under-devised love interest with a calculated affliction. It’s only really with her character that the picture struggles to overcome its embrace of clichés; elsewhere Coogler gets them and is fully prepared to run with and enjoy them.


Although, I have to admit to being a little surprised that he doesn’t make the most of the traditional montage sequences. They should be punch-the-air, and Coogler is going for that, but he also seems to be catching himself on the realisation that they are an inherently cheesy device; they’re a little laboured. Later, when both main characters are doing their fighting, one to get match-ready and the other to overcome a bout of cancer, the sequence comes across as rather trite, particularly since Stallone’s deep-felt remembrance of the suffering Adrian underwent in similar circumstances is washed over by a couple of shots of vomiting and hair loss. Then he’s near-enough ship-shape again.


Nevertheless, Coogler really steps up to the plate with the fights. The early one-shot round and KO is dazzling, and the finale is every bit as rousing as one would expect, helped considerably by not knowing whether it will follow the original to the letter or go its own route. Most of all, when that Rocky theme finally comes in, Adonis has earned it. I think it’s safe to say Coogler is set on powering up a whole new franchise from the groundwork established here and, as others have said, he’s fashioned the best Rocky movie since the original.


As for whether Creed should have been better represented in the Oscar nominations, it just isn’t on that level (although that’s never stopped the Academy before). And, due to the nature of its DNA, it can’t quite muster the same vitalising raw empowerment of the 1976 film either (which is why it made the voters swoon, even if All the President’s Men should have won). But Coogler navigates the path of creating new characters in an existing world with considerable intelligence and skill for the most part. He’s made a movie that deals in clichés and cynicism and makes it genuine, which is no small accomplishment.


Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

Other monks will meet their deaths here. And they too will have blackened fingers. And blackened tongues.

The Name of the Rose (1986) (SPOILERS) Umberto Eco wasn’t awfully impressed by Jean Jacques-Annaud’s adaptation of his novel – or “ palimpsest of Umberto Eco’s novel ” as the opening titles announce – to the extent that he nixed further movie versions of his work. Later, he amended that view, calling it “ a nice movie ”. He also, for balance, labelled The Name of the Rose his worst novel – “ I hate this book and I hope you hate it too ”. Essentially, he was begrudging its renown at the expense of his later “ superior ” novels. I didn’t hate the novel, although I do prefer the movie, probably because I saw it first and it was everything I wanted from a medieval Sherlock Holmes movie set in a monastery and devoted to forbidden books, knowledge and opinions.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies.

Watership Down (1978) (SPOILERS) I only read Watership Down recently, despite having loved the film from the first, and I was immediately impressed with how faithful, albeit inevitably compacted, Martin Rosen’s adaptation is. It manages to translate the lyrical, mythic and metaphysical qualities of Richard Adams’ novel without succumbing to dumbing down or the urge to cater for a broader or younger audience. It may be true that parents are the ones who get most concerned over the more disturbing elements of the picture but, given the maturity of the content, it remains a surprise that, as with 2001: A Space Odyssey (which may on the face of it seem like an odd bedfellow), this doesn’t garner a PG certificate. As the makers noted, Watership Down is at least in part an Exodus story, but the biblical implications extend beyond Hazel merely leading his fluffle to the titular promised land. There is a prevalent spiritual dimension to this rabbit universe, one very much

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) (SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek , but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan . That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.