“Southpaw” Aims High (Short Review)

boxing film Southpaw (2015) begins with Jake Gyllenhaal’s Billy Hope on top of the boxing world, but we get the impression that Hope is at the top more from his willingness to take a beating than his stellar boxing skills. Soon, Hope undergoes a number of blows outside the ring that further test his ability to take a beating and bounce back. The movie attempts to be a combination of a serious family drama and sports movie in one. Although it is not really a champion in either category, it is a decent summer film that at least aims high in a weak cinema summer.

The basic plot of Southpaw involves Hope facing a tragic loss that he magnifies because of his inability to manage his anger. As he struggles to win back custody of his daughter, Hope finds some help from the wise boxing coach Tick Wells, played by Forest Whitaker. Will Hope find redemption?

Yes, Southpaw is full of cliches. After all, the main character’s name is “Hope.” But the acting performances by Gyllenhaal, Whitaker, and Rachel McAdams — along with excellent fight scenes by director Antoine Fuqua — make it decent entertainment. I also appreciated that the movie treated the big fight more realistically than some of the later Rocky films, avoiding the temptation to turn it into a big cartoonish revenge battle.

Of course, Southpaw is no Raging Bull (1980) or Rocky (1976). Yet, one could have an interesting discussion about how it compares to a movie like Cinderella Man (2005), another boxing family drama, although the latter was aided by the fact it was a true story about James J. Braddock. Overall, if you really like boxing movies and do not mind some moving family drama (or vice versa), you might still find Southpaw entertaining.

Conclusion?
Rotten Tomatoes gives Southpaw a 58% critics rating but a decent 83% audience rating, which probably reflects audience members who are looking for something to enjoy and not the next great boxing classic. If you want to get out of the heat for a few hours of air-conditioned entertainment, you could do a lot worse than Southpaw.



What did you think of “Southpaw”? Leave your two cents in the comment.

  • “The Magnificent Seven” Trailer With Denzel Washington
  • 10 Best True-Life Sports Movies
  • “Little Prince” Trailer (in English)
  • Trailer for “The Little Prince”
  • It’s About Time to Watch “About Time” (Missed Movies)
  • Midnight in Paris (short review)
  • (Some related Chimesfreedom posts.)

    “Little Prince” Trailer (in English)

    Little Prince Movie

    An English-language trailer for the upcoming film The Little Prince has been released, following an earlier French trailer version. The much-anticipated movie, which will bring Antoine de Saint-Exupéry’s novel to the big screen, intertwines the story of the prince with a story about a little girl and her mother.

    An all-star cast provides the voices in the movie, and they include Rachel McAdams, Marion Cotillard, Jeff Bridges, Benicio del Toro, Paul Giamatti, Ricky Gervais and James Franco. Check out the new trailer.


    The Little Prince – International Trailer 2 by Orangefr

    The Little Prince will premiere at Cannes.

    Leave your two cents in the comments.

  • Trailer for “The Little Prince”
  • Midnight in Paris (short review)
  • What Is That Song About Dying in “Hell or High Water”?
  • “The Ballad of Buster Scruggs” (Short Review)
  • Trailer for “11.22.63” Stephen King Miniseries
  • “Southpaw” Aims High (Short Review)
  • (Some related Chimesfreedom posts.)

    Trailer for “The Little Prince”

    Little Prince Trailer

    The beloved classic 1943 book by Antoine de Saint-Exupery, Le Petit Prince (The Little Prince), is being made into an animated movie. The film, directed by Mark Osborne, first will be released October 7, 2015 in France.

    As you can hear from the new trailer below, the movie is in French, but apparently it also will be released in English.

    The English version of The Little Prince will feature the voices of Jeff Bridges, James Franco, Benicio del Toro, and Rachel McAdams.

    Leave your two cents in the comments.

  • “Little Prince” Trailer (in English)
  • What Is That Song About Dying in “Hell or High Water”?
  • “The Ballad of Buster Scruggs” (Short Review)
  • Trailer for “11.22.63” Stephen King Miniseries
  • “Southpaw” Aims High (Short Review)
  • Jeff Bridges Will Make You Sleepy
  • (Some related Chimesfreedom posts.)

    It’s About Time to Watch “About Time” (Missed Movies)

    Domhnall Gleeson There are a number of reasons to give the movie About Time (2013) a chance, despite its somewhat generic title. The film is written and directed by Richard Curtis, who wrote Love Actually (2003), Bridget Jones’s Diary (2001), Notting Hill (1999), and Four Weddings and a Funeral (1994). While not everyone loves romantic comedies, About Time throws in a twist. In line with a trend previously examined on Chimesfreedom, the film incorporates a science fiction element where the science fiction element, with little or no special effects, is a mere co-star to help explore some interesting aspects of the human condition.

    Near the start of the film, a father, played by the wonderful Bill Nighy, tells his 21-year-old son Tim, played by Domhnall Gleeson that the men in the family have an unexplained ability to travel back in time in their lives to change their own past. Before viewers can get too excited about the time-travel concept, though, the dad explains that it is limited to the person’s life, so they cannot go back and kill Hitler, etc. With that limitation in mind and other “rules” we later discover, the rest of the film follows Tim trying to live a good life with his unusual ability to help his family and friends, including the woman with whom he falls in love, Mary, played by Rachel McAdams. As a metaphor for real life, Tim uses his powers much as the way we use our own power to live in the present.

    I will not ruin the movie by delving further into the plot (and if you are sure you are going to see the movie, skip the plot-revealing trailer below). But there are additional reasons to see the movie besides the clever writing and the interesting concept, which never comes close to overwhelming the real emotions of the characters. One reason the movie works is the engaging acting by Domhnall Gleeson. His occasional narration will remind viewers of similar narration by Hugh Grant in films like Love Actually and About a Boy (2002), with comparable phrasing and heartfelt insight. But, aside from the Hugh Grant similarities, Gleeson brings much more, adding some goofy humor from a man trying to figure out life. Gleeson, who lacks Grant’s leading-man looks, brings an everyman quality to the role. He interacts well with McAdams, but it may be his work with Nighy as his dad that provides the real heart of the movie. The movie features a fine supporting cast of other secondary characters that are well developed too.

    Because of the sweetness of the film is connected to a supernatural element, one is tempted to say the movie is a combination of Love Actually and Groundhog Day (1993). The comparison may raise expectations too much, but you get the idea. Even if About Time does not live up to those movies on your first viewing, it is one that has a chance to grow in popularity with repeated viewings once it starts running on cable TV. After watching the movie for the first time on DVD, I immediately watched it again, which is something I rarely do. And I continued thinking about the movie for several days, a nice respite from the majority of films that vanish from thought ten minutes after they end.

    In addition to the engaging characters, the concept of the film makes it re-watchable, as a viewer might analyze the logic of the film’s time-travel concept. Because of the number of questions that are raised by time travel that cannot be completely sorted out in a movie, I could not help thinking that About Time would make an interesting television series.

    There were other questions that a TV series might explore more. For example, Tim is a lawyer in the movie. While the movie does not tell us much about his work, someone does make a comment implying Tim has won all of his cases. That off-hand comment makes the viewer wonder if Tim used his time travels in the workplace, which would raise a number of ethical and moral issues. But the movie does not have time to explore them. What the movie does with the time it has, though, is explore the meaning of time, making the viewers think about their own lives. And, even if About Time is not perfect, that experience is a lot more than one expects from most modern movies.

    Conclusion? If you like romantic comedies and do not mind an unusual twist that may challenge you and make you think, then you should give About Time a chance. Maybe you will not like it, but then again, it might change your perspective on life.

    Other Reviews Because Why Should You Trust Me?: About Time is a movie that seems destined to be loved by a lot of viewers while being scorned by a lot of critics. Rotten Tomatoes gives About Time a so-so rating of 69% from critics while the movie gets a respectable 82% audience rating. Stephanie Zacharek at The Village Voice hated the movie, calling it “mostly dreadful.” Meanwhile, Joel Arnold at NPR enjoyed the film, concluding that About Time “blends genre pleasures with efficient, thematically resonant storytelling and moreover gives its audience a call to action.” Finally, if you get the DVD, check out the deleted scene involving Abbey Road that Curtis was sad to leave out of the movie (no longer available on YouTube).

    {Missed Movies is our continuing series on good films you might have missed because they did not receive the recognition they deserved when released.}

    What did you think of About Time? Leave your two cents in the comments.


  • End-of-the-World Movies . . . Without Special Effects
  • Missed Movies: The Man From Earth
  • Nicolas Cage Shines In Modest But Surprising “Pig” (Short Review)
  • Jennifer Lawrence and Chris Pratt Travel Space in “Passengers”
  • Is “Captain Fantastic” Fantastic?
  • “Westworld” is Coming to HBO
  • (Some related Chimesfreedom posts.)

    Midnight in Paris (short review)

    Midnight in Paris Midnight in Paris is a very good light-hearted entry from director Woody Allen and starring Owen Wilson. The film begins with Wilson and his fiance, played by Rachel McAdams, visiting Paris. Wilson is a screenwriter struggling to write his first book. Wilson loves Paris and longs for the literary Paris of the past, and then his desire to live in the past comes true. One night, after he gets lost walking back to his hotel, he ends up back in the 1920s where he encounters F. Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald, as well as other artists from that era. After the night’s adventure, he goes back to his hotel and the twenty-first century, but he plans to visit his friends from the 1920s again the next evening. What will he see and what will he learn from his trips to the romantic 1920s?

    I realize different people have different feelings about films directed by Woody Allen. Some adore most or all of them while others are not fans, perhaps because they feel his life has tainted the films, as in a topic we discussed last week. Critics often like Allen’s films more than viewers, as shown by the current Rotten Tomatoes rating for Midnight in Paris (92% critics; 77% audience). By way of disclosure, I like most of Allen’s films; I love several of them; and there is one that I would probably list among my top twenty films of all time (Crimes and Misdemeanors).

    While it is unfortunate that Allen’s films often have to compete with each other, it it is fair for viewers to consider how a new film ranks within Allen’s canon of films. Considering Midnight in Paris in that context, it is not his best work ever, but it is certainly very good. And, more fairly, considering the comedies usually released during the summer, it is more enjoyable and thoughtful than most of them. The lines are witty, the background is beautiful, the story is interesting, and the movie features fine acting from Wilson in “the Woody Allen role” as well as other actors in the ensemble like Kathy Bates and Marion Cotillard.

    Since Allen has started making several films in cities outside New York, he has used the camera to make these other cities characters in his films the way he once made New York a character in films like Manhattan. And Midnight in Paris certainly makes one desire to walk the streets of Paris and live a rich lifestyle there, beginning with the opening several minutes devoted to various scenes around the city.

    Another feature of Allen’s films is that he often addresses serious themes about life and death, and he does so in Midnight in Paris. For many years Allen has noted that he has been influenced by Ernest Becker’s book The Denial of Death, which is about how our fears affect the way we live. Some of those themes are touched on in this film, as are themes about nostalgia and longing for the past. The themes of nostalgia are reminiscent of Allen’s excellent movie The Purple Rose of Cairo. Although the resolution of these themes in Midnight in Paris is fairly predictable, one may not mind the ride because the journey is so scenic.

    What is your favorite Woody Allen film? Leave a comment.

  • Springsteen Makes a Life-Affirming Rocking Statement With “Letter to You”
  • Death in Movies That Remind Us to Enjoy Life
  • “Little Prince” Trailer (in English)
  • To Rome with Love (Short Review)
  • Penn State Riots, Sports, and Life
  • Life Lessons – From a Pulitzer-Prize Winner, a Country Star, and an American Idol
  • (Some Related Chimesfreedom Posts)