Gholamreza Takhti

The film is about the Iranian famous wrestler, the world champion, Gholamreza Takhti, which was popular among people not only because of his winnings and medals but because of his manner.

The film, despite having serious issues in casting, dialogs and transferring the sense of enjoyment and honor of winning the world champion, is still, in my opinion, the best Iranian biography movie.

Although that the producer decided to stay with facts instead of hoaxes about his death, and the ending of the film is possibly the best ending to complete the dramatic atmosphere and sending the message of the movie, it could have an open ending instead because of arguments and debates on his death and how that happened.

This is a story we knew about the whole, but not the details, the feelings and how alone the Pahlavan was when he needed the most help.

When i was a child i asked my dad that what happened to Takhti, he said he was murdered. A few years later i found out he was killed himself. I never asked my dad why he lied me until today i watched this movie and i understood he was murdered! murdered by society! The society doesn't respect the goodness.

When I heard the news of the making of this film, I was happy at first and then scared. I was happy because a film was to be made about one of the most popular people in the history of Iran. I was scared because the director was not a great director and a good film might not have been made. That's what happened. The acting of the film is too weak. The director could not even make a single good wrestling sequence. Ninety-five minutes is not enough to express Takhti's life, and the film, because it wants to portray his whole life and has to show every part of Takhti's life briefly, causes the film to fall.In spite of all this, I think Iranian cinema needed this film, but I wish it was made by Mohammad Ali Fardin because he was friends with Takhti and he was at that time and he knew history better and he was the best to play the role of Takhti. But alas, fate did not allow him to do so.

Gholamreza Takhti, the person, is one of the most prominent characters of his time. Whether or not you agree with his worldview or his opinions, you cannot deny how he influenced the Iranian culture of his time. Still considered the symbol of chivalry and sportsmanship for many, this real-life manifestation of Rocky remains one of the most celebrated athletes in Iran's history.

But let me be clear: You cannot abuse his renown to shield a bad movie from criticism. A bad movie about a great person is a terrible movie, and probably a worse insult than if it was about a normal person. You're doing a disservice to people that admire him and choose him as their role model.

So, where should I start? Any person that could see through the pretentious veil of unnecessary "artistry" should see that black and white shots and empty vain dramatic poses of a troubled character, hopping monotonously from one location to another, does not a great movie make. Seriously, were you aspiring to be the next Elephant Man? The next Schindler's List? Those movies work because they have something else to offer than music and narration.

And I hit the nail on the head now, didn't I? There is a recent wave of wannabe artistic movies in Iranian cinema which fail to be much more than narration. I cannot tell if it's a reaction to overly sensitive grading authorities, but what it results in is inoffensive, incredibly boring, documentary-like "movies" that tell you all the interesting stuff and show meager scenes and dialog like extra hot spice on ice cream. It's a nice cop-out to spending movie budget as well, so why not? It's not like we actually care about the audience, they can take whatever we throw at them.

That pretty much sums it up. Someone should carve with hot iron, on the walls of production studios, big "SHOW, DON'T TELL" signs. That should be a good guideline. If I turn off the sound, what remains should be more than the supposed Takhti actor staring expressionless at the ground or at the ceiling throughout the entire movie as if that's going to add weight to his character, while the narration completely dismisses entire championships with "oh, he came on second, by the way". (That's true, by the way, there are not even seconds of screen time for any of the major plot points in the second half of the movie)

Did I mention the narration is no Morgan Freeman? Oh well, I guess I talked about this movie more than it deserved. I just hope this so-called cinema industry stops setting the alarm to snooze, and starts making movies that have something to say.