En 1975, un boxeur inconnu de Bayonne dans le New Jersey, tente de combattre le champion.En 1975, un boxeur inconnu de Bayonne dans le New Jersey, tente de combattre le champion.En 1975, un boxeur inconnu de Bayonne dans le New Jersey, tente de combattre le champion.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Avis à la une
Only if you are a boxing fan would should you consider watching this movie and even then think twice as this movie is god awful. The whole movie is centered around Chuck Wepner and his self-destructive habits. I did not think movies this bad would even be allowed on DVD or streaming, but Hollywood continues to show they have now idea how to make a good movie anymore. Chose something else to watch and this is really not worth your time. But if you insist on watching it, you can scan through the movie quickly as it is such a slow dreary movie you would miss nothing.
It didn't help that I watched the two Chuck Wepner films back-to-back to see how they compare. Although Zach McGowan and Jerrod Page barely resemble their respective characters, I will commend their performances, with Page getting the nuances of Ali just right and McGowan giving a performance that is at least different enough from the 2016's Chuck. It was also cool to see Burt Young appear in a film about the man who inspired the Rocky franchise, nice touch there.
Beyond the 1hr mark, it is basically beat-for-beat like the last film. Which begs the question, why does this even exist? I assume, its because they were coincidentally both in production? Regardless, its pretty obvious which one is the better film.
However, there are a few notable differences that were actually BETTER than 'The Bleeder', this film in particular had the balls to include a scene in which Ali wanted Chuck to call him a 'you know what' prior to a press conference to generate buzz, something that the 2016 film completely ignores. In fact, I will say that there is far more interaction between Ali and Wepner in this version than the last. There was also a particularly fantastically-acted argument scene between Chuck and his estranged wife in this film, which I cannot say was in the original.
I will say that the film is basically at its best when its covering events NOT in the 2016 film. His weird antics with the forger John Olsen and the events of suing Sylvester Stallone, though I must admit it takes a very weird turn when it basically portray Sly as a villain by the end of the film, and it just kind of ends abruptly with the lawsuit.
Unfortunately however, its ultimately an inferior version of the film released only a few years before it. With worse pacing, fight choreography, structure, acting and editing. If you're somehow split between watching this or the 2016 film, choose the latter. However, if you simply want another rendition of the Chuck Wepner story told, give this film a watch.
Beyond the 1hr mark, it is basically beat-for-beat like the last film. Which begs the question, why does this even exist? I assume, its because they were coincidentally both in production? Regardless, its pretty obvious which one is the better film.
However, there are a few notable differences that were actually BETTER than 'The Bleeder', this film in particular had the balls to include a scene in which Ali wanted Chuck to call him a 'you know what' prior to a press conference to generate buzz, something that the 2016 film completely ignores. In fact, I will say that there is far more interaction between Ali and Wepner in this version than the last. There was also a particularly fantastically-acted argument scene between Chuck and his estranged wife in this film, which I cannot say was in the original.
I will say that the film is basically at its best when its covering events NOT in the 2016 film. His weird antics with the forger John Olsen and the events of suing Sylvester Stallone, though I must admit it takes a very weird turn when it basically portray Sly as a villain by the end of the film, and it just kind of ends abruptly with the lawsuit.
Unfortunately however, its ultimately an inferior version of the film released only a few years before it. With worse pacing, fight choreography, structure, acting and editing. If you're somehow split between watching this or the 2016 film, choose the latter. However, if you simply want another rendition of the Chuck Wepner story told, give this film a watch.
Asking his opponent to call him the N word. I'm a pugilist fan, but this film really shows the underside of this dark sport.
This is truly a bad movie. The acting is terrible, the script is terrible, the fights are terrible. I watched maybe 30 minutes of the movie before I gave up. I can't find any good comment to say about that movie.
Acting was strong. Story was strong. I was engaged until the final act. The writers didn't close. Flat and disappointing ending.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesJames Brown sang in the ring for the Muhammed Ali fight vs Chuck Wepner and did a pre-fight performance onscreen in "Rocky IV," which starred Sylvester Stallone as Rocky Balboa as inspired by Chuck Wepner.
- ConnexionsFeatured in The Cine-Masochist: CHUCK WEPNER VS ROCKY BALBOA (2021)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is The Brawler?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Sites officiels
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Дебошир
- Lieux de tournage
- Patterson, New Jersey, États-Unis(location)
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 6 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Durée
- 1h 35min(95 min)
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant