Southpaw

The narrative structure is a bit inconsistent, as after a strangely rushed and overstuffed first half, the story basically "starts from scratch". Anyway, with the arrival of Forest Whitaker on the scene, Southpaw spills into its better half. It's not necessarily his acting (he's playing his standard), rather that he has an extremely audience-rewarding "mentor" role here. Perhaps the only thing worth mentioning from the first half of the film is the opening fight, which is beautifully and evocatively shot. Everything else in the first hour felt too superficial and overwrought. The second half is a lot more believable and elevates the final impression to slightly above average. (24/03/2019)

Simply said, when the actor and director are on completely different level in terms of quality. While Gyllenhaal’s performance is brilliant and he is even "aiming for Oscar", Fuqua only makes just another everyday consumer version of the thousand-times-seen boxing B-movie melodrama, in which perhaps all genre clichés are present; just often in a non-functional style. It also strangely tends to fade away, because it starts with by far the best scene and then it only gets worse especially after falling to the bottom, when the true values are revealed and the after getting at its height again. It's kind of sad when the opening match has a driving force, energy and charge and the final one has nothing. It holds together only thanks to Gyllenhaal’s performance, but as I mentioned, his excellent performance seems almost inappropriate in this movie. (22/07/2015)

I guess I haven't seen any boxing movies yet, but I was still able to guess which character would be in which type of shot TEN MINUTES IN ADVANCE! So, thanks a bunch, Kurt. It's more interesting to watch Fuqua being able to handle this assignment with alternating formal styles. The documentary "talking heads", zoomed in camera during big fights, changing the focus between multiple actors, the hand-held close-ups on faces and dark toning as the hero writhes at rock bottom, and then that quiet simple classic montage style of preparing for the climax. This actually subtly tells you what the film should have been about in the first place, because it seems to me that Hollywood is currently over-indulging in whiny whiny whiners, however much they're played by Oscar-chasing aces like Gyllenhaal. Which is actually kind of funny, because I think the little girl is outperforming everybody. (12/11/2015)

Southpaw is a movie that certainly doesn't brim with originality. You've seen the story many times in various forms, which is a typical pitfall of most sports movies. But when you get over classic cliches like "The more you get hit, the harder you fight.", etc., you are in for a pretty solid experience. Especially the fights are filmed very well, Gyllenhaal is his usual (above)standard self, and the movie goes by really fast. All in all, I was satisfied in the end. (05/01/2016)

Why does everybody give Southpaw three stars? Because it’s fine in terms of craftsmanship, it has quite a few emotionally tense moments, the ring scenes are very naturalistic thanks to the contact camerawork, and the two outstanding actors, Jake Gyllenhaal and Forest Whitaker, wring their talents to the last drop of sweat and blood. But why only three stars? Because nothing happens that we wouldn’t have expected in advance today (the only seemingly surprising twist is revealed in the distributor's blurb). After all, "fine in terms of craftsmanship" today is any project with such budget and cast, and then if we were to put this film’s level of emotion on some imaginary ring facing Warrior, the mentally unstable champion Billy Hope, his cliché-ridden sporting and moral reboot, and the routine Uncle Fugua would all walk away ignominiously defeated by a painful knockout. Good ol’ three stars… ;) (16/09/2015)