A compelling story most of the way, Rod Lurie’s Resurrecting the Champ is only marred by some by-the-numbers storytelling as it dots every I and crosses every T on its way to a predictable finale.
Tale of a once-renowned boxer, thought to be dead, re-discovered as a homeless man living on the streets is equally fascinating and heartfelt; especially as this film was based on true story. Critic turned director Lurie (The Contender, The Last Castle) has turned in another solid if unspectacular film.
Josh Hartnett stars as boxing journalist Erik Kernan, living in his father’s shadow, separated from his wife, trying to impress his young son with exaggerated tales of his relationships with sports icons.
He’s looking to make a name for himself with that elusive big story, and when he stumbles upon a homeless man being beaten up by some teenagers, he may have found it.
That homeless man (played by Samuel L. Jackson) refers to himself as ‘The Champ’ and claims to be a certain Bob Satterfield, once ranked number three in the world. He now lives from a shopping cart and regales Kernan with tales of sparring with Rocky Marciano in exchange for booze.
Everyone seems to have nothing but praise for Satterfield the boxer, whom they all thought had died twenty years ago though no one can recall a funeral.
Jackson completely disappears into the role, creating a character that avoids the expected sentimentality and invigorates the film. Hartnett is bland but effective as the reporter. Supporting cast is also fun, especially Alan Alda as Kernan’s editor.
This is prime material for some incisive commentary; a second-act twist, unexpected by me, enriches the experience. Only true negative is a third act that tends to drag its feet.
The film had me so interested in its story that I sought to read the original article it was based on; after doing so, I felt a bit uneasy.
The movie had not really done justice to it; a major plot detail was unnecessarily injected into the film, and the character played by Josh Hartnett, to put it mildly, did not seem like the kind of journalist that would win a Pulitzer (J.R. Moehringer, author of the article, has won the award). Still, the film does succeed on its own terms.
The original article – which I wouldn’t recommend reading before seeing the film – can be found online here.
