Best Movie I've Seen In a Very Long Time

[dafame]

As the title says, Warrior is by far the best movie I've seen in a long time. I'm definitely a movie buff who see's pretty much every movie worth seeing. I've seen all of the films that are Oscar nominated and think this film can stand up to any of them.

I don't expect many people to agree with me on this simply because we tend to have a great fondness for things from our childhood because the memory of those things take us back to a time when things were a lot simpler in our lives, but in my opinion it's better than Rocky and I'll explain why.

Although Rocky had very engaging characters it really focused primary on the struggles and fate of one (Rocky). You rooted for Rocky and subsequently everyone who was involved in his life.

Warrior however works on emotions in a much different and more powerful way. Here you see and feel the pains of 3 unique characters played out in a very emotionally gripping way. You in a way are rooting for all three and the climax has you almost emotionally confused until the very end that was done in the most perfect and satisfying way.

If you're a fan of acting I think that you'll agree that Nick Nolte needs to be recognized for his role of Paddy Conlin in this film and I way happy to learn that he recently received the nomination from the Oscars. I think he deserves to win.

You guys won't be disappointed if you see this film.

[dafame]

71 views and not one response? Guess its pretty safe to say no one has seen this movie. Not too surprising being that I heard it didn't do to well at the box-office. Don't let that deter you. Again its a great film.

[RallyCola]

i've seen it and didn't really care for it. the two brothers coming together in more ways than one is a complete cop out as it is 100% expected. Moreover, the idea of one brother "sacrificing" for the other has been done over and over again much better.

the other glaring thing about your review is that you mention rocky...of course some might say this is better than rocky because Warrior pulls elements from ALL of the rocky films. Each of the rocky chapters tells a story and Warrior is like a "cliff's notes" version of all the rocky movies put together. that lack of originality and direct influence means that this movie is just like all the regurgitated stories expected from hollywood. there was no attempt at anything new except to make it about MMA.

[Stavros]

I've seen a trailer for another boxing film The Fighter, which sound similar to the Warrior although I believe its a true story. Brothers in Boxing seems to be as common as man meets woman in a bar. Anyway, the summary says
The Fighter, is a drama about boxer "Irish" Micky Ward's unlikely road to the world light welterweight title. His Rocky-like rise was shepherded by half-brother Dicky, a boxer-turned-trainer on the verge of being KO'd by drugs and crime.
The Fighter (2010) - IMDb@@AMEPARAM@@http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTM0ODk3MjM1MV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNzc1MDIwNA@@._ V1._SX90_SY140_.jpg@@AMEPARAM@@BMTM0ODk3MjM1MV5BMl 5BanBnXkFtZTcwNzc1MDIwNA@@@@AMEPARAM@@SX90@@AMEPAR AM@@SY140

I am not a fan of Boxing, Raging Bull is easily the best Boxing film ever made and also links this so-called 'sport' to organised crime, which has been part of it since the beginning. Bogart's last film The Harder They Fall, which features ex-heavyweight champ Primo Carnero is ok but Bogart was dying and the film lack a real edge. John Huston's Fat City was a good film because it focused on the bread-and-butter lower order fights where glory is absent and bruises more obvious. Brando in On the Waterfront had been a boxer, and his speech in the back of a taxi is part of cinema legend. Paul Newman replaced the dead James Dean to play Rocky Graziano in Somebody Up There Likes Me, but my recollection is that its just ok and nothing special. Part of the reason is that it is a film about success, whereas most boxers are failures before they get into the ring, and failures out of it. You need only cast a look at the pathetic, jelly-brained Muhammad Ali to see this.

The Rocky films are not about Boxing, but various sugar-coated anthems to the American Dream, and as vehicles for the preposterously vain Stallone actually embarrassing to watch. There are other boxing films which BM's may discuss, I haven't seen that many.

[dafame]

i've seen it and didn't really care for it. the two brothers coming together in more ways than one is a complete cop out as it is 100% expected. Moreover, the idea of one brother "sacrificing" for the other has been done over and over again much better.

the other glaring thing about your review is that you mention rocky...of course some might say this is better than rocky because Warrior pulls elements from ALL of the rocky films. Each of the rocky chapters tells a story and Warrior is like a "cliff's notes" version of all the rocky movies put together. that lack of originality and direct influence means that this movie is just like all the regurgitated stories expected from hollywood. there was no attempt at anything new except to make it about MMA.

Really? Surprising you would say that because I didn't see many similarities to Rocky at all. Only reason I even mentioned it was because a critic made the comparison on the poster thats on the post. Rocky just seemed to be a very different type of movie (dont really see the need to compare all of the Rocky movies because i didn't care for the after the original). I just don't recall Rocky really drawing me in on an emotional level to multiple characters the way this movie did.

Plus I can assure you haven't seen a movie that doesn't have plot similarities in some way or another unless all you're watching is stuff from the 1930's. But that's beside the point. What gives a movie its value isn't whether or not theres been a story of two brothers with bad blood before (of course there has), but rather the way in which a particular story is told. Appreciate your opinion though.

[RallyCola]

Nolte does a Burgess Meredith impression as the tough as nails trainer that loves his fighter.
Jennifer Morrison is channeling Adrian
There are fights akin to Rocky's fights with Clubber Lang and Drago.

It panders to the underdog story idea that Rocky aspired to and is 100% predictable as soon as you learn why each brother is fighting.

The only reason it works as a movie at all is because of Nolte/Paddy. If his redemption wasn't really the core of the story and it really was about the 2 brothers only, this movie would fail.

[Richctdude]

even my 71 year old dad who jas never seen a mma fight said it was the movie of the year

[dafame]

RallyCola I'm a bit confused on the whole "akin to Rocky" thing being that you can take virtually any movie and find similarities to any other movie if you want to. And really don't get the comment about the movie working because of Nolte/Paddy and his story being central to the film, being that "Nick Nolte/Paddy is in the movie and his story is central to the film"???

Richctdude, couldn't agree with your dad more. I was extremelly disappointed that this did receive a best picture nod from the Oscars because I thought it definitely deserved it.

[RallyCola]

Warrior is an underdog fight movie where direct comparisons can be made between the characters taking almost exacting roles from the rocky franchise. the same kinds of cliches rocky has to deal with are now broken up between the 2 brothers. it is not like i am comparing Warrior to Titanic...that's just stupid...Rocky is THE underdog story that was played out over 6 different movies each with a different theme: 1) the underdog shows he is just as good, 2) the underdog shows he is better, 3) the top dog shows he is vulnerable and becomes the underdog again, 4) (worst of the franchise) the underdog has to fight for whats right not just a belt, 5) the underdog has to come full circle and 6) the underdog has to prove he still has something left.

Take those 6 premises and squeeze them into an underdog fighting movie and you have warrior.

I think you misunderstood what I meant about paddy. Warrior, devoid of the job nolte did bringing the paddy character to life, is just a bad MMA movie. he makes the movie watchable. that's my point.

[dafame]

Nolte does a Burgess Meredith impression as the tough as nails trainer that loves his fighter.
Jennifer Morrison is channeling Adrian
There are fights akin to Rocky's fights with Clubber Lang and Drago.

It panders to the underdog story idea that Rocky aspired to and is 100% predictable as soon as you learn why each brother is fighting.

The only reason it works as a movie at all is because of Nolte/Paddy. If his redemption wasn't really the core of the story and it really was about the 2 brothers only, this movie would fail.

even my 71 year old dad who jas never seen a mma fight said it was the movie of the year

Warrior is an underdog fight movie where direct comparisons can be made between the characters taking almost exacting roles from the rocky franchise. the same kinds of cliches rocky has to deal with are now broken up between the 2 brothers. it is not like i am comparing Warrior to Titanic...that's just stupid...Rocky is THE underdog story that was played out over 6 different movies each with a different theme: 1) the underdog shows he is just as good, 2) the underdog shows he is better, 3) the top dog shows he is vulnerable and becomes the underdog again, 4) (worst of the franchise) the underdog has to fight for whats right not just a belt, 5) the underdog has to come full circle and 6) the underdog has to prove he still has something left.

Take those 6 premises and squeeze them into an underdog fighting movie and you have warrior.

I think you misunderstood what I meant about paddy. Warrior, devoid of the job nolte did bringing the paddy character to life, is just a bad MMA movie. he makes the movie watchable. that's my point.

Again your reasoning doesn't make much sense to me simply because this whole "the underdog" thing is the has been a theme in countless movies and I don't think that makes them bad movies because Rocky has a lock down on the whole "underdog" thing.

No I understood totally what you meant about Paddy. I think you misunderstood the point that I was making which was basically "what really is your point when the (Paddy) character WAS a part of the movie". In other words the point you were trying to make is essentially moot.