mik bb I guess it's an Indy film. It didn't seem cheap. The acting, filming and all that seemed fine. The story was very very lame. A boy is in a pitiful sad life because of too much fighting at school even though he was destined for more. He apparently got into all these fight for good reasons because he has absolutely no rage issues whatever. He's just a sweet, kind, Mama's boy who only wants to take care of his sick mother. He starts boxing and for no reason and barely any time to practice, he's just an incredible boxer. A few motivational words from his new boxing coach whom has a much bigger back story relevant to his life and wow, he's a champion. Geez, I should just go off and be the next ultimate fighter champion. I just have to want it bad enough and no problem, I'll beat all those people for no apparent reason, it's just that easy.

A_Different_Drummer When Stallone did Rocky I, you would think from the hype at the time that he invented the boxing film.No he did not. He re-invented it. Boxing films have been around forever and the first rule of a good boxing film is to connect with the audience by allowing them to "grow" with the protagonist, to improve from fight to fight.And that was the first rule the producers broke.Given the minimal amount of screen time alloted to the "early" fights for the protagonist/hero (in some cases just 2 seconds per fight) you may have thought that these were real cable fights where the producers did not have the rights to rebroadcast. But no this is a fiction film and they could have made those fights real. They did not.Frankly, once you break that key rule, once you have no connection between star and viewer, there is no turning back.But, almost out of perversity, the producers broke another rule and that amazes me. They cast two actors who look alike for both roles in the ring, hero and villain.So, and I cannot emphasize the bizarreness of this enough, not only does the audience have no connection with the hero in the final fight, but sometimes you can't tell which actor is playing which role.And the final rule? Good choreography in the fights. The audience should feel every punch. Here the audience only feels cheated.A rarity. A boxing film that, like a bad boxer, starts out weak. And then just gets weaker.Of course, the fact that the film is a "vanity" film -- the same guy is the writer director and star -- may be a factor. But what do I know -- I am just a reviewer.Terrible film.

MrChallenger This movie despite some of the bad reviews and press it's gotten is an exceptionally well made film with a good cast that played their roles well. They had a low budget and a limited amount of time to get this movie done but the movie doesn't show that side to it at all, it had gripping moments that made you edge closer out of your seat. Everyone loves an underdog and this movie was all about the underdog, yet it showed with hard work anything is possible, it's an inspirational movie, the story was great, something you see less of day in and day out, no fancy film effects, just brilliant camera-work, excellent choreography that made everything so realistic, so believable. Everything in this movie had a purpose, everything was for a reason, nothing makes you sit there and think "Why was that there?" everything in your mind has a purpose for the movie, it builds the characters, there were no wasted scenes here. I think with a bigger budget and more time, this movie could have added a lot more, and really shown the world an even more in depth character that would make you wish the movie went on longer than it did.For me, I would highly recommend this movie to anyone, a lot of bad movies have been released lately, and it was nice to see something true to the art come from The Challenger. This movie for me was perfect for what it was, I'm not a critic and I don't rate every movie I ever watch and critique it, but I have taste, and I have a mind that can tell the truth from the bull, and this movie was truthfully refreshing.

subxerogravity Possibly the best part of this movie was the fact that Michael Clarke Duncan starred in it, three years after his death. The movie does showcase what a good man we lost.Duncan plays a coach who sees potential in a poor kid from the Bronx who tries to fight his way out of his stereotypical life story.Unfortunately, the timing of this movie stinks. Despite the fact that it was most likely made first, it's released after the far better South Paw, makes me think of it as a low budget South Paw.What does set it apart from other boxing films is it's commentary on where boxing is today and what can be done to fix it, namely a Cable station wants to exploit the challenger with a reality show that leads up to his fight with the current heavy weight champ as to way to bring back the Heavy Weights that have been long gone since Tyson/Holyfeild.The challenger has a lot to its story without being too overwhelming. Although the actors were not that convincing for me as even light Heavyweights, they all worked together well to give an emotional heart filled story. The Best part of the boxing scenes is the advice the coaches would give the athletes in-between rounds. The focus on this, especially with Duncan's character is what the challenger brings to the table.Not the best boxing movie I've seen but it works for me. R.I.P Michael Clarke Duncan.