Review: Against the Ropes (* 1/2)

AGAINST THE ROPES
A film review by Steve Rhodes

Copyright 2004 Steve Rhodes

RATING (0 TO ****): * 1/2


AGAINST THE ROPES stars a horribly miscast Meg Ryan as Jackie Kallen, a
woman trying to break into the Boys' Club world of professional boxing
managers. Rosie Perez might have had the right spunky swagger for the
movie's silly and sappy script, inspired by the real Jackie Kallen, but Ryan
fails just as miserably as she did in IN THE CUT, another of her awkward
attempts to broaden her acting horizons.



"The world's an oyster, and you're a pearl," Jackie is told when she is a
little girl hanging around the boxing ring, admiring the fighters. "Pearls
are pretty, and they're tough."



Cut to the present, when a now grown Jackie works as a secretary in a boxing
coliseum. Cynically she says, "The world is not an oyster. It is a tank
filled with dirty water and sharks where you can't swim." Dressing like a
street hooker and talking with a heavy and unidentifiable (Brooklyn?)
accent, she isn't taken seriously. Larocca (Tony Shalhoub), a boxing
manager and a made man in the Mafia, ridicules her occasional outbursts of
bravado, calling her just a "Barbie doll with glass balls."



Through a strange set of circumstances, Jackie finds herself suddenly the
manager of Luther Shaw (Omar Epps), a street punk who has the skills, which
only she can see, that could make him into a real champion. In no time, he
starts winning fights -- the film's director, Charles Dutton, plays his
trainer -- while she becomes the star of the show. The press are in awe of
a woman making it in a man's world. Her fighter is relegated into an
increasingly unimportant role in his own career. Think he might to come to
resent her grandstanding?



Sometime during the first act, Jackie completely loses her accent. (Look
for Ryan to win this year's award for the most inconsistent and unbelievable
accent.) Jackie's sleazy wardrobe goes in the second act. And then there
is the third act, which is off-the-wall ridiculous. Rarely is the film
funny, and even more rarely still is it credible. Only the fights appear
genuine.



Let's talk about the film's inappropriate rating for a moment. I know all
of the studios want their pictures to come in at PG-13 because it
significantly improves their box office potential, but why does the MPAA
have to go along by giving obvious R movies like AGAINST THE ROPES a PG-13
rating? There is constant foul language, albeit no use of the F-word, oral
sex jokes, crack cocaine and violence -- and I'm not just talking about in
the ring.



Please do us a favor Meg. Stick to romantic comedies. You're always great
in them. Stop trying to prove your acting range. You are already a
champion in one arena. Don't get knocked out again by trying to succeed at
something else. After IN THE CUT and AGAINST THE ROPES, you'll be out for
the count if you're not careful. You're too good to let this happen to you.



AGAINST THE ROPES runs 1:51. The film is rated PG-13 for "crude language,
violence, brief sensuality and some drug material" and would be acceptable
for most teenagers.



The film opens nationwide in the United States on Friday, February 20, 2004.
In the Silicon Valley, it will be showing at the AMC and the Century
theaters.



Web: http://www.InternetReviews.com

Email:



************************************************** *********************



Want free reviews and weekly movie and video recommendations via Email?

Just send me a letter with the word "subscribe" in the subject line.