Movie Review: Fighting (2009)
Yeah, this one was pretty bad...
Photo: Rogue Pictures
Off the top of my head I can't remember a film that tried to act this tough but came off so weak. Dito Montiel returns to direct his follow-up to 2006's A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints with Fighting, a film filled with so much stupidity it is impossible to ever take it seriously. Conversely, the film takes itself so seriously, it is impossible to ever sit back and try to find enjoyment in its stupidity.
The cast includes Terrence Howard, Channing Tatum, Zulay Henao, Luis Guzmán and Cung Le. For more information on this film including pictures, trailers and a detailed synopsis choose from the following menu.
Review
"Fighting" is a Rogue Pictures release, directed by Dito Montiel and is rated PG-13 for intense fight sequences, a sex scene and brief strong language.
Before I bash the film too much I will say the fight sequences aren't that bad when you can actually see what's going on. The tight shots on fight scenes work when you are filming a guy dressed as a bat, since you need to conceal the suit's limitations, but in Fighting we are talking about guys wearing tank tops or even less so a few wide-angles would actually help. However, considering the title of the film, four fight sequences hardly live up to the billing as too much time is spent focusing on garbage no one came to see and building a back-story no one cares to know.
Dito Montiel won a lot of people over with his debut, A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints, an admittedly decent film worth a look, and a film that features what is most likely the best performance Channing Tatum has ever given. However, Montiel did Tatum no favors with this feature as he stumbles around mumbling his words before the "big secret" from his checkered past is let out of the bag to an overwhelming lack of gasps from the audience.
The only thing Fighting is missing is a half-naked street brawl in the pouring rain with Missy Elliott rapping over Timbaland beats, an idea that would have actually been welcome considering the mess this film is. Montiel, however, is not a director to count out after one stumble as he has already shown potential. As for Tatum I expect he won't be earning many high marks for this summer's toys-for-tots feature, G.I. Joe, but hopefully his role as Pretty Boy Floyd in Michael Mann's Public Enemies will give us something to build on and quickly forget Fighting ever happened.
Showing 7 Comments
~ PLEASE NOTE ~
If, in any way, your comment is an attack on the author of this post or a previous commenter, your comment will be deleted without question.
Add a New CommentNOTE: The Facebook login option has been disabled. We apologize for any inconvenience. |
Click to Read Our Commenting Rules & Guidelines

Well, Roger Ebert liked it. But I gotta say, from the previews I'm not surprised by your review. And as for Dito Montiel, there was very little to like about "A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints." One of them was Channing Tatum's performance. That film had so many structural flaws that it was sometimes painful to watch.
This movie is hot and unique! It's exciting, because it's a fight with no rules. Now, that's something the world really needs. Never seen quite like it. I give it a 10!
@monique: Illegal streetfighting with no rules? You've never seen that in a movie before? Really?
Try Lionheart (known here as Wrong Bet) for instance. Not a great film but the fighting is pretty cool.
And there are many more, although admittedly never good but sometimes entertaining.
I saw microphones in every scene. This was a pathetic excuse for a movie. Terrible plot, terrible acting, terrible directing and terrible editing describe this movie for what it really is. Their wasn't even that much fighting! It should have called the movie "Boom Mics" because there was more of them then there was anything else. 4 fight scenes?!?! I wanted to go their and watch some fighting to get me pumped up. What was Terrance Howard doing? He seemed to be mentally challenged! I hated this movie and wouldn't reccmend it to anyone!
easy to see mics? Surely the film wouldve been edited/cut properly so that any mics would never be viewable, regardless of any cinema showing too much extra space where there could potentially be more movie image? A finished product should be exactly that, if "extra film space" isnt viewable on a finished dvd movie, why should it be viewable on a supposed finished cinema version of the same title?
i highly did not like the movie i would rather drink a smoothie that is 90% broken glass than watch that movie again.
thank you for agreein with me i wounder what derecters are thinking these days they think that they can throw the cheepest corneist stuff in and expect people to enjoy the film. I bet that they spent a lot of money on the film and the only reason that they got any people to go to it was the previews. (unless that is if you caught the the comment "the only way i can lose is if someone beats me" ya and the only way im gona fall on ice is if thears water.) thank you for reading my comment