It didn't help that I watched the two Chuck Wepner films back-to-back to see how they compare. Although Zach McGowan and Jerrod Page barely resemble their respective characters, I will commend their performances, with Page getting the nuances of Ali just right and McGowan giving a performance that is at least different enough from the 2016's Chuck. It was also cool to see Burt Young appear in a film about the man who inspired the Rocky franchise, nice touch there.
Beyond the 1hr mark, it is basically beat-for-beat like the last film. Which begs the question, why does this even exist? I assume, its because they were coincidentally both in production? Regardless, its pretty obvious which one is the better film.
However, there are a few notable differences that were actually BETTER than 'The Bleeder', this film in particular had the balls to include a scene in which Ali wanted Chuck to call him a 'you know what' prior to a press conference to generate buzz, something that the 2016 film completely ignores. In fact, I will say that there is far more interaction between Ali and Wepner in this version than the last. There was also a particularly fantastically-acted argument scene between Chuck and his estranged wife in this film, which I cannot say was in the original.
I will say that the film is basically at its best when its covering events NOT in the 2016 film. His weird antics with the forger John Olsen and the events of suing Sylvester Stallone, though I must admit it takes a very weird turn when it basically portray Sly as a villain by the end of the film, and it just kind of ends abruptly with the lawsuit.
Unfortunately however, its ultimately an inferior version of the film released only a few years before it. With worse pacing, fight choreography, structure, acting and editing. If you're somehow split between watching this or the 2016 film, choose the latter. However, if you simply want another rendition of the Chuck Wepner story told, give this film a watch.
Beyond the 1hr mark, it is basically beat-for-beat like the last film. Which begs the question, why does this even exist? I assume, its because they were coincidentally both in production? Regardless, its pretty obvious which one is the better film.
However, there are a few notable differences that were actually BETTER than 'The Bleeder', this film in particular had the balls to include a scene in which Ali wanted Chuck to call him a 'you know what' prior to a press conference to generate buzz, something that the 2016 film completely ignores. In fact, I will say that there is far more interaction between Ali and Wepner in this version than the last. There was also a particularly fantastically-acted argument scene between Chuck and his estranged wife in this film, which I cannot say was in the original.
I will say that the film is basically at its best when its covering events NOT in the 2016 film. His weird antics with the forger John Olsen and the events of suing Sylvester Stallone, though I must admit it takes a very weird turn when it basically portray Sly as a villain by the end of the film, and it just kind of ends abruptly with the lawsuit.
Unfortunately however, its ultimately an inferior version of the film released only a few years before it. With worse pacing, fight choreography, structure, acting and editing. If you're somehow split between watching this or the 2016 film, choose the latter. However, if you simply want another rendition of the Chuck Wepner story told, give this film a watch.
