About Rodney

View all posts by Rodney →

You may like these posts

14 thoughts on “The Movie Blog in The Chicago Tribune”

  1. A few thoughts about the much acclaimed film “Million Dollar Baby”.

    As a female boxer, I have come to know through four years of training what is contained in “the heart” of a boxer.
    As the movie’s opening monologue suggests, the heart is about personal integrity, going past your limits, and earning respect. Unfortunately, “Million Dollar Baby” was only concerned with these attributes being played out by Hilary Swank’s character, Maggie, leaving a very poor image of the other boxer’s for speculation.
    Eastwood filmed the movie in a classic boxing gym, but managed, purposefully it seems, to discredit what boxers are all about. A contender challenges not only the opponent, but first and foremost himself or herself. The training involved redefines the way one views oneself, and consequently, the way one views life.
    Boxing is an external expression of the same energy used in other physical disciplines, including yoga. Those with a proclivity toward violence may be drawn to the sport, yet that energy must eventually shift into a spiritual agitation in order to develop mastery of and excellence in the demanding and oft-times grueling training boxers undergo.
    It is an endeavor toward transformation: losing the self to develop a stronger sense within, which is what is summoned and relied on in the ring.
    Countless boxers have told stories of how the sport literally saved their lives from great mental and emotional despair, granting confidence and breakthroughs in perceived limitations on all levels of human experience.
    Yet Eastwood chose to stop the journey at violence, creating and furthering a stereotype:
    Boxer as hoodlum.
    In the “heart” of any sportsman, one does not utilize the skills cultivated over months and years to beat up a hapless wannabe, as in the case of Danger’s character. To portray boxers in such a vein, including the various gym buddies who stood-by, cheering, is a cheap path toward the infusion of drama.
    Sexism in the form of the gym boys teasing Maggie in regard to her breasts was another gratuitous injection by Eastwood. In reality, male boxers, and most other athletes for that matter, are not threatened by females within the sport, since they do not fight one another.
    In my few years of training and thousands of hours clocked in various gyms across the country, I have NEVER witnesses nor heard about such behavior. What I have observed is respect, offers of guidance and compliments in some form from every male I’ve encountered.
    What value do these scenes add to this “love story” as Eastwood names it? It appears to be an easy attempt at endearing Maggie into the hearts of the viewers, by making those around her rough and abusive.
    More films have been made around boxing than any other sport. It’s a simple formula combining a big-hearted, hard driven character going after their dream, then earning the right to fight for a title. It involves drama, blood, guts, and depth. Because these are ideas are metaphorical, boxing allows an uncomplicated theme that is understood on some level by everyone.
    Eastwood used this simple platform of boxing but added practically nothing to it: He offered no insight or development, only the most base and cliché portrayals. Particularly Maggie’s one-dimensional family and the memory-laden former contender “Scrap”, played by Morgan Freeman, who now only lives in and cleans the gym.
    Nothing is revealed regarding Frankie’s relationship with his daughter but that he suffers tremendous guilt over their estrangement. So much so that he goes to church on a daily basis and prays regularly. He writes letters to her, which much to his disappointment, are returned and saved. If Frankie has possession of his daughter’s address, why does he not go and see her in order to make amends? Are we to feel sympathetic to this lack of initiative?
    Unlike Rocky, and Girlfight where viewers are the ring-side VIPs, cheering on the beloved contender, momentarily teased with uncertainty as to whether or not they will make it through, Eastwood again chooses the easiest path in propelling Maggie through her professional bouts. Proving her ability as an invincible opponent and reaching the championship scene being this director’s objectives, we see Maggie ludicrously achieve a knock-out in the first round, fight after fight. Eastwood could have achieved these objectives in a more authentic manner by simply showing Maggie returning home, sweaty and satisfied.
    Another incredulous moment occurs in Maggie’s final bout wherein the champion throws a punch after the bell had rung, ending the round. Again – simple, predictable and without any creative vision leading to the inspiration for her fall.
    DO NOT READ ON- SPOILERS:
    Other reality checks:
    Toward the end of the film we see Maggie lying in bed at a rehabilitation center. She ultimately maintains such a pronounced reduction in circulation to her leg, it is decided that amputation is necessary. What kind of rehabilitation center allows a patient to slip into such an acute condition?
    Obviously a fictitious facility wherein there is no illumination in the corridors after sun-down, no guards monitoring the entrances, and to further add to what should be taken by viewers as adding insult to injury, there exists no sound, no alarm, nothing to alert the staff at the nearby nurse’s station of the activities occurring in Maggie’s room.
    Lastly, if this is a love story, why would Frankie pull out her oxygen tube BEFORE giving her the adrenaline? Why pull it out at all? Gratuitous effect, and unfortunately, people don’t think enough for themselves to recognize a manipulative, non-creative film when they see it.
    As Stephanie Zacharek wrote in her review of “Mystic River”, √¢‚Ǩ≈ìEastwood has been revered as a director for reasons that probably have more to do with iconography than with actual talent.√¢‚Ǩ¬ù
    And so now movie-goers are abuzz about the hotly debated subject of euthanasia. I would propose the first debate be why this film deserved the accolades it is receiving and may receive on Sunday.
    To put it lightly, I found the movie to be clichéd, boring, but most sadly, uninspiring. Its stereotypical and nonsensical story-line left me angry; but instead of picking a fight with the helpless mascot of my gym, I sat down to write this commentary.

    Lorna Magarian

Leave a Reply