Libramedi
Intense, gripping, stylish and poignant
Beystiman
It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.
Francene Odetta
It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.
Michael_Elliott
Undisputed (2002) *** (out of 4)Heavyweight champion George 'Iceman' Chambers (Ving Rhames) is convicted of a rape he says never happened and is sent to prison in the prime of his life. Inside the prison is a boxing ring where Monroe Hutchen (Wesley Snipes) is the champ. It doesn't take long until mob boss Mendy (Peter Falk) talks the men into a battle between the undisputed champs.For some reason, UNDISPUTED turned out to be yet another box office disappointment for director Walter Hill, which is really too bad because this here is a rather fun movie for what it is. Perhaps what it is is why it didn't catch on with the public but, again, that's too bad because the film is actually a lot of fun as long as you don't take it too serious.The film really plays out like one of those Warner prison dramas from the 1930s. Not the "A" list ones but a low-budget "B" movie where you got a nice cast, threw them behind bars and then let everything play out. If you're looking for messages or heart-warming drama of character being built then this isn't the movie for you. Everything happens rather quickly and without too much reason but both Rhames and Snipes are so fun that you can overlook any flaws.Hill does a great job at slowly building up the anticipation to the fight. There are some really fun mini-battles between the two men and all of this really gets you pumped up for the eventual fight. Once the fight happens the entertainment continues as it certainly lives up to everything the director has built up. Not only do Rhames and Snipes do a nice job in their roles but we also get good support from Faulk, Michael Rooker and Wes Studi.Again, if you're expecting some sort of hard hitting drama then you're going to be disappointed. This is the type of movie where you just turn your brain off, kick back and have a good time with it.
M MALIK
read my review title carefully i don't care if snipes is in the movie or not but what was ving rhames doing here he was just embarrassing himselfving rhames is a great actor but this was a low point in his career he should be careful.i love his M.I films the plot is about a boxing champion goes to jail & is accused of raping a woman.i don't want to discuss the plot here because i could give a spoiler.all i have to say is this film is nonsense as far as boxing is concerned i am not interested anymore i have watched wrestling for more then 13 years since 1996 when i was a kid & six years old.i have stopped watching this nonsense i am serious about this issue boxing & wrestling never did anything good.it created violence in the society.both want to win vings character is the bad guy in the film now Wesley snipes is a c grade actor i am sorry but its the truth hes making junk films.my rating is 1/10 undisputed is a insult to the viewers
wes-connors
Convicted of rape, world heavyweight boxing champion Ving Rhames (as George "Iceman" Chambers) is stripped of his title and sent to prison. There, he meets disgruntled murderer Wesley Snipes (as Monroe Hutchen), the jailhouse champ for ten years. Old and foul-mouthed Peter Falk (as Mendy Ripstein) promotes a fight between the two boxers. The co-stars eventually have a big fight. The interjected scenes of Mr. Rhames' victim further suggest the film was inspired by Mike Tyson. Rhames says his woman liked rough sex and enjoyed the experience. Flashbacks show Mr. Snipes' victim was enjoying the company of another man.*** Undisputed (5/31/02) Walter Hill ~ Ving Rhames, Wesley Snipes, Peter Falk, Jon Seda
translator
where do you begin? first off, there are so many characters that after a while you just stop giving a damn. they just keep popping up. when they first appear on screen, we get a freeze-frame with their name, crime, etc. in the best of guy ritchie fashion. such "meta-cinematic" devices are totally out of place here, and detract from the movie's overall tone and seriousness.which brings me to the second point: with so many characters, there's an overabundance of dialog. i mean, the movie's supposed to be a boxing/prison movie, yet it's got more lines than "pride and prejudice"! i guess they needed to "spice up" the clichéd and simple, yet always effective underdog-becomes-champ plot. and spice it up they do - with more paper-cut characters and trite, go-nowhere dialog.however, the movie's biggest problem is that it spends infinitely more time depicting the bad guy, than it does our hero wesley. he's got at least 5 times as much screen-time. AT LEAST. the bad guy's obviously directly inspired by tyson, and the movie's further "spiced up" by flashback interviews with the victim and himself. please. just let them beat the sh*t out of each other.i haven't watched the movie until the end, i got too bored. even the fights, while excellently choreographed, seem to require annoying commentary by an inmate in order to be more interesting. if your depiction of boxing ain't interesting enough in and off itself, then you've got a problem, buddy.like i said, i haven't seen the end, but i guess it's not that hard to predict. the good guy wins. which would be okay, if we got a chance to know him.
