Rocky VII: CREED and the importance of Rocky V (***spoilers***)

[alaskanseminole]

This thread isn't just about Creed and it assumes you've seen all the Rocky films up to this point. It also assumes you're a fan of the franchise (translation: Not the thread for folks to chime in with their obligatory, I have never seen a Rocky film, I hate them, blah blah blah).

So the Misses and I went to see it Friday night (which, btw, was nice because everyone else was in Star Wars). First off, we really enjoyed it. Great way to introduce a new character and preserve the best of Rocky. After watching the film my wife wanted to go home and watch "The one where Apollo dies", so we threw in Rocky IV. After that she was like, "what happens next, I can't remember", so we wound up watching V & VI too.

That brings me to the real premise of the thread. Rocky V wasn't that bad. I agree the worst part of the film was Tommy Gunn's bad acting and Duke's overacting, but Rocky was still Rocky and I think the film is VERY necessary to his story. Without it we wouldn't have had Balboa or Creed as they picked up where that film left off.

Rocky V set up the "after success" story and continued to develop Rocky's character, a character I've really grown to love; especially in part VI, Rocky Balboa. The scene with him and Paulie in the meat packing plant about the "stuff in the basement" was pretty powerful (see below). "You haven't peaked yet?" Great scene! ...and we wouldn't have it without Rocky V and Rocko's fall from the top.



So, while I'd rank Rocky V dead last in the series, my contention is that it's still very important to the series.

Thoughts?

 

[grady327]

I think it's important as it shows him back in the gutter after tasting success. But rather than riding Tommy Gunn's coat tails into a check he only wants what's best for him. He loses sight of his family ( the son) and has to earn back that trust and love before his son becomes a bum. Also love the fact he stay retired and fought Tommy in the parking lot and not some bull shit promotion. " you knocked him down, why don't you try knocking me down!" And although it's probably the consensus least favorite of the series, I rather enjoyed it. Minus the Don King knock off character. " only in America".

You are spot on in your feeling s about the series as a whole. Although I have not seen Creed yet.

 

[Lemon Thrower]

I didn't even know they made a Rocky V or VI.

 

[MathisJones]

I haven't seen Balboa yet. I'll make sure to do so. When it came out I was just thinking he was a 60 year getting smashed in the ring so I've never cared to watch.

Creed was a great spin off. I'm not sure it makes 5 or 6 necessary - you already know Apollo is dead before that. It's not hard to put the pieces together.

However, maybe seeing 6 would've made the moments about Adrianne in Creed that much now touching.

Anyway, 5 is probably the worst. I didn't love the Mr. T one, but 1, 2, 4 & Creed are all great. 3 was eh, & 5 was really eh. Will see Balboa soon though.

 

[Lemon Thrower]

I thought 3 was pretty good. At the time, Mr. T was pretty scary. There had not been a lot of characters like that on film or TV yet. The whole theme of losing your edge and fighting to get it back was a good one.

 

[alaskanseminole]

I haven't seen Balboa yet. I'll make sure to do so. When it came out I was just thinking he was a 60 year getting smashed in the ring so I've never cared to watch.

Creed was a great spin off. I'm not sure it makes 5 or 6 necessary - you already know Apollo is dead before that. It's not hard to put the pieces together.

However, maybe seeing 6 would've made the moments about Adrianne in Creed that much now touching.

Anyway, 5 is probably the worst. I didn't love the Mr. T one, but 1, 2, 4 & Creed are all great. 3 was eh, & 5 was really eh. Will see Balboa soon though.

Seeing Balboa before Creed would definitely give the film more grounding and backstory to where Rocky is....even as simple as something as why he's working in a restaurant. It's a good story flick, not a good action flick (although the fight itself is filmed the most realistic of all the films.)

 

[MathisJones]

Seeing Balboa before Creed would definitely give the film more grounding and backstory to where Rocky is....even as simple as something as why he's working in a restaurant. It's a good story flick, not a good action flick (although the fight itself is filmed the most realistic of all the films.)

Makes sense. Like I said, it's not hard to follow along, but just being able to figure it out loses some meaning I'm sure.

Creed follows the Rocky format, especially the first couple. It's a drama, no doubt about it. But as you said, the fight scenes were very realistic. I was blown away by the fighting.

Creed is way up there on my list of 2015 favorites.

 

[West Duval Nole]

Lol. 3 was my favorite. Loved Mr T and the fact it also had Hulk Hogan in it. I lived the 80s. 4 was a close 2nd for me. Loved the whole USA vs Russia.

Hated 5. The street fight was stupid and I just don't think it was needed at all in the story line.

I did like Balboa and Creed. I wonder how many Creed's they will do.

 

[GwinnettNole]

Alaska-
Rocky V was horrible. Between horrible acting, the dumb story line of Paulie giving power of attorney, and Tommy Morrison and Sly's son being it all lead it to being embarrassingly bad.

I, II, IV, Balboa, III,........<end of earth>, and then V.

 

[alaskanseminole]

Alaska-
Rocky V was horrible. Between horrible acting, the dumb story line of Paulie giving power of attorney, and Tommy Morrison and Sly's son being it all lead it to being embarrassingly bad.

I, II, IV, Balboa, III,........<end of earth>, and then V.

So what you're saying is we have different opinions?

 

[GwinnettNole]

So what you're saying is we have different opinions?

Perhaps ... " Home Team"

 

[cgj0198]

1st off Creed was a great movie. However is does perpetuate some stereotypes(angry black man, deadbeat black father). I know I went a little deep but I guess it added to the depth of Creed. I thought Rocky's son should have came back in the movie some how.(It would have been a good setup for a Rocky's son vs Creed's son in the future) I did like the ending of the movie it made it more realistic.

I didn't think Rocky V was that bad until I rewatched it yrs. later. (Its pretty bad)
Rocky IV is the one I've watched the most but still not sure if its my favorite...

 

[tarheelinfl]

Still not sure not what boxing association is dominant in these films. It's one that bans any defense other than blocking punches with your face!

 

[Nole Lou]

I don't think 5 or even 6 is necessary for Creed. I watched 1-4 with my son and then took him to Creed, and didn't miss a beat other than explaining Adrian is gone ahead of time. 5 is just not very good, or important. 6 is pretty good, and is most important mainly for a stylistic bridge for the character between the absurd cartoon Rocky of 3/4 and the more original realistic Rocky that's back in Creed. I thought the basic themes of 6 would be mainly lost on a 12 year old or boring, but I would suggest an adult see 6 if they could before Creed for that connective tissue. But really you only need to be aware of the events of 3-4 to latch right on to Creed.

And I'll just say it...Creed is great. Not just a great Rocky movie, it's a great damn movie. 3 and 4 are really absolute trash, but I understand not without their appeal to a 10 year old. Re-watching them again, I was surprised how poor and stupid they were, and how much of the charm of the original character was just totally lost by that point. It's really amazing how much they were able to pull it back in 6 and especially in Creed.

 

[alaskanseminole]

I don't think 5 or even 6 is necessary for Creed. I watched 1-4 with my son and then took him to Creed, and didn't miss a beat other than explaining Adrian is gone ahead of time. 5 is just not very good, or important. 6 is pretty good, and is most important mainly for a stylistic bridge for the character between the absurd cartoon Rocky of 3/4 and the more original realistic Rocky that's back in Creed. I thought the basic themes of 6 would be mainly lost on a 12 year old or boring, but I would suggest an adult see 6 if they could before Creed for that connective tissue. But really you only need to be aware of the events of 3-4 to latch right on to Creed.

And I'll just say it...Creed is great. Not just a great Rocky movie, it's a great damn movie. 3 and 4 are really absolute trash, but I understand not without their appeal to a 10 year old. Re-watching them again, I was surprised how poor and stupid they were, and how much of the charm of the original character was just totally lost by that point. It's really amazing how much they were able to pull it back in 6 and especially in Creed.

I guess my point is that the events that transpired in Rocky V were important to the series and the character of Rocky. It showed him returning (physically) to his roots (in V) and then returning emotionally to who he was in the first two films in VI. Again, that scene in the meat packing plant was pretty powerful (for me). I really wish V was done better because there was an important story to be told in that film which did (good film or bad film) successfully set up VI and VII.

I agree Creed was a fantastic film and stylistically moved seamlessly from Rocky Balboa (VI).

 

[Nole Lou]

I guess my point is that the events that transpired in Rocky V were important to the series and the character of Rocky. It showed him returning (physically) to his roots (in V) and then returning emotionally to who he was in the first two films in VI. Again, that scene in the meat packing plant was pretty powerful (for me). I really wish V was done better because there was an important story to be told in that film which did (good film or bad film) successfully set up VI and VII.

I agree Creed was a fantastic film and stylistically moved seamlessly from Rocky Balboa (VI).

I would be willing to revisit V in light of the most recent two. I recently had an astute boxing journalist on Twitter who I respect a lot tell me that he thinks it's highly underrated. Even at the time I thought III and IV were pretty dumb, so I think I probably looked at IV as an even worse version of those, with those being the context. What I remember most of V, and I don't remember much, was the melodramatic histrionics. That just wasn't much of a feature of I, and although it was hinted at in II, III-V just go off the rails with it.

As more of a prequel to the later two, I could see your premise of how V could have more thematic value now in relation to Rocky Balboa and Creed than it did to III and IV at the time it came out, even if it's still not a very good movie. It might be worth another look, especially for me as not being much of a fan of III and IV. Maybe I should have liked it more than I did at the time.

 

[JLORYFSU!]

I liked Creed a lot. Also a huge fan of the original Rocky and I also liked 2 and 3.....I thought Rocky 4 and 5 were God Awful. I don't think 5 and Rocky Balboa were necessary for Creed but understand you saying they bridged the gap. 4 and 5 actually pissed me off they were so bad. Just my $.02

 

[BrianNole09]

I thought Creed was decent but the original Rocky movies (the good ones) were way more exciting. One thing I think about Creed was that it lacked good music, unlike the original Rocky. If Creed had good music, it would have been way better.

 

[peezy28]

I think the Music is a to each his own.

Creed also had much more authenticity with the boxing aspects as everyone involved from the fighters all the way down to the pad man and cut man were someone real in boxing... If your not a boxing fan (old or new) you may not appreciate that part of it.

 

[alaskanseminole]

I thought Creed was decent but the original Rocky movies (the good ones) were way more exciting. One thing I think about Creed was that it lacked good music, unlike the original Rocky. If Creed had good music, it would have been way better.

Exciting? I love the 1st rocky.,but it's very slow. There are a lot of air punches in the fight too.

 

[BrianNole09]

I think the Music is a to each his own.

Creed also had much more authenticity with the boxing aspects as everyone involved from the fighters all the way down to the pad man and cut man were someone real in boxing... If your not a boxing fan (old or new) you may not appreciate that part of it.

The Creed music was putting me to sleep. It was nothing like "Eye of the Tiger" and the other original Rocky song...don't know the name but it's iconic.

 

[peezy28]

Eye of the Tiger Fits Rocky but Adonis Creed is a different character

 

[Nole Lou]

I think the Music is a to each his own.

Creed also had much more authenticity with the boxing aspects as everyone involved from the fighters all the way down to the pad man and cut man were someone real in boxing... If your not a boxing fan (old or new) you may not appreciate that part of it.

Yeah, and it's not even close. If you are remotely a boxing fan, Creed is way more exciting because it looks real and it's very easy to get into the fights in a way that's impossible in in the early Rocky films. By far the most exciting one to me. I was a boxing fan from the time I was a kid, so the fights were always much more ludicrous than exciting to me. Creed is pretty much the best boxing I've ever seen on film by a long shot, and I've seen a lot. The way that the fights in Raging Bull were stylized is probably the only thing as good, but that obviously relied on stylizing the fights in such a way that it didn't need to be authentic, and thereby avoided the difficulty of bringing real boxing action to film.

 

[peezy28]

I have to give alot of credit to Michael B Jordan not only did he REALLY get KO 'd in filming (they may or may no have used that #spoilers ) but he didn't look out of place gain the ring against REAL boxers.

 

[Nole Lou]

I have to give alot of credit to Michael B Jordan not only did he REALLY get KO 'd in filming (they may or may no have used that #spoilers ) but he didn't look out of place gain the ring against REAL boxers.

He sure didn't. Every single time there's a boxing movie, there's tons of hype about how they trained and trained, and the revolutionary choreography is going to make it the most realistic fight scenes ever. And it comes out and looks hokey as hell.

It's because the vast majority of boxers, even mediocre ones, have been working the craft since they were children, and you can't replicate the nuances of that in 6 or 8 weeks. I really can't believe how legit Jordan looked in there, almost as if he's got some extreme natural talent and could have been a fairly good boxer. There's a very small handful of guys that can pick up boxing after say age 20 and reach a world class level, and maybe he's that kind of natural.

 

[tarheelinfl]

Did anyone notice in the PTI segment, the poke at ESPN? I'm sure ESPN approved, but it was pretty funny.
When the shot showed the upcoming topics, at the end of the list were, in no particular order,
Tim Tebow, Tiger, Lebron. Pretty much some of ESPN's favorites!

 

[BrianNole09]

Eye of the Tiger Fits Rocky but Adonis Creed is a different character

I can understand that. I didn't hear any inspiring or exciting music, though.

 

[BrianNole09]

He sure didn't. Every single time there's a boxing movie, there's tons of hype about how they trained and trained, and the revolutionary choreography is going to make it the most realistic fight scenes ever. And it comes out and looks hokey as hell.

It's because the vast majority of boxers, even mediocre ones, have been working the craft since they were children, and you can't replicate the nuances of that in 6 or 8 weeks. I really can't believe how legit Jordan looked in there, almost as if he's got some extreme natural talent and could have been a fairly good boxer. There's a very small handful of guys that can pick up boxing after say age 20 and reach a world class level, and maybe he's that kind of natural.

Lou, random boxing question for you.

Would you fight 1986 Mike Tyson for $5 million USD?

Here's the deal: You are 25 years old and get to train for 6 months with a real trainer. You can't take a dive. You have to fight until you knock out Mike or get knocked out. If you knock him down you get $10 million. If you knock him out, you get $50 million. No taxes.

Would you take the fight? Why or why not?

 

[MathisJones]

Lou, random boxing question for you.

Would you fight 1986 Mike Tyson for $5 million USD?

Here's the deal: You are 25 years old and get to train for 6 months with a real trainer. You can't take a dive. You have to fight until you knock out Mike or get knocked out. If you knock him down you get $10 million. If you knock him out, you get $50 million. No taxes.

Would you take the fight? Why or why not?

I'd do it, no question about it. Scary? Of course. But seriously, getting knocked out? Taking some punches, regardless of how hard, I can live my whole life on $5m.

Getting some digs on him ... I wouldn't even entertain that lol. Maybe I'd try that, open myself up so I didn't have to think about it.

 

[BrianNole09]

I'd do it, no question about it. Scary? Of course. But seriously, getting knocked out? Taking some punches, regardless of how hard, I can live my whole life on $5m.

Getting some digs on him ... I wouldn't even entertain that lol. Maybe I'd try that, open myself up so I didn't have to think about it.

What if you were given a severe speech impediment for life? Would that be worth it?

 

[peezy28]

Ll

He sure didn't. Every single time there's a boxing movie, there's tons of hype about how they trained and trained, and the revolutionary choreography is going to make it the most realistic fight scenes ever. And it comes out and looks hokey as hell.

It's because the vast majority of boxers, even mediocre ones, have been working the craft since they were children, and you can't replicate the nuances of that in 6 or 8 weeks. I really can't believe how legit Jordan looked in there, almost as if he's got some extreme natural talent and could have been a fairly good boxer. There's a very small handful of guys that can pick up boxing after say age 20 and reach a world class level, and maybe he's that kind of natural.

I think he just might be that guy. I don't know what type of power he has and well we know he may not be able to take a punch well by the KO but his footwork and hand speed and combinations were authentic... At a minimum I bet he could beat some guys like Corey Spinks or something maybe more if he dedicated as he definitely has natural talent to be able to look as good as he did.

 

[peezy28]

I

What if you were given a severe speech impediment for life? Would that be worth it?

I won't like I am not remembering what songs were playing during the movie other than the weird Techno stuff his weird girlfriend was doing but I was pretty hype during all the fighting and training scenes.

 

[Nole Lou]

Lou, random boxing question for you.

Would you fight 1986 Mike Tyson for $5 million USD?

Here's the deal: You are 25 years old and get to train for 6 months with a real trainer. You can't take a dive. You have to fight until you knock out Mike or get knocked out. If you knock him down you get $10 million. If you knock him out, you get $50 million. No taxes.

Would you take the fight? Why or why not?

Of course. Here's the thing...even if I try as hard as I can, I'm going to be knocked out cold by one punch or a combination of a couple. And it's not going to take long. How many total punches will I take? 2, 3? Maybe 5?

The chances of long term damage from being knocked out like that are extremely low. It is not totally unheard of, but it is extremely rare for a fighter to die or or receive serious long term injury (like a speech impediment) from a quick knockout, even if it's from a flurry of punches. Serious injuries and death are virtually always caused by a repetitive beating over a lengthy fight.

That's why guys like Tyson, Foreman, Hearns didn't kill guys in the ring, and many lighter punchers did. Again, there are a few exceptions (Griffith-Paret), but most boxing deaths occur after many rounds and many punches absorbed.

There's just no way I'm going that long with Tyson, or any world class heavyweight or even a journeyman. 6 months is absolutely nothing in terms of training to face a real fighter, let alone someone like Tyson.

 

[MathisJones]

What if you were given a severe speech impediment for life? Would that be worth it?

Probably not. If that was a guarantee, I'd probably pass. But if it's just a "it might happen" ... Because seriously, it might've happened haha ... I would likely take the risk.

 

[BrianNole09]

Of course. Here's the thing...even if I try as hard as I can, I'm going to be knocked out cold by one punch or a combination of a couple. And it's not going to take long. How many total punches will I take? 2, 3? Maybe 5?

The chances of long term damage from being knocked out like that are extremely low. It is not totally unheard of, but it is extremely rare for a fighter to die or or receive serious long term injury (like a speech impediment) from a quick knockout, even if it's from a flurry of punches. Serious injuries and death are virtually always caused by a repetitive beating over a lengthy fight.

That's why guys like Tyson, Foreman, Hearns didn't kill guys in the ring, and many lighter punchers did. Again, there are a few exceptions (Griffith-Paret), but most boxing deaths occur after many rounds and many punches absorbed.

There's just no way I'm going that long with Tyson, or any world class heavyweight or even a journeyman. 6 months is absolutely nothing in terms of training to face a real fighter, let alone someone like Tyson.

Of course you'll be knocked out cold, but how can you know the chances of long term damage from fighting Tyson are extremely low? I was under the impression that he could kill an average Joe in the ring.

Tyson was knocking out professional boxers in the 1st round. Imagine how bad he could hurt someone like you? (A non boxer with no professional experience)

 

[Nole Lou]

Of course you'll be knocked out cold, but how can you know the chances of long term damage from fighting Tyson are extremely low? I was under the impression that he could kill an average Joe in the ring.

Tyson was knocking out professional boxers in the 1st round. Imagine how bad he could hurt someone like you? (A non boxer with no professional experience)

I just explained it to you. People are just not killed/maimed with a single punch. It virtually never happens, unless there is some underlying previous brain damage, or some freak incident of your head hitting something on the way down or your neck landing on the bottom rope and breaking your neck, which is again, incredibly rare.

There's no difference between him knocking out Michael Spinks or an average joe in terms of brain injury. You don't get a thicker skull or a stronger brain from training. It's almost certainly the opposite, considering that I've never had a concussion or even been punched in the head before, the likelihood of me facing serious damage from taking one or two punches from Mike Tyson substantially smaller than almost anyone he knocked out in his career.

The chances of being permanently or even significantly injured brain-wise by a single punch or even a few from Mike Tyson is incredibly small. It's just the way it works. You would be much, much worse off going 12 rounds with Chris Byrd, a small, just ok, light hitting heavyweight. While he could actually probably still knock me out, the chance that he might not, but instead hit me with 30-40 stiff punches a round for 12 rounds, would just be asking for long lasting effects. That, I would not do.

Or if you changed the rules to you have to fight Mike Tyson for 12 rounds, but he is not allowed to knock you out, and every time he came close he had to back off, or give you time to recover if you got stunned...that's something I would never dream of doing for any money. A scenario like that you'd be facing a significantly non-zero chance of debilitating brain injury or worse.

 

[BrianNole09]

I just explained it to you. People are just not killed/maimed with a single punch. It virtually never happens, unless there is some underlying previous brain damage, or some freak incident of your head hitting something on the way down or your neck landing on the bottom rope and breaking your neck, which is again, incredibly rare.

There's no difference between him knocking out Michael Spinks or an average joe in terms of brain injury. You don't get a thicker skull or a stronger brain from training. It's almost certainly the opposite, considering that I've never had a concussion or even been punched in the head before, the likelihood of me facing serious damage from taking one or two punches from Mike Tyson substantially smaller than almost anyone he knocked out in his career.

The chances of being permanently or even significantly injured brain-wise by a single punch or even a few from Mike Tyson is incredibly small. It's just the way it works. You would be much, much worse off going 12 rounds with Chris Byrd, a small, just ok, light hitting heavyweight. While he could actually probably still knock me out, the chance that he might not, but instead hit me with 30-40 stiff punches a round for 12 rounds, would just be asking for long lasting effects. That, I would not do.

Or if you changed the rules to you have to fight Mike Tyson for 12 rounds, but he is not allowed to knock you out, and every time he came close he had to back off, or give you time to recover if you got stunned...that's something I would never dream of doing for any money. A scenario like that you'd be facing a significantly non-zero chance of debilitating brain injury or worse.

I spoke with a brain surgeon I know and he said Mike Tyson could permanently injure and/or kill an average guy in the ring with 1-3 punches. I'm going to have to agree with his opinion since he's a medical professional. Too bad we'll never find out the truth with you in the ring, Lou.

 

[MIKE_G]

While Tyson was a very hard-hitter, what made him so devastating as a puncher was his speed. He also was good at hitting spots that would knock his opponent's equilibrium off, like up high on the side of the head. Guys would drop like a ton of bricks, be counted out before they were able to regain their balance, but otherwise were not hurt. Boxers who fought both Tyson and Foreman would say that Foreman was the much bigger puncher, for example. He was a big guy with just a very clubbing punch. He could literally break your rib with a body blow. I wouldn't want to get hit by either guy, but I'd probably rather take a single knockout blow from Tyson than a guy like Foreman.