Save your money for something good and enjoyable

i know i wasted 90 mins of my life.

How sad is this?

Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast

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.

Not only is this a prison picture centered around boxing in jail, it also tells us the outside influences of corruption at all levels permeating through the prison walls.As Mendy Ripstein, the late Peter Falk steals the show as the man who arranges a match between prison champ Wesley Snipes and the heavy weight champ, Ving Rhames, incarcerated on rape conviction charges.We're basically dealing with two fighters with huge egos. They immediately take an aversion towards each other,and you know that the both of them shall eventually come to blows anyway.One of the fighters refuses to throw the fight and Rhames sees this as an opportunity by mobster Ripstein to get him out of jail earlier by the connections he has despite the fact that he has been incarcerated for such a long time.Yes, the ultimate bout finally does take place. Let me say that both men come up winners in this satisfying ending to a very interesting story.

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.

I'm sorry if that comes across as harsh but this film is a complete mess, both in the editing room and to the bewildered acting from some usually tidy performers. The plot is a straight forward one that doesn't call for much ingenuity on the viewers behalf, we can reasonably expect competent acting and choreography in what is basically an unofficial biopic of Mike Tyson's conviction for rape and his subsequent time in prison.Instead of putting heart to the story the makers have simply plonked two big name black actors in a prison setting with one having a bigger mouth and ego than the other, and all this leading to a big punch up to decide who is the rugged and toughest man on the planet !. Throw away interview scenes of the woman raped by our main protagonist don't garner sympathy or merit because they are so misplaced and badly acted they seem like an edited after thought.Poor film and in one scene where Michael Rooker looks bemused at the fight between Ving Rhames & Wesley Snipes.......it says it all, it's embarrassing so don't be fooled by the talent appearing in the movie, they are all wasted and deserve better, hell we all do, 2/10.