Muhammad Ali's Greatest Fight

I was perusing On Demand yesterday and came across this movie that was made for HBO. My wife and I decided to watch it over lunch and it was one of those movies that was way better than we could have imagined because there was zero hype of this movie. We knew nothing about it, not even the outcome of the decision by the Supreme Court. We had totally forgotten about that case and its impact on Muhammad Ali and his rise to iconic status in American history. After the movie was over I looked up Supreme Court Justice John Marshall Harlan II and found that by Hollywood standards the movie was pretty factual. It was heartbreaking in places. Christopher Plummer does a great job as a conservative judge with a love of the law, and a love of the clerks who worked for him. Frank Langella was also good as Warren Burger who was the politician on the court and took daily phone calls from Richard Nixon. I was surprised by the less than sympathetic portrait of Thurgood Marshall. He comes across as knowing the law but somewhat of a slacker. The movie rightfully so sticks to archival footage of Ali and that alone is almost enough justification to watch this movie. He was far more than just a great heavyweight boxing champion. He represented the changes going on in America. The only weak point in the movie is the interplay between the Supreme Court clerks. It was the least interesting part of the movie. Plummer and Langella make this movie. They are perfect in their roles. If you like real life legal drama, this is a movie worth seeing. Nice to have movies that exceed one's expectations.

The filmmaking (or rather, videomaking) by Stephen Frears is not particularly noteworthy, nor are some of the secondary performances. Still, the film allows one a rather fascinating peek at various forces (personal and cultural) influencing the Supreme Courts decision with regard to the legality of Mohammed Ali's refusal to serve in the U.S. army. As noted elsewhere, the segments involving the competition between interns are very much a distraction. Only one of the interns is of any narrative importance and his thread could easily have been played out in scenes between him and Judge Harlan (Christopher Plummer). In short, view this for the history, rather than the art.

I had a mixed-reaction to this film. It panders to the audience too much, with the workers in the Supreme Court conversing on subjects that would be obvious to them. Also, at some moments it feels like the plot is jumping from one moment to the next, rather than moving along seamlessly. My third criticism is that it glosses over the likely fact that Ali didn't want to go to the Vietnam War because he didn't want to fight. The movie gives the inaccurate impression that the boxer stood purely on religious grounds. However, that is not what the film is about. It was assumed by the Solicitor General that Ali was honest with his convictions, and this work concerns a fight in the highest court.

The main reason to see the HBO movie is Christopher Plummer's fantastic performance as Justice John Marshall Harlan. He plays a reflective man nearing the end of his life beautifully. Christopher and Frank Langella, who plays Chief Justice Warren Burger, have some great scenes together. Additionally, there is some well-chosen historical footage of Ali speaking to the media. If you're a fan of politics or just want to see Plummer knock one out of the park, you will probably enjoy Muhammad Ali's Greatest Fight; but, I think it is overly simplistic.

While being an interesting look at a major event in American history, I thought the general mood of the film didn't really mesh with the subject matter.

The locker room bro moments of the clerks felt more like a distraction in my mind from what was really interesting. I understand that throughout the move there's an attempt to compare and contrast the generational differences between the justices and clerks, but really it came out more muddled than insightful. But hey, maybe that's just me.

I think a more interesting movie would have been a more focused study into the closed-off perspective of the justice's world. A closed-room style would have fitted well. The hippies lined up outside made to seem distant and strange, even to the blue justices.

The movie also seemed a little closed off and lacking much room for audience pondering. Mohammed Ali was valid for conscientious objector status. No question. This might have been the case, but I'd rather come to that conclusion myself.

Anyway, it was a fine TV movie. Definitely worth a watch.

It should suffice to observe that Stephen Frears, the crew and cast took on a subject that no other film-maker chose to, and did so commendably. As Justice Harlan, Christopher Plummer also does a very commendable job. I also did not particularly find Mr. Plummer's early performances suitable for the screen, from 'Inside Daisy Clover' to 'Somewhere in Time'. Somehow, the hammiest roles early on were preferable (he does what the script demands as Commodus in 'The Fall of the Roman Empire' and his Atahualpa in 'Royal Hunt of the Sun' is actually much fun: "They EAT Him!"). As his art has matured ('Silent Partner'; 'Dolores Claiborne'; 'The Insider'; 'The Last Station'; 'The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo'), the more I have looked forward to his performances, as here. Still, while I understand the politics of casting better-known actors in leading roles, I regret that Harris Yulin, another great too long under-appreciated in movies who plays Justice Wm. O Douglas, was not cast as Justice Harlan. Mr. Yulin ('Clear and Present Danger'; 'Training Day'; 'Looking for Richard') will always bring to his characters, villains included, a delicate gravitas that does not belie the humanity of their circumstances: different surely, if not better or preferable to Mr. Plummer's characterization - but audiences would certainly have regarded it very well-tailored for him.