- Commissioner’s statement on Ventura, Marte
- Ronnie O’Sullivan: Masters champion ‘felt so vulnerable’ in final
- Arron Fletcher Wins 2017 WSOP International Circuit Marrakech Main Event ($140,224)
- Smith challenges Warner to go big in India
- Moncada No. 1 on MLB Pipeline’s Top 10 2B Prospects list
- Braves land 2 on MLB Pipeline’s Top 10 2B Prospects list
- Kingery makes MLB Pipeline’s Top 10 2B Prospects list
- New Zealand wrap up 2-0 after Bangladesh implosion
- Mathews, Pradeep, Gunathilaka to return to Sri Lanka
- Elliott hopes for rain for Poli
Movie Review: ‘Hands of Stone’
- Updated: September 7, 2016
“Raging Bull” remains the standard for all boxing films. “Cinderella Man” was another all-time classic, and the “Rocky” series is beloved by fans the world over. Now, a new contender waits in the shadows. How does “Hands of Stone” stack up against its predecessors? It’s safe to say that a biopic on the life of Panamanian legend Roberto Duran was a worthwhile endeavor. Edgar Ramirez portrays Duran and by all accounts does a fantastic job. While he won’t ever be confused as Duran’s twin, Ramirez went to great lengths to learn how to move like the hall of famer inside the ring. Director Jonathan Jakubowicz brought Duran and his story to life, but the film missed several key punches along the way.While screen icon Robert De Niro was expectedly solid as trainer Ray Arcel, the man who helped guide Duran to greatness, Jakubowicz seemed to go out of his way to make his side of the story closely resemble that of every other manager/trainer in every other boxing movie. His ties to the mob, his attempted murder and his banishment from the sport were all actual events, but the way they unfolded in “Hands of Stone” came off as hokey and cliché. The fight scenes can only be …
