[« Olbermann spanks Bill O'Lielly....] [Um, Washington, we have a problem..... »]
02/03/2006: Thought for the Day:
But this movie is not about war. It is about boxing.
Yes, "Annapolis" takes the subject of a young man training to be a Navy officer in a time of war, and focuses its entire plot on whether he can win the "Brigades," which is the Academy-wide boxing championship held every spring. It switches from one set of cliches to another in the middle of the film, without missing a single misstep. Because Jake has an attitude and because Cole doubts his ability to lead men, they become enemies, and everything points toward the big match where Jake and Cole will be able to hammer each other in the ring.
I forgot to mention that Jake was an amateur fighter before he entered the Academy. His father thought he was a loser at that, too. He tells the old man he's boxing in the finals, but of course the old man doesn't attend. Or could it possibly be that the father, let's say, does attend, but arrives late, and sees the fight, and then his eyes meet the eyes of his son, who is able to spot him immediately in that vast crowd? And does the father give him that curt little nod that means "I was wrong, son, and you have the right stuff"? Surely a movie made in 2006 would not recycle the Parent Arriving Late and Giving Little Nod of Recognition Scene? Surely a director who made "Better Luck Tomorrow" would have nothing to do with such an ancient wheeze, which is not only off the shelf, but off the shelf at the Resale Store?
Yes, the Navy is at war, and it all comes down to a boxing match.
--Roger Ebert
Len on 02.03.06 @ 07:50 AM CST
