Watch Undisputed For Free

Admirable film.

This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.

What can i say apart from after watching the sequels that were Direct to DVD, i was surprised, I came in expecting Rocky in prison and i got more than that.Although Wesley Snipes and Ving Rhames are both Brilliant Actors on there own merits, they were both miscast in this film, Neither come off as convincing Physical fighters, both are better with weapons rather than hand to hand combat.The most character development is in a minor character who has memory problems and can remember many historical fights, and he wants to see one more legendary fight before he passes, although he comes off more as a clone of Micky from Rocky than anything else.The Fight scenes whilst entertaining and well edited lack when compared to later films in the series, they don't hold a shot long enough and cut away during most of the blows obviously showing that they've been faked.Overall a great movie by it's own accord but when compared to it's sequels it's a mediocre film at best, but still a good watch if you're a fan of either of the top billed actors.

There was a time -- oh, around 1991-1997 -- when Wesley Snipes was one of my very favorite actors. But then he began to get typecast -- his own doing -- into martial arts-related films. He forgot that acting was about...acting. And my esteem for him dwindled...as it seemed to do for pretty much everyone. And this movie is a good example of Snipes not having to act. What he did have to do here was box, and one of the highlights of the film (yes, there are some) is that the boxing was reasonably realistic (and I say that as a person who watches a fair amount of boxing). In fact, I kept wondering how many of those "thrown punches" actually landed at least a glancing blow. The cameraman did a great job filming the boxing scenes. But, as good as the boxing appeared, I still go to a movie to watch acting...and there wasn't much of that here. So, for me, what was the point? The story is okay. A Mike Tyson-like boxer who goes to prison and fights the prison favorite. Ving Rhames actually does the better acting here, and does fine with the boxing, too.Peter Falk has a role as a con who is involved in the gambling side of boxing in the pen; it was meant to be gritty, but comes off as cliché-ish. I always enjoyed seeing Jon Seda on screen, and never quite understood why his big screen acting didn't catch on more.If you wanna watch 2 guys pretend they are boxing, then this is a good film for you. If you wanna watch some good acting, look elsewhere. Okay for a viewing...once.

Convicted of rape, world heavyweight boxing champion Ving Rhames (as George "Iceman" Chambers) is stripped of his title and sent to prison. There, he meets disgruntled murderer Wesley Snipes (as Monroe Hutchen), the jailhouse champ for ten years. Old and foul-mouthed Peter Falk (as Mendy Ripstein) promotes a fight between the two boxers. The co-stars eventually have a big fight. The interjected scenes of Mr. Rhames' victim further suggest the film was inspired by Mike Tyson. Rhames says his woman liked rough sex and enjoyed the experience. Flashbacks show Mr. Snipes' victim was enjoying the company of another man.*** Undisputed (5/31/02) Walter Hill ~ Ving Rhames, Wesley Snipes, Peter Falk, Jon Seda

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.