Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 14 Jan 2026, 05:30
This was produced and released by ITV News a few days ago, not a bad watch
BoxRec
Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Page 5 of 6
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 18 Jan 2026, 18:25
Naz has just done the High Performance podcast, perhaps his most in depth interview.
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 16 Mar 2026, 06:43
I saw this film at the weekend. Was really disappointed, particularly after a few on here said it was decent.
- As predicted, Brosnan has adapted his Mobsters Irish accent. It is terrible - particularly given that he is Irish
- The portrayal of Brendan isn’t fair. He was more focussed than the film representation - and had a lot more going on than just Naz.
- The actor playing Naz was way too thick set, looked about 50 years of age at some points and pulled off none of the likeable cheekiness Naz did posses at times
- The portrayal of FW is abysmal. It is so caricatured and the acting is some of the worst I have ever seen. Surprised he hasn’t sued them.
- Loads of other characters are so cheesy and the dialogue is cringe. The director should have spent some time in actual boxing gyms
- I know Steve Robinson wasn’t a spring chicken, but he is played by what look likes a 60 year old man
- The fight scenes are amongst the worst I have ever scene in a boxing film. This was clearly filmed on a tight budget (perhaps Brosnan took it all) as there is no genuine arena footage so you never get a big fight feel. I’m guessing everything was filmed in a smallish studio as all the action is shown at close quarters or from above. It feels like boxing during Covid. They do have some long shot stadium footage, but its so obviously CGI
- Compunding this, you get no sense of Hamed’s languid, yet sharp style. They’d have been better off buying the rights for the Kelley fight. Hard to beat the actual drama.
- It just isn’t historically accurate, as has been confirmed by people on both sides of the film. And where the hell is Herol Graham, Johnny Nelson etc….
The character of John Ingle is quite likeable. Dom doesn’t get shown much, even as an adult when they were both involved in the gym.
They are both shown laughing when Naz loses to Hamed - which just wouldn’t have happened.
God knows how this has got 6.7 on IMDB.
There is artistic licence, but this is just a lazy, shameless money grab. Raging Bull it isn’t.
- As predicted, Brosnan has adapted his Mobsters Irish accent. It is terrible - particularly given that he is Irish
- The portrayal of Brendan isn’t fair. He was more focussed than the film representation - and had a lot more going on than just Naz.
- The actor playing Naz was way too thick set, looked about 50 years of age at some points and pulled off none of the likeable cheekiness Naz did posses at times
- The portrayal of FW is abysmal. It is so caricatured and the acting is some of the worst I have ever seen. Surprised he hasn’t sued them.
- Loads of other characters are so cheesy and the dialogue is cringe. The director should have spent some time in actual boxing gyms
- I know Steve Robinson wasn’t a spring chicken, but he is played by what look likes a 60 year old man
- The fight scenes are amongst the worst I have ever scene in a boxing film. This was clearly filmed on a tight budget (perhaps Brosnan took it all) as there is no genuine arena footage so you never get a big fight feel. I’m guessing everything was filmed in a smallish studio as all the action is shown at close quarters or from above. It feels like boxing during Covid. They do have some long shot stadium footage, but its so obviously CGI
- Compunding this, you get no sense of Hamed’s languid, yet sharp style. They’d have been better off buying the rights for the Kelley fight. Hard to beat the actual drama.
- It just isn’t historically accurate, as has been confirmed by people on both sides of the film. And where the hell is Herol Graham, Johnny Nelson etc….
The character of John Ingle is quite likeable. Dom doesn’t get shown much, even as an adult when they were both involved in the gym.
They are both shown laughing when Naz loses to Hamed - which just wouldn’t have happened.
God knows how this has got 6.7 on IMDB.
There is artistic licence, but this is just a lazy, shameless money grab. Raging Bull it isn’t.
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 16 Mar 2026, 06:45
I saw the trailer and it sounded like the script was terrible.
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 16 Mar 2026, 06:47
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 16 Mar 2026, 07:22
I saw it a while ago, it was ok, nothing to write home about. They can't include everyone but seems odd they left out guys like Herol and Johnny after all their achievements. But they made some reference to another fighter who would be pretty much unknown to even those who follow the sport. The actor who playing Naz wasn't great but I guess it's hard to find an actor who not only looks like him but is also similar proportions and can pull off being as unorthodox as Naz boxed. I was always gauge how much I like a film by whether I'd watch it again and I wouldn't watch this again.
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 16 Mar 2026, 09:46
I agree with most of that but the bit about Brendan being far more focused is debatable. He had Naz with him at all times from being a small child. I remember him as I’m roughly the same age and was at a lot of shows in the region following Wharton. Brendan was pushing Naz first and foremost even then, 89-90 when he was still a youth. Brendan broke every rule in the current England Boxing rule book when it comes to Naz and safeguarding.Frostieballs wrote: ↑16 Mar 2026, 06:43 I saw this film at the weekend. Was really disappointed, particularly after a few on here said it was decent.
- As predicted, Brosnan has adapted his Mobsters Irish accent. It is terrible - particularly given that he is Irish
- The portrayal of Brendan isn’t fair. He was more focussed than the film representation - and had a lot more going on than just Naz.
- The actor playing Naz was way too thick set, looked about 50 years of age at some points and pulled off none of the likeable cheekiness Naz did posses at times
- The portrayal of FW is abysmal. It is so caricatured and the acting is some of the worst I have ever seen. Surprised he hasn’t sued them.
- Loads of other characters are so cheesy and the dialogue is cringe. The director should have spent some time in actual boxing gyms
- I know Steve Robinson wasn’t a spring chicken, but he is played by what look likes a 60 year old man
- The fight scenes are amongst the worst I have ever scene in a boxing film. This was clearly filmed on a tight budget (perhaps Brosnan took it all) as there is no genuine arena footage so you never get a big fight feel. I’m guessing everything was filmed in a smallish studio as all the action is shown at close quarters or from above. It feels like boxing during Covid. They do have some long shot stadium footage, but its so obviously CGI
- Compunding this, you get no sense of Hamed’s languid, yet sharp style. They’d have been better off buying the rights for the Kelley fight. Hard to beat the actual drama.
- It just isn’t historically accurate, as has been confirmed by people on both sides of the film. And where the hell is Herol Graham, Johnny Nelson etc….
The character of John Ingle is quite likeable. Dom doesn’t get shown much, even as an adult when they were both involved in the gym.
They are both shown laughing when Naz loses to Hamed - which just wouldn’t have happened.
God knows how this has got 6.7 on IMDB.
There is artistic licence, but this is just a lazy, shameless money grab. Raging Bull it isn’t.
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 16 Mar 2026, 09:51
I’d agree he was with him a lot, but he did have lots of other good fighters he worked really hard for.mickey1975 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2026, 09:46I agree with most of that but the bit about Brendan being far more focused is debatable. He had Naz with him at all times from being a small child. I remember him as I’m roughly the same age and was at a lot of shows in the region following Wharton. Brendan was pushing Naz first and foremost even then, 89-90 when he was still a youth. Brendan broke every rule in the current England Boxing rule book when it comes to Naz and safeguarding.Frostieballs wrote: ↑16 Mar 2026, 06:43 I saw this film at the weekend. Was really disappointed, particularly after a few on here said it was decent.
- As predicted, Brosnan has adapted his Mobsters Irish accent. It is terrible - particularly given that he is Irish
- The portrayal of Brendan isn’t fair. He was more focussed than the film representation - and had a lot more going on than just Naz.
- The actor playing Naz was way too thick set, looked about 50 years of age at some points and pulled off none of the likeable cheekiness Naz did posses at times
- The portrayal of FW is abysmal. It is so caricatured and the acting is some of the worst I have ever seen. Surprised he hasn’t sued them.
- Loads of other characters are so cheesy and the dialogue is cringe. The director should have spent some time in actual boxing gyms
- I know Steve Robinson wasn’t a spring chicken, but he is played by what look likes a 60 year old man
- The fight scenes are amongst the worst I have ever scene in a boxing film. This was clearly filmed on a tight budget (perhaps Brosnan took it all) as there is no genuine arena footage so you never get a big fight feel. I’m guessing everything was filmed in a smallish studio as all the action is shown at close quarters or from above. It feels like boxing during Covid. They do have some long shot stadium footage, but its so obviously CGI
- Compunding this, you get no sense of Hamed’s languid, yet sharp style. They’d have been better off buying the rights for the Kelley fight. Hard to beat the actual drama.
- It just isn’t historically accurate, as has been confirmed by people on both sides of the film. And where the hell is Herol Graham, Johnny Nelson etc….
The character of John Ingle is quite likeable. Dom doesn’t get shown much, even as an adult when they were both involved in the gym.
They are both shown laughing when Naz loses to Hamed - which just wouldn’t have happened.
God knows how this has got 6.7 on IMDB.
There is artistic licence, but this is just a lazy, shameless money grab. Raging Bull it isn’t.
Nelson, Graham …. And poor old Ryan Rhodes didn’t even get a mention
The film fails on all levels:
- It’s a terrible boxing film. The fight sequences are dreadful, and there is no jig fight feel or build up tension.
- it’s a terrible relationship film. It isn’t historically accurate, the characters are off and you don’t particularly feel warm to anyone
- it’s a terrible piece of art. Terrible script, terrible acting and a million stereotypes.
You can tell I’m not a fan. Maybe I’m too old and nobody wants considered films or literature any more!
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 16 Mar 2026, 10:33
You know they're saving money when they use a different gym to film because it was cheap...
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 18 Mar 2026, 13:22
This was truly one of the worst films I have ever seen. I agree with almost all of above.Frostieballs wrote: ↑16 Mar 2026, 06:43 I saw this film at the weekend. Was really disappointed, particularly after a few on here said it was decent.
- As predicted, Brosnan has adapted his Mobsters Irish accent. It is terrible - particularly given that he is Irish
- The portrayal of Brendan isn’t fair. He was more focussed than the film representation - and had a lot more going on than just Naz.
- The actor playing Naz was way too thick set, looked about 50 years of age at some points and pulled off none of the likeable cheekiness Naz did posses at times
- The portrayal of FW is abysmal. It is so caricatured and the acting is some of the worst I have ever seen. Surprised he hasn’t sued them.
- Loads of other characters are so cheesy and the dialogue is cringe. The director should have spent some time in actual boxing gyms
- I know Steve Robinson wasn’t a spring chicken, but he is played by what look likes a 60 year old man
- The fight scenes are amongst the worst I have ever scene in a boxing film. This was clearly filmed on a tight budget (perhaps Brosnan took it all) as there is no genuine arena footage so you never get a big fight feel. I’m guessing everything was filmed in a smallish studio as all the action is shown at close quarters or from above. It feels like boxing during Covid. They do have some long shot stadium footage, but its so obviously CGI
- Compunding this, you get no sense of Hamed’s languid, yet sharp style. They’d have been better off buying the rights for the Kelley fight. Hard to beat the actual drama.
- It just isn’t historically accurate, as has been confirmed by people on both sides of the film. And where the hell is Herol Graham, Johnny Nelson etc….
The character of John Ingle is quite likeable. Dom doesn’t get shown much, even as an adult when they were both involved in the gym.
They are both shown laughing when Naz loses to Hamed - which just wouldn’t have happened.
God knows how this has got 6.7 on IMDB.
There is artistic licence, but this is just a lazy, shameless money grab. Raging Bull it isn’t.
It’s like a 1980s TV movie. Acting awful. Very shallow. Poor dialogue. I didn’t think the fight scenes were the worst ive seen but that’s because there are so many awful boxing scenes in the films in general…
From the credits - was Sylvester Stallone genuinely a producer? I can’t believe he’d be involved with such a trash UK specific project. Also Dom and John Ingle were allegedly consultants…. Which probably means they were interviewed once.
And ‘Steve Robinson’ looked ridiculous. The guy playing Naz also seemed to slip into a London accent often.
It must’ve been very low budget and no idea how they afforded Brosnan unless he got the big slice of the pie. Also Naz is interviewed saying most of it is fabrication. The guy who wrote and directed also seems o be very inexperienced and it shows.
I’d say it’s the worst boxing film I’ve ever seen
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 18 Mar 2026, 13:47
Naz came out and say Sly was a producer in name only. Sounds like he wasn't anywhere near the film.JamesPhilips wrote: ↑18 Mar 2026, 13:22This was truly one of the worst films I have ever seen. I agree with almost all of above.Frostieballs wrote: ↑16 Mar 2026, 06:43 I saw this film at the weekend. Was really disappointed, particularly after a few on here said it was decent.
- As predicted, Brosnan has adapted his Mobsters Irish accent. It is terrible - particularly given that he is Irish
- The portrayal of Brendan isn’t fair. He was more focussed than the film representation - and had a lot more going on than just Naz.
- The actor playing Naz was way too thick set, looked about 50 years of age at some points and pulled off none of the likeable cheekiness Naz did posses at times
- The portrayal of FW is abysmal. It is so caricatured and the acting is some of the worst I have ever seen. Surprised he hasn’t sued them.
- Loads of other characters are so cheesy and the dialogue is cringe. The director should have spent some time in actual boxing gyms
- I know Steve Robinson wasn’t a spring chicken, but he is played by what look likes a 60 year old man
- The fight scenes are amongst the worst I have ever scene in a boxing film. This was clearly filmed on a tight budget (perhaps Brosnan took it all) as there is no genuine arena footage so you never get a big fight feel. I’m guessing everything was filmed in a smallish studio as all the action is shown at close quarters or from above. It feels like boxing during Covid. They do have some long shot stadium footage, but its so obviously CGI
- Compunding this, you get no sense of Hamed’s languid, yet sharp style. They’d have been better off buying the rights for the Kelley fight. Hard to beat the actual drama.
- It just isn’t historically accurate, as has been confirmed by people on both sides of the film. And where the hell is Herol Graham, Johnny Nelson etc….
The character of John Ingle is quite likeable. Dom doesn’t get shown much, even as an adult when they were both involved in the gym.
They are both shown laughing when Naz loses to Hamed - which just wouldn’t have happened.
God knows how this has got 6.7 on IMDB.
There is artistic licence, but this is just a lazy, shameless money grab. Raging Bull it isn’t.
It’s like a 1980s TV movie. Acting awful. Very shallow. Poor dialogue. I didn’t think the fight scenes were the worst ive seen but that’s because there are so many awful boxing scenes in the films in general…
From the credits - was Sylvester Stallone genuinely a producer? I can’t believe he’d be involved with such a trash UK specific project. Also Dom and John Ingle were allegedly consultants…. Which probably means they were interviewed once.
And ‘Steve Robinson’ looked ridiculous. The guy playing Naz also seemed to slip into a London accent often.
It must’ve been very low budget and no idea how they afforded Brosnan unless he got the big slice of the pie. Also Naz is interviewed saying most of it is fabrication. The guy who wrote and directed also seems o be very inexperienced and it shows.
I’d say it’s the worst boxing film I’ve ever seen
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 18 Mar 2026, 18:16
Not great. Agree with all the above criticisms.
Poor, unrealistic, cheap and very unwatchable, truth be told.
Poor, unrealistic, cheap and very unwatchable, truth be told.
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 20 Mar 2026, 09:16
My apologies if I mislead anyone by my review. I had zero expectations of it. The boxing was naff (I'm forty and still in better shape than some of Naz opponents in the film 
) and yes in true film fashion it didn't capture many if any of the details of Brendan and Nazs relationship accurately. And yes it was extremely cheesy and scripted.
I still enjoyed it just taking it as standalone cheap-ish movie - if you were expecting it to be realistic in any way (boxing wise, history wise, Brendan's real accent etc) or a masterpiece like Raging Bull I can see why you'd hate it.
I just thought they captured certain elements of that time period (the tattered old boxing gym, the northern accents, the racism, the old village/ town environments) very well and as British asian growing up in a small village up north in the 80/90s I could relate to it a fair bit and it felt very nostalgic (even though I'm from Lancashire not Yorkshire). The first boxing gym I went to as a teen, despite it being all white English lads and trainers at the time, was the first place I felt accepted and faced no prejudice. I really liked how Brendan and the Ingles were depicted as an anti-racist though I guess not surprising given they're Irish.
I remember as teen watching "Ali" and being so excited with high hopes for realism and was massively let down - I couldn't believe how sh!t it was from the boxing to capturing boxing politics. Now watching any boxing film, I set the bar extremely low and if I want my realism I'll dig out my old "When we were kings" dvd
) and yes in true film fashion it didn't capture many if any of the details of Brendan and Nazs relationship accurately. And yes it was extremely cheesy and scripted.I still enjoyed it just taking it as standalone cheap-ish movie - if you were expecting it to be realistic in any way (boxing wise, history wise, Brendan's real accent etc) or a masterpiece like Raging Bull I can see why you'd hate it.
I just thought they captured certain elements of that time period (the tattered old boxing gym, the northern accents, the racism, the old village/ town environments) very well and as British asian growing up in a small village up north in the 80/90s I could relate to it a fair bit and it felt very nostalgic (even though I'm from Lancashire not Yorkshire). The first boxing gym I went to as a teen, despite it being all white English lads and trainers at the time, was the first place I felt accepted and faced no prejudice. I really liked how Brendan and the Ingles were depicted as an anti-racist though I guess not surprising given they're Irish.
I remember as teen watching "Ali" and being so excited with high hopes for realism and was massively let down - I couldn't believe how sh!t it was from the boxing to capturing boxing politics. Now watching any boxing film, I set the bar extremely low and if I want my realism I'll dig out my old "When we were kings" dvd
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 20 Mar 2026, 09:49
Started to watch last night got half hour in and went to bed. Will carry on watching tonight but can’t say Il be rushing to put it on.
On a side note surely people were not booing Hamed when he was on the way to the ring. I know racism was less frowned upon back then but surely they put that in the film to make it more theatrical.
On a side note surely people were not booing Hamed when he was on the way to the ring. I know racism was less frowned upon back then but surely they put that in the film to make it more theatrical.
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 20 Mar 2026, 10:06
I can assure you mate it could have happened. I was subjected to so much racism from age six by eighteen I was thoroughly accustomed to it.smiling assassin wrote: ↑20 Mar 2026, 09:49 Started to watch last night got half hour in and went to bed. Will carry on watching tonight but can’t say Il be rushing to put it on.
On a side note surely people were not booing Hamed when he was on the way to the ring. I know racism was less frowned upon back then but surely they put that in the film to make it more theatrical.
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 20 Mar 2026, 10:15
Il ask you mate as you are the most clued up on the ingle gym. Was the wincobank gym the most diverse gym around those parts at the time?black panther wrote: ↑20 Mar 2026, 10:06I can assure you mate it could have happened. I was subjected to so much racism from age six by eighteen I was thoroughly accustomed to it.smiling assassin wrote: ↑20 Mar 2026, 09:49 Started to watch last night got half hour in and went to bed. Will carry on watching tonight but can’t say Il be rushing to put it on.
On a side note surely people were not booing Hamed when he was on the way to the ring. I know racism was less frowned upon back then but surely they put that in the film to make it more theatrical.
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 20 Mar 2026, 11:23
smiling assassin wrote: ↑20 Mar 2026, 10:15Il ask you mate as you are the most clued up on the ingle gym. Was the wincobank gym the most diverse gym around those parts at the time?black panther wrote: ↑20 Mar 2026, 10:06I can assure you mate it could have happened. I was subjected to so much racism from age six by eighteen I was thoroughly accustomed to it.smiling assassin wrote: ↑20 Mar 2026, 09:49 Started to watch last night got half hour in and went to bed. Will carry on watching tonight but can’t say Il be rushing to put it on.
On a side note surely people were not booing Hamed when he was on the way to the ring. I know racism was less frowned upon back then but surely they put that in the film to make it more theatrical.
Apologies my man, Ive never been to Wincobank or even Sheffield. I'm from Lancashire only knew gyms round there (Chorley, Preston, Bolton), later gyms in Leicester and North London.
Think some others like Mickey will have a good idea.
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 20 Mar 2026, 11:30
Crikey, had no idea this forum was full of proper Scorceses. It's a low budget British film about the life of an actual boxer and I enjoyed it on that basis. I wasn't expecting it to win any Oscars. Let's call it an Area title type film. Honest, did Its best with what was available and worth the ticket price for the effort put in.
I've just got DVDs of The Boxer and Twentyfourseven so be interesting to compare.
I've just got DVDs of The Boxer and Twentyfourseven so be interesting to compare.
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 20 Mar 2026, 13:29
Sorry mate I must of got you mixed up with someone elseblack panther wrote: ↑20 Mar 2026, 11:23smiling assassin wrote: ↑20 Mar 2026, 10:15Il ask you mate as you are the most clued up on the ingle gym. Was the wincobank gym the most diverse gym around those parts at the time?black panther wrote: ↑20 Mar 2026, 10:06
I can assure you mate it could have happened. I was subjected to so much racism from age six by eighteen I was thoroughly accustomed to it.
Apologies my man, Ive never been to Wincobank or even Sheffield. I'm from Lancashire only knew gyms round there (Chorley, Preston, Bolton), later gyms in Leicester and North London.
Think some others like Mickey will have a good idea.
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 20 Mar 2026, 15:43
I didn't know the gyms then like I do now. I only knew the North Yorks ones and they are very different to the rest of Yorkshire. In those days, and now, almost exclusively white, ironic when Atang is the best talent we've produced in years.. I think most boxing gyms in the rest of Yorkshire now are predominantly Asian and traveller kids, then the rest.smiling assassin wrote: ↑20 Mar 2026, 13:29Sorry mate I must of got you mixed up with someone elseblack panther wrote: ↑20 Mar 2026, 11:23smiling assassin wrote: ↑20 Mar 2026, 10:15
Il ask you mate as you are the most clued up on the ingle gym. Was the wincobank gym the most diverse gym around those parts at the time?
Apologies my man, Ive never been to Wincobank or even Sheffield. I'm from Lancashire only knew gyms round there (Chorley, Preston, Bolton), later gyms in Leicester and North London.
Think some others like Mickey will have a good idea.
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 20 Mar 2026, 18:06
Twentyfourseven Is fantastic.veriton wrote: ↑20 Mar 2026, 11:30 Crikey, had no idea this forum was full of proper Scorceses. It's a low budget British film about the life of an actual boxer and I enjoyed it on that basis. I wasn't expecting it to win any Oscars. Let's call it an Area title type film. Honest, did Its best with what was available and worth the ticket price for the effort put in.
I've just got DVDs of The Boxer and Twentyfourseven so be interesting to compare.
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 20 Mar 2026, 20:47
Ah come on veriton mate …. it didn't do its best.veriton wrote: ↑20 Mar 2026, 11:30 Crikey, had no idea this forum was full of proper Scorceses. It's a low budget British film about the life of an actual boxer and I enjoyed it on that basis. I wasn't expecting it to win any Oscars. Let's call it an Area title type film. Honest, did Its best with what was available and worth the ticket price for the effort put in.
I've just got DVDs of The Boxer and Twentyfourseven so be interesting to compare.
Even with a low budget you can have authentic dialogue, historical accuracy, decent acting and decent casting.
Curious as to what you enjoyed about the film?
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 21 Mar 2026, 10:50
My school report 35 years ago said 'satisfied with mediocrity'.
It was meant as an insult but it's proved to be one of my greatest strengths in life.
Yes the film could have been better but it was a fair effort. I particularly enjoyed the young Naz bits but the whole thing was ok.
For a genuinely bad boxing biopic, the recent George Foreman is the low bar in my opinion. Giant is superb next to that.
It was meant as an insult but it's proved to be one of my greatest strengths in life.
Yes the film could have been better but it was a fair effort. I particularly enjoyed the young Naz bits but the whole thing was ok.
For a genuinely bad boxing biopic, the recent George Foreman is the low bar in my opinion. Giant is superb next to that.
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 21 Mar 2026, 12:36
The George Foreman one was 100 times better than Giant. He sets and wardrobe were great and it clearly had a budget and half decent crew. Giant is one of the worst films I have ever seenveriton wrote: ↑21 Mar 2026, 10:50 My school report 35 years ago said 'satisfied with mediocrity'.
It was meant as an insult but it's proved to be one of my greatest strengths in life.
Yes the film could have been better but it was a fair effort. I particularly enjoyed the young Naz bits but the whole thing was ok.
For a genuinely bad boxing biopic, the recent George Foreman is the low bar in my opinion. Giant is superb next to that.
Re: Piers Brosnan portraying Brendan Ingle
Posted: 24 Mar 2026, 16:39
interesting comments but i sat he wondering if some of the posters actually saw the film.
People saying there was no mention of Herol Graham - who do you think the black bloke was that Brendan was arguing with outside his house who drove off in the car?
People saying there was no mention of Ryan Rhodes - Naz sparred with Ryan in the film when they were both kids. Brendan referred to him as Ryan.
The film was about Naz and his rise to the top. Characters playing Jonny nelson, Buster keeton etc were often visible in the film. I thought the mix of other gym characters besides Naz was reasonably well done.
The film as a whole was decent. By no means great but it was an interesting watch.
As for Naz saying a lot of the film was fabricated.......Well John and Dom were used as sources of info for the film, of course Naz is going to say its fabricated. He doesnt want to be seen as someone who gave a 50 year old Brendan a beating in the ring. But that actually did happen, and it happened worse than the film portrayed.
People saying there was no mention of Herol Graham - who do you think the black bloke was that Brendan was arguing with outside his house who drove off in the car?
People saying there was no mention of Ryan Rhodes - Naz sparred with Ryan in the film when they were both kids. Brendan referred to him as Ryan.
The film was about Naz and his rise to the top. Characters playing Jonny nelson, Buster keeton etc were often visible in the film. I thought the mix of other gym characters besides Naz was reasonably well done.
The film as a whole was decent. By no means great but it was an interesting watch.
As for Naz saying a lot of the film was fabricated.......Well John and Dom were used as sources of info for the film, of course Naz is going to say its fabricated. He doesnt want to be seen as someone who gave a 50 year old Brendan a beating in the ring. But that actually did happen, and it happened worse than the film portrayed.