Pride

Back in 1964, Jim Ellis (Terrence Howard) tried to compete in Salisbury, N Carolina but he's not wanted as the only black competitor. Then it's 1973. All he can get is a job to close down a rec center from the Philadelphia Department of Recreation. He finds bitter maintenance guy Elston (Bernie Mac) and a rundown swimming pool. Sue Davis (Kimberly Elise) is the representative who is reluctantly closing down the unused center. When the city takes down the basketball rims, Jim teaches the kids to swim. It turns out that Sue Davis is the sister and guardian of one of the kids.

It's a simple formulaic sports movie. It adds in a splash of racism, a splash of poverty, and stirs it up in an unconventional black sport. Terrence Howard holds it all together. Bernie Mac could have done some damage with his clowning but it's in small doses. It's heart warming at the appropriate time. Tom Arnold may not have the weight to play the bad guy. However the movie follows the underdog formula and does a good job.

I'm giving this movie a 5 out of 10. Sorry to those that think every movie that doesn't win an Oscar deserves less than a 3 on a scale of ten. But seriously, why can't people be honest or think rationally anymore? I don't care how much this movie lacked, whether in acting or script, the feeling that I felt leaving the theater may not have left me in complete satisfaction, but I felt happy and good inside. Is there something wrong with just feeling good now? I understand where the criticism comes from, which is why I don't rate this higher. The script was all over the place; sometimes you didn't know what was going on or why. Tom Arnold was more annoying to watch than anyone else, the fact that Mainline scheduled no-name recreation centers for their opponents sounds unbelievable, Franklin's so called gangster status was unconvincing (not to mention seeing what he did to pool was disgusting), and even Terrence Howard sounded way too corny at times. But COME ON! This isn't a 1.7 out of ten kind of movie. Bernie Mac was hilarious for the first time in a while, the setting and music was very accurate and good, and the swimming scenes were real and believable. People need to think about what they saw before giving movies such bad reviews. It doesn't matter how bad some of the recent movies have been, but there are about 10 movies from the last two years in the bottom 100 movies of all time! WHAT? Be honest. Give some of these movies a chance. And for some of those who are wondering, I'm white, so I'm not "defending by race" either. I think this movie is somewhat worth it, definitely watchable and, although I would not recommend this overly, I think that someone could get a lot out of this movie.

The fact that this movie has a 3.7 rating on IMDb is ridiculous. I don't see how somebody could not like this movie. Why is racism in early 70s Philadelphia unbelievable? How are Terrence Howard and Tom Arnold not good in this movie? Terrence Howard as Jim Ellis is one of the most inspirational coaches in any movie I've ever seen. The script is better than some people say and every character is believable-some more than others-but regardless. From the start of the movie all the way to the end I was glued to the TV. Who cares if the movie is "predictable": it's a TRUE story, OF COURSE IT'S PREDICTABLE. Some people are ridiculous. Anybody that gives this movie lower than 7 stars is obviously a complete moron. I'm giving this 10 stars because it damn well deserves it.

Anybody who reads this comments prior to seeing the movie, don't believe a word they say: they're all wrong.

It's obvious that a lot of people giving PRIDE a "1" are reacting to the trailers and radio ads that make this movie come off as a "black vs. white" thang. In reality, the movie it self is much more nuanced and filled with universal themes. It's been said that the achievement in sport by people of color is responsible more than anything to bring a semblance of equality in America. In sports, it's mathematical. A strike is a strike, a touchdown's a touchdown no matter who throws it. PRIDE is worth supporting because it shines light on a real-life person who used sports to teach young kids there's a bigger world past the playground, and if you develop your talents you won't have to fall back on the race card to catch breaks. Pride is a solid sports flick with strong performances by all that will suffer because of some unimaginative and lazy marketing. If you like Terrence Howard or Bernie Mac or even Kimberly Elise, make this one worth your time. Otherwise, wait for the Mark Gastineau story.

Pride is about an African-American swim coach, Jim Ellis (Terrence Howard), who rebuilds a swimming pool in a Philadelphia Recreation center and starts an all-black swim team. Overall the acting is a average and sometimes corny, but hey that's what happens when you hire Tom Arnold and Bernie Mac to try to be serious actors. Terrence Howard does a pretty good job as Jim Ellis, but he does cry a bit much.

The movie does not provide an accurate portrayal of swimming, however. No team with 5 swimmers can win a state meet as team because 5 people can't accumulate enough points even if they were to win every race they swam in. In a swim meet, there is a limit to how many events one person can swim in. Usually its 2 relays and 2 individual events. You get more points if you win an event but you still get points if you finish in like the top 8. If one swimmer from a school gets 1st place, and two swimmers from another school get 2nd and 3rd, then the school that had the 2nd and 3rd place swimmers, gets more points. A big team with a lot of swimmers will beat a small team, even if the small team has good swimmers, so the idea of PDR's small swim team beating a big swim team is not realistic.

I'm not sure how they did it in the 1970's but I doubt they used a gun to start a race. Also, not once did I see any times announced and that's what swimming is all about. Swimming is mainly an individual sport, with the exception of relays. They just put all the individual's points together from a school and make that team points. You swim to make your times better, and if the movie had times in it, then it would have been more authentic.

I did not live in the 1970's, so I don't know if girls swam against guys, but from my experience with swimming I found the idea that Willie (the black girl swimmer) beating all the guys in butterfly is unrealistic. The idea of a girl beating guys is not totally far-fetched. (Hey I know girls that are faster than me in certain events) But in the movie the last meet is supposed to be a state meet or a national meet or something like that, so the guys there are really fast and no girl, even if she is the fastest girl, can beat the fastest guys.

One part that was completely stupid, was in the 1st meet between Main Line and PDR when the white guy swimmer, kicked Hakim in the face during the 50 yard freestyle. Do you have any idea how difficult that would be? Go and try it. Get in a pool with lanes and tell your buddy to swim in the lane next to you and try and kick him after you do a flip turn. First off, to be able to reach the person next to you, both of you would have to swimming really close to the lane line, and most swimmers, when they are racing swim in the middle to avoid running into the lane lines. The part that makes it really hard is the fact that they did it after a flip turn. (For those of you who aren't swimmers that's when you swim into the wall do a somersault, push off the wall, and go back the other way) After a flip turn you are somewhat disoriented and I don't think you would be able to reach over and kick the guy swimming next to you.

The movie is inspiring, but it could have been a lot better if they had a more experienced director.