“Creed” And its Sequel: The Sterilizing Effect of Sequilitis

Creed innovated where its sequel fell flat.

On the advent of Creed 3, I, a neutral viewer of the Rocky franchise, thought it was high time to catch up on Creed and see what the buzz was about. Partially pioneering the legacy sequel phenomena with its sheer quality and shocking commercial success, I found Creed even better than I expected. An army’s effort is required for a film to effectively elicit any emotion from even a single audience member, so imagine my surprise when I found myself shadow boxing during Adonis’ gladiatorial bout against his arch rival. Like a puppet on strings, Coogler’s masterful direction had me in the ring with Creed.

Expectations were rightfully high entering the film’s follow up. The original Creed’s success promised a sequel, but the change in direction incited whispers of fear. Without unfairly decrying director Steven Caple Jr  (it is not his fault Coogler creates with a never before seen balance of quality and heart and was primed for Black Panther at the time of the sequel’s release) Creed 2 felt to me like nothing more than a by the numbers commercial sports movie. Meaning, Creed 2 is not a bad film by any means, there is certainly a craft on display worthy of appreciation, but it falls short when attempting to live up to its predecessor. Not at the fault of Steven Caple Jr., who attempts to save the film from oversimplification, Creed 2 falls victim to the sterilizing effect of sequelitis: instead of emotional intelligence and nuance, audiences are presented a familiar walk through the cold streets of Russia with tired themes, shallow dialogue, and a commercialized look that may make for a polished film, but an emotionally distant one.

Which is an ironic notion, as the film immediately establishes itself as being even more centered on emotion than the original. Opening on Drago and his son Viktor in painful silence as the man-animal hybrid that is Viktor Drago gets up and immediately eats, the camera stays close behind Drago, the color palette is cool, and the space is deeply impersonal. Cut to Adonis winning the world heavyweight title, a remarkable success immediately effaced by Adonis’ nervousness when proposing to Bianca. Meaning, in its first moments, Creed 2 establishes themes of nature vs nurture, emotional vulnerability, and fighting for the right cause. While these were executed effectively in the beginning minutes, the content itself speaks to the film’s simplicity. From this intro, I felt as though I knew exactly how this story was going to run its course: the emotionally distant Drago will lose to the vulnerable Creed, who only learns to win by discarding his ego, pride, anxieties and lust for revenge to instead fight for “the love of the game” and “whoever is in his corner.” In other words, it’s predictable, which is disappointing for a sequel to one of the most shocking films at its time. The tired themes of “getting back up” and “fighting for the right reasons” are only satisfying when paired with strong visuals and emotional writing, both of which take a step down in quality from the original. Motivations of revenge, legacy, and overly sentimental character relationships feel less thought out than the web of conflicting emotions in Creed. While in the original Adonis’ humanity and complex character was subtly reinforced through awkward slip ups with Bianca, contrasting thoughts surrounding his legacy and emotional vulnerability, and Creed shadowboxing a projected recording of his father, in the sequel he tells Rocky “I was afraid” the second he is asked about his core weakness. Creed 2 follows plot beats and themes already explored not just in other sports films, but movies in this very franchise. Meanwhile, Creed acted in the same way as its title character: it forged its own path. Creed blended the grit, wisdom and heart of the original Rocky with a new hero, one that introduced complex themes through subtle character work to make for a fleshed out protagonist and story. Meanwhile, Creed 2 retreads old ground, both in themes and iconography, that is only flattened further with dull visuals. 

Again, I do not believe Creed 2 to be a bad film, simply an uninspired one, and this can be further demonstrated through the two film’s uses of franchise iconography. In Creed, we saw Philly revisualized to fit Adonis’ life and character. The city streets are real, populated by a community that learns to accept Adonis for who he is in relation to his emotional journey. The community's development is one to one with Adonis’ willingness to accept it, his past, and himself, which is masterfully visualized in a goosebump-inducing training montage with Philly motorcyclists circling the battered and beaten Adonis. Meanwhile, Creed 2 moves Adonis from Rocky’s shack to out-of-touch L.A. high rises and penthouses before traveling to Moscow. Here, there is no community, there is no connection, there is no reimagining of the heart at the core of what made Rocky so special. While a man is allowed to enjoy the fruits of his labor, the dissonance between Creed and the community that supported him, the city that built a franchise, feels like an extension of the film’s commercialization. “Don’t worry about the people, focus on the fight” says the studios, both in the film and out.

Then there are the Drago’s, who remain a mixed bag in my opinion. While an attempt at emotional depth is certainly appreciated, and I would say the film executes Drago and Viktor’s characters well for the majority of the time, there is still a moment that I find speaks to the film’s emotional simplicity in comparison to the first. While Viktor is being pummeled by Creed, Drago has a change of heart so large it only feels out of character. Rather, the film should have positioned Viktor as rebelling against Drago in the final minutes, choosing to call the fight instead of his emotionally detached, cold father. Having a character actually close to Drago inform this arc would have made the decision feel natural instead of forced, much like Rocky’s decision to visit his son. This is potentially a simple result of there not being enough time to give these characters proper arcs instead of a last minute life altering decision, but it is nevertheless disappointing when the original gave the retired trainer a more developed character than the sequel. 

Lack of innovation applies most accurately to the visuals, which is where the explicit gap in quality between the original and its sequel is best expressed. While Creed 2 feels as if any errors were sanded down, it also feels incredibly sterile, inauthentic even. Much like Philadelphia's presence demonstrates a lack of heart in the sequel, the polished visuals makes Creed 2 lack a distinct identity. Again, ironic for a story about defining one’s own legacy. The change struck me around the ten minute mark, where Rocky and Adonis have an emotional confrontation in front of Rocky’s Philly apartment…captured entirely in shot-reverse format. After this, the subdued, overly clean visuals could not be ignored. While there are some impressive shots, specifically when the motifs of warm and cold colors are utilized, there are other patterns that make the film simply hard to watch exactly because of how easy it is to watch. The original’s fight scenes were electric, shot in a way that, again, had me shadow boxing in my room. The oner is the most notable example, but the transition from the camera hovering around the ring before eventually existing exclusively within it reflects the audience’s growing attachment to Adonis. The stylish dimmed lights in the fifth round of the original’s final fight is replaced by predictably shaky cam coverage and heavy cuts. In this way, beauty is a barrier, a means of distancing the audience from the action in a way that makes every fight feel less tactile, less impactful, and when paired with the lower quality writing along with simplistic emotional development and themes, makes the film overall feel emotionally fraught when compared to the original. Sure, every light is in its perfect position, every shot square with an actor’s face, every wide following leading lines; every cinematic technique is used for its predictable, intentional purpose. Rarely was I surprised by the visuals, and as a result, rarely was I connected to what appeared on screen.

But that wasn’t strictly the case. Creed 2, as I’ve been noting throughout this critique, is a solid movie. The themes may not be as explored with as much depth or innovation as the original, but there is a competent thematic network with a range of characters all relating to the film’s messages. The performances are even stronger than the original, and for what it’s worth, I think the training montage is more exciting in this one than the first. But on that same notion, I found the original’s training montage to be emotionally engaging. I found the original’s writing more surprising, more grounded, and therefore more entertaining and emotionally resonant. Creed’s visuals consistently stunned where Creed 2’s were consistently, well, consistent, to the film’s detriment. Creed 2 is not a bad movie, but a simple one, which when coming off the back of the heartfelt, emotional and innovative legacy sequel, is enough to call Creed 2 a disappointment.