Adonis loses to Conlan on a split decision, and in my opinion that is the smartest choice the film makes, because the result is not the point. He goes all twelve rounds, puts the champion on the canvas and earns the Liverpool crowd, much as Rocky Balboa's close loss to Apollo Creed did in Rocky (1976). Rocky II then opens right after that loss, which tells you how the saga treats a defeat: as the start of the next story, not the end of this one.
So, is Creed just a remake of Rocky? It could be argued that the outline is familiar, since both films feature an outsider, a mentor and a title fight that ends in a loss. Yet the film moves the weight onto Rocky, who now has lymphoma and refuses treatment until Adonis forces the issue from a jail cell. The trade is neat: Rocky trains Adonis, and Adonis gets Rocky to fight for his own life. Compare that with Rocky V, where a brain condition ends Rocky's boxing career and the film spends its running time on a young protege, Tommy Gunn. Creed keeps the mentor and student pairing but lets the student care about the mentor, and I think that is why it lands better.
The staging helps. The title bout was shot with a real Everton crowd at Goodison Park, and three of the cast, Tony Bellew, Gabriel Rosado and Andre Ward, are professional boxers, according to Bellew. Creed had a $35 million budget, and that scale shows in a stadium fight. The ring work still follows the saga's rule that a fight tells you who is hurting.
The final scene on the Philadelphia Museum of Art steps shows a frail but recovering Rocky beside Adonis, and it hands the saga's best known image to a new fighter. It also pays off later. By the start of Creed II, Adonis has become world heavyweight champion, and the Drago family returns as the story of Apollo's death is reopened.
Is Creed 1 a good movie? Perhaps the better question is whether it works as both a restart and a sequel, and I think it does, with the fights built around who is hurting and what each man needs from the other.