Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 09/2007

« Of Course! | Main | Bet You'll Yawn! »

January 28, 2008



I was hoping to see a line that showed how many five year olds Rambo could take on in a fight!


Just an example of why every other country in the world thinks we are "stupid americans".


I haven't seen any Rambo or Rocky movies either...I don't know but it just doesn't draw me in...

Vic Rattler

Also haven't seen any Rambo movie, let me guess... he wins?

The first Rocky is pretty great though.


Through no fault of my own, I happened to watch the Rambo kicks Ruskie butt in Afghanistan, whichever one that is in the series. Stallone says maybe 10 words throughout the whole movie, so that's a plus, but the movie as a whole just wasn't good, and not even a so-bad-it's-good kind of way. If I want to watch a musclebound bad actor, I will take Van Damme over Stallone any day.


The original "Rambo" is mostly a character drama. It’s actually a very good movie, and really doesn't seem to fit into the archetype of the rest of the series. The acting in "Rambo" is Sly at his all-time best (maybe a tie with "Copland"), and Brian Dennehy plays his part so well it’s hard to imagine who else could have pulled it off. The next 2 sequels were a sign of the times, living in the 80’s surrounded by Freddy and Jason movies, action heroes, and sugary cereals.
The latest Rambo reminded me a lot of “Tears of the Sun” or “Saving Private Ryan.” Yeah, it’s definitely violent, but it felt like he did it on purpose (directed by Sly) to expose the viewers to how awful things really are in some places of the world. It seemed like the violence was meant to seem more “real,” believe it or not. There was probably too much violence, but I think that’s kinda the whole point of the movie.

Still, the original “Rambo” is, dare I say, an American classic. It’s VERY similar to a Bourne movie rather than a Van Damme-type flick---------a man on the run trying to survive and not be captured, rather than to kill for some movie-scripted purpose. Rent it. Seriously.


Looks like the only thing you're missing out on is lots of blood and gratuitous death. I haven't seen either of these film franchises and I don't think my life is any less full because of it.

Doesn't it say something about the state of American entertainment when the 4th movie in a series has 236 times more people killed than the first movie???????


Note to Janet above:
Stupid Americans???
What about the Japanese and their Godzilla(sorry Bean not your pig) movies, how stupid is that?

Can't be any worse than that????


Bottom line, if you liked the "Bourne" movies, you'll like the FIRST Rambo movie, guaranteed. The monologue Sly delivers at the end is enough to convince you he CAN act (even if it's only apparent in 10% of his roles). And Brian Dennehy, wow...
Ignoring the first Rambo because of the movies that followed is just unfair to yourself. I think calling it an "action" movie isn't even accurate-----I can certainly imagine fans of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th movies would absolutely hate the original Rambo because it's not about guns or war.
I'm trying to think of another series where the first movie was so different from the rest, but I can't. The closest thing I can come to is Friday the 13th-----Jason was the killer in all the movies EXCEPT the first one, where his mother was the killer instead.
Maybe the Batman movies of the 90's? The first one was great, the second one was pretty good, but after that the series became a neon-infested toy seller.
See the first Rambo. Skip the rest.

The comments to this entry are closed.