Jan El Señor
Junior Member
I love everyone.
@janelsenor
Posts: 1,659
Likes: 1,247
|
Post by Jan El Señor on Sept 23, 2019 6:14:40 GMT
Saw this one tonight. Not as bad as parts II or III, but definitely not as good as I or IV. It's a fun epilogue to the series, but I don't think I'll be rewatching it like parts I and IV down the road. I'll wait to see the uncut version before I make my final call on it though. I wasn't that big on IV until I saw the Extended Cut, so you never know....
In a way, this movie steps back from the serious, brutal tone of the last entry and goes back to the over-the-top silliness of the second and third entries. So it felt like a step back to me. Also, the last movie really ended things well, and this movie definitely disrupts the ending of the last one.
While part of me would like Stallone to make a better entry to make up for this one, this movie makes it pretty clear that Stallone is finally looking/acting too old to be believable in these. He went the right route with the way he believably continued the Rocky character in the Creed movies. But I can't think of a way to believably continue this franchise. Just let it die....
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Sept 23, 2019 6:55:20 GMT
What? part 2 is great!
"And these are the people you protect-with your pain! You may scream, there is shame."
And part 3 has the Trautman sidekick stuff.
"How's the wound?"
Rambo: "You taught us to ignore pain remember?"
Traumtan: "Is it working?"
Rambo: "not really."
|
|
Jan El Señor
Junior Member
I love everyone.
@janelsenor
Posts: 1,659
Likes: 1,247
|
Post by Jan El Señor on Sept 23, 2019 13:22:10 GMT
What? part 2 is great! And part 3 has the Trautman sidekick stuff. If you think parts 2 and 3 are good, you'll probably enjoy this one more than I did....
|
|
Jan El Señor
Junior Member
I love everyone.
@janelsenor
Posts: 1,659
Likes: 1,247
|
Post by Jan El Señor on Sept 23, 2019 14:47:36 GMT
Sorry! I know it's all subjective, but Part 2 is terrific. First Blood and Rambo: First Blood Part 2 are better than III and IV in my opinion. IV didn't even feel like a Rambo movie. I get that it's subjective. Because, to me, Rambo: First Blood Part 2 doesn't feel like it belongs in the same universe as First Blood....
|
|
|
Post by James on Sept 23, 2019 15:00:49 GMT
IV didn't even feel like a Rambo movie. I thought IV went back to the more grounded reality of First Blood, with hints of 2 and 3 in the action department. I’m curious to why you think that way.
|
|
Jan El Señor
Junior Member
I love everyone.
@janelsenor
Posts: 1,659
Likes: 1,247
|
Post by Jan El Señor on Sept 23, 2019 16:24:33 GMT
IV didn't even feel like a Rambo movie. I thought IV went back to the more grounded reality of First Blood, with hints of 2 and 3 in the action department. I’m curious to why you think that way. Agreed. In my mind, IV is the only one that really feels like it belongs in the same universe as First Blood....
|
|
|
Post by James on Sept 23, 2019 16:34:20 GMT
I thought IV went back to the more grounded reality of First Blood, with hints of 2 and 3 in the action department. I’m curious to why you think that way. Agreed. In my mind, IV is the only one that really feels like it belongs in the same universe as First Blood.... Truth be told, I like all the sequels. Hopefully when I see this one, that statement stays the same.
|
|
Jan El Señor
Junior Member
I love everyone.
@janelsenor
Posts: 1,659
Likes: 1,247
|
Post by Jan El Señor on Sept 23, 2019 16:50:54 GMT
Agreed. In my mind, IV is the only one that really feels like it belongs in the same universe as First Blood.... Truth be told, I like all the sequels. Hopefully when I see this one, that statement stays the same. If you could enjoy Rambo III, I don't see any reason you couldn't enjoy this one. I even enjoyed it. It was just nowhere near as good as the last one.
|
|
|
Post by James on Sept 23, 2019 17:45:37 GMT
Truth be told, I like all the sequels. Hopefully when I see this one, that statement stays the same. If you could enjoy Rambo III, I don't see any reason you couldn't enjoy this one. I even enjoyed it. It was just nowhere near as good as the last one. That’s the impression I’ve been given from the reviews; just about the same as the others. For that I’m actually far more interested than I was before.
|
|
|
Post by James on Sept 24, 2019 8:59:42 GMT
I thought IV went back to the more grounded reality of First Blood, with hints of 2 and 3 in the action department. I’m curious to why you think that way. First Blood was an original and unique presentation and that is why it is a classic. The setting\cinematography is awesome too. Rambo: First Blood part 2, is also its own movie and I cannot recall any other movie around that time that brought us something on this action scale before. It picks up from the first when Rambo is released from a hard labor prison by Trautman to go on a mission, builds up some exciting tension as Rambo is infiltrating and then once captured, tortured and escaped, it just keeps on getting great. Rambo also goes it alone in both these films.
In Rambo III and Rambo IV, Rambo has another team on his side to help him along, although he is still the main player. IV is also similar to II, in that it was an Asian setting. IV however, had a millennial doco\gritty feel to the filming and the violence was amped up to the 9th degree. It was bloody and graphic, whereas First Blood wasn't and Rambo was more resourceful in just surviving and trapping his pursuers, but not killing them. Part 2, Rambo blew the s<>t out of the enemy, but is was largely just loud noises and explosions with minimal bloodletting, apart from an occasional bullet spray. I think IV came too late and is worlds apart in style from First Blood and 2 and 3 and is nothing like the first.
I have no comment to make on this new one yet, as I haven't yet viewed. That’s understandable. I knew that 4 is the most violent and thus sets itself apart from FB which wasn’t that violent. But I do think that both movies felt like they were the most concerned about his morality, whereas in II and III it just felt like he was doing it as a patriotic thing.
|
|
Jan El Señor
Junior Member
I love everyone.
@janelsenor
Posts: 1,659
Likes: 1,247
|
Post by Jan El Señor on Sept 24, 2019 13:52:52 GMT
That’s understandable. I knew that 4 is the most violent and thus sets itself apart from FB which wasn’t that violent. But I do think that both movies felt like they were the most concerned about his morality, whereas in II and III it just felt like he was doing it as a patriotic thing. Also, FB wasn't as graphically violent because, as much as Rambo was pushed, he knew he wasn't in a real wartime combat situation. He was purposely trying not to kill anyone. Rambo IV is the same Rambo we know from FB in an all out combat scenario. This is war and he is fully unleashed. Although I will say I prefer the Extended Cut from 2010 that dials the graphic violence back a bit. I think the theatrical cut goes a little too far. Plus the Extended Cut delves more into Rambo's motivations for helping the missionaries and I just feel it works better as a whole. II and III don't feel like they even belong in the same universe as FB and Rambo 2008....
|
|
|
Post by James on Sept 24, 2019 15:43:42 GMT
That’s understandable. I knew that 4 is the most violent and thus sets itself apart from FB which wasn’t that violent. But I do think that both movies felt like they were the most concerned about his morality, whereas in II and III it just felt like he was doing it as a patriotic thing. Also, FB wasn't as graphically violent because, as much as Rambo was pushed, he knew he wasn't in a real wartime combat situation. He was purposely trying not to kill anyone. Rambo IV is the same Rambo we know from FB in an all out combat scenario. This is war and he is fully unleashed. Although I will say I prefer the Extended Cut from 2010 that dials the graphic violence back a bit. I think the theatrical cut goes a little too far. Plus the Extended Cut delves more into Rambo's motivations for helping the missionaries and I just feel it works better as a whole. II and III don't feel like they even belong in the same universe as FB and Rambo 2008.... Usually an extended/non-theatrical version would show more blood and explicit content, but that’s interesting.
|
|
Jan El Señor
Junior Member
I love everyone.
@janelsenor
Posts: 1,659
Likes: 1,247
|
Post by Jan El Señor on Sept 24, 2019 16:03:29 GMT
Also, FB wasn't as graphically violent because, as much as Rambo was pushed, he knew he wasn't in a real wartime combat situation. He was purposely trying not to kill anyone. Rambo IV is the same Rambo we know from FB in an all out combat scenario. This is war and he is fully unleashed. Although I will say I prefer the Extended Cut from 2010 that dials the graphic violence back a bit. I think the theatrical cut goes a little too far. Plus the Extended Cut delves more into Rambo's motivations for helping the missionaries and I just feel it works better as a whole. II and III don't feel like they even belong in the same universe as FB and Rambo 2008.... Usually an extended/non-theatrical version would show more blood and explicit content, but that’s interesting. This Extended Cut is a complete re-edit of the movie that really improves the flow and the story. Don't get me wrong, it's still violent as hell. But it is toned down from the theatrical cut. I highly recommend tracking it down if you've never seen it.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Oct 13, 2019 17:28:55 GMT
That’s understandable. I knew that 4 is the most violent and thus sets itself apart from FB which wasn’t that violent. But I do think that both movies felt like they were the most concerned about his morality, whereas in II and III it just felt like he was doing it as a patriotic thing. Also, FB wasn't as graphically violent because, as much as Rambo was pushed, he knew he wasn't in a real wartime combat situation. He was purposely trying not to kill anyone. Rambo IV is the same Rambo we know from FB in an all out combat scenario. This is war and he is fully unleashed. Although I will say I prefer the Extended Cut from 2010 that dials the graphic violence back a bit. I think the theatrical cut goes a little too far. Plus the Extended Cut delves more into Rambo's motivations for helping the missionaries and I just feel it works better as a whole. II and III don't feel like they even belong in the same universe as FB and Rambo 2008.... I think it had more to do with simply not making Rambo unlikeable in First Blood, iirc in the book in the scene where he escapes the police initially he guts one of the cops who abused him, in the movie I think he broke his arm or something, it wasn't Rambo was restrained mentally but Stallone didn't want Rambo to be unsympathetic, I think is the case with the book and the original script of the movie, it was Sly who wanted Rambo to be more a hero, I wouldn't doubt he also had sequels in his mind at that point which is why he wrote in Rambo surviving in the end rather than dying.
IV is more in line with the Rambo from the novel, he's extreme, brutal and not exactly easy to like, First blood Prt 2 and Rambo 3 feel similar enough but First Blood prt 1 is a middle ground imo, it's half novel & IV Rambo and half FB Prt 2 & Rambo 3 Rambo, personally I hate Rambo IV and prefer the FB part 1 - Rambo 3 variation.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Oct 13, 2019 19:51:18 GMT
I liked the character arc in 4. He's disgruntled and bitter and although he was right about the humanitarian mission-that it would end badly, the missionaries succeeded in changing him-since he decides to go home. It's also Rambo without Trautman.
The first FB is kind of wonky-like the stuff with the national guard. "Who's got the rocket launcher?"
|
|
|
Post by James on Oct 16, 2019 0:53:41 GMT
Usually an extended/non-theatrical version would show more blood and explicit content, but that’s interesting. Haven't seen the extended cut, but there is so much violence and frenetic editing in the action\violence scenes, blink and one would miss any extra blood and gore. I think the editing could’ve been done better but the action itself is still top notch. I also found it to be ambitious with the gore/violence.
|
|
|
Post by James on Oct 16, 2019 1:18:42 GMT
I think the editing could’ve been done better but the action itself is still top notch. I also found it to be ambitious with the gore/violence. Stallone is reputed as saying that he wishes extended cut was the one that was released theatrically. He said something like time pressure to get a release ready and then hindsight a year later allows more room for introspection and what could have worked better.
I did feel the film was a bit too under-nourished dramatic wise. I wanted to see more conflict between the mercs. Rambo IV must also have one of the longest end credit sequences ever that goes on for about 12mins padding out the run time. The meat of the film is over in about 77mins. I don’t pay much attention to credits anyway, so that doesn’t bother me as much.
|
|
|
Post by James on Oct 16, 2019 9:55:43 GMT
I don’t pay much attention to credits anyway, so that doesn’t bother me as much. My point was though, that the film is very short and needed more exposition. Yeah it probably did.
|
|