[quote=“Angel”]
Rambo got an R18+ rating here.
[/quote]
Same here but that’s much better than what the germans got… which is minus one minute from the running time.
Gonna see the film tomorrow when it opens here.
in Austria you can watch it from 16 up and it’s uncut. Seen it twice.
I just saw it tonight. It’s pretty good. Got some awesome action scenes.
Rambo (USA, 2008) – 9/10
Stallone ages like wine, it seems. In Rambo his charisma has reached an almost inhuman level. Perfect to make John Rambo a character bigger than life. No need for backstory or big words. In fact, most of the time Stallone remains silent, and when he does opens his mouth he mumbles something about how you can’t change what you are and how killing is as easy as breathing. Brilliant. The film’s body is as fit as that of a supermodel, which is both a good and a bad thing. You gotta admire how perfectly the film is put together with no filler scenes or fat anywhere. The film reaches its finale almost too soon. But, it’s a finale that makes you happy. When Rambo grabs the big machine gun for the first time half of the audince falls off their chairs. And 10 minutes later they leave the theatre with a Jack Nicholson / The Joker smile on their face. Rambo is cinema.
edit: typo
[quote=“Hung Fist”]
Rambo (USA, 2008) – 9/10
Stallone ages like wine, it seems. In Rambo his charisma has reached an almost inhumane level. Perfect to make John Rambo a character bigger than life. No need for backstory or big words. In fact, most of the time Stallone remains silent, and when he does opens his mouth he mumbles something about how you can’t change what you are and how killing is as easy as breathing. Brilliant. The film’s body is as fit as that of a supermodel, which is both a good and a bad thing. You gotta admire how perfectly the film is put together with no filler scenes or fat anywhere. The film reaches its finale almost too soon. But, it’s a finale that makes you happy. When Rambo grabs the big machine gun for the first time half of the audince falls off their chairs. And 10 minutes later they leave the theatre with a Jack Nicholson / The Joker smile on their face. Rambo is cinema.
[/quote]
That’d be close to my review. I’m starting to think maybe I should go back and watch Rambo III, I might be pleasantly surprised.
Oh my god, Rambo is such a faggot, you guys are out of it.
;D
Rambo - 4/10
Brilliantly, predictably bad! ;D Watch it just for the ridiculous violence. We just laughed throughout the film, and that’s what we went for.
How is the violence depicted in Rambo ridiculous? Guess what, if you shoot somebody with that calibre, they don’t just lay down on the ground with a red dot somehwere on their body, even if most movies make you think so. The human body is soft, so that shit was depicted real.
You laughed throughout the whole film? Even at the killing and torturing of innocent people, women and children? And at the massacre of a whole village? Which is based on stuff that is really happening over there?
There hasn’t been a better action movie since The Matrix.
The “schoolboy” character was using a .50 cal sniper rifle. Those things blow right through the human body. Hell, they blow right through helicopters. I thought the .50 cal hits were decent enough in Rambo. Even if it wasn’t, I don’t think it would really matter. First Blood is the only previous Rambo film that ever tried to strive for some sense of realism.
But I think Ify was referring to the level of carnage as opposed to the depiction of violence. Just the sheer amount of people he kills.
[quote=“Crazy Kenneth”]
How is the violence depicted in Rambo ridiculous? Guess what, if you shoot somebody with that calibre, they don’t just lay down on the ground with a red dot somehwere on their body, even if most movies make you think so. The human body is soft, so that shit was depicted real.
You laughed throughout the whole film? Even at the killing and torturing of innocent people, women and children? And at the massacre of a whole village? Which is based on stuff that is really happening over there?
There hasn’t been a better action movie since The Matrix.
[/quote]
Dude, I never questioned the impact the bullets made on the human body. In fact, I thought that was very well done. It’s one of my pet peeves where in movies you see people firing their guns to no end yet you hardly see the carnage it causes (cough Heat cough). I was referring to the amount of violence in the film which was insane. That’s the reason we went to watch it.
Obviously I didn’t laugh throughout the entire film, the opening sequence was pretty heart breaking. I love how seriously you’re seeing this film, it obviously was only made to depict violence (and setting it in Burma with the genocides was a kind of reasoning for doing it).
[quote=“Angel”]
But I think Ify was referring to the level of carnage as opposed to the depiction of violence. Just the sheer amount of people he kills.
[/quote]
Correct 
It does what it was made to do, which was to provide ridiculously over the top violence. But as a film, it just doesn’t stand up to even the average films. It was far too short, the plot was basically non-existent, the dialogue was really, really bad and the acting from everyone except maybe Stallone at times was abysmal. But that’s what we expected, and that’s why we went!
what’s odd is that First Blood was a very serious film with very well thought-out dialogue. It is a great movie on many levels. Then came Rambo…boo! This movie sucks balls. Then comes this shit. Same thing with Rocky. The first one was Oscar-worthy…and then came Rocky 2, 3, 4, etc… which all suck to some level.
[quote=“Kilgore Trout”]
what’s odd is that First Blood was a very serious film with very well thought-out dialogue. It is a great movie on many levels. Then came Rambo…boo! This movie sucks balls. Then comes this shit. Same thing with Rocky. The first one was Oscar-worthy…and then came Rocky 2, 3, 4, etc… which all suck to some level.
[/quote]
First Blood was like an entirely different film to the others. It was a serious film about Vietnam and then you get Rambo: First Blood Part 2 where as soon as the film starts they go into exposition and get the story over in about ten minutes. I wonder why they changed so much?
Why can’t people be more versatile and appreciate both a serious drama and an awesome action-fest?
I love First Blood because it’s so captivating and thrilling. It’s a great drama with a great atmosphere.
Rambo - First Blood Part 2 was a change in tone. The action finale is awesome and beyond comparison. It’s great to see Rambo win.
The third one was a great adventure/action movie, also well made.
The fourth one was like a gift from heaven to me. Finally an action movie again that is simple, cuts the bullcrap and delivers the goods, with a “hard R”-rating.
And if the film snobs could look past all the violence and simpleness of the story, they might see that each Rambo movie has a message too:
the first one of course makes comments about how a country or parts of it is treating Vietnam vets, and shows their trauma.
the second one raised awareness of the US soldiers who are missing in action and still POW in Vietnam, a much debated and delicate issue for sure.
the third one focused on the whole Afghanistan/Russia thing
and the third one brings to attention the Burma situation.
If they didn’t have a message, they’d be just as great to me. I’m just saying there is more to them and you have to respect Stallone for this, if you don’t already respect him for his huge impact on popular culture by creating two of the most legendary and iconic figures in movie history.
With Rocky, parts 1-4 all rule. Idiot people complain that IV is dated and cheesy, but it’s my favourite one. montages a plenty, a great score and a great fight.
Nr. 5 and 6 weren’t really necessary, although 6 was good.
i think the first one got an Oscar because it refelcted updon the zeitgeist and feelings of the american population at that time. something i don’t care about when i watch it today.
Mad Max didn’t get an oscar either, but it rules.
[quote=“Crazy Kenneth”]
Mad Max didn’t get an oscar either, but it rules.
[/quote]
Mad Max is a better film than all the Rambo films. Not trying to make the Rambo films out to be shit or anything, but Mad Max is in a whole other league of awesomeness.
But I do agree with you. I’ve never bought into the “style over substance” argument. It’s bullshit. Just look at De Palma, he’s unashamedly a formalist who often couldn’t really give a shit about the story or developing characters. (No one take this the wrong way. I am not saying that De Palma’s films have no story or don’t have good characters. But De Palma is usually less concerned with the logistics of the story than he is with the technique of the film. He isn’t a humanist director like Kurosawa.)
[quote=“Crazy Kenneth”]
The third one was a great adventure/action movie, also well made.
[/quote]
There was nothing adventurous about it. He just killed a lot of people.
I was actually having an argument with someone the other day about the new Rambo. He said it was shit and there was no story. I said: “Honestly, if there had been a story - I would have been disappointed.” 
[quote=“Crazy Kenneth”]
Why can’t people be more versatile and appreciate both a serious drama and an awesome action-fest?
I love First Blood because it’s so captivating and thrilling. It’s a great drama with a great atmosphere.
Rambo - First Blood Part 2 was a change in tone. The action finale is awesome and beyond comparison. It’s great to see Rambo win.
The third one was a great adventure/action movie, also well made.
The fourth one was like a gift from heaven to me. Finally an action movie again that is simple, cuts the bullcrap and delivers the goods, with a “hard R”-rating.
And if the film snobs could look past all the violence and simpleness of the story, they might see that each Rambo movie has a message too:
the first one of course makes comments about how a country or parts of it is treating Vietnam vets, and shows their trauma.
the second one raised awareness of the US soldiers who are missing in action and still POW in Vietnam, a much debated and delicate issue for sure.
the third one focused on the whole Afghanistan/Russia thing
and the third one brings to attention the Burma situation.
If they didn’t have a message, they’d be just as great to me. I’m just saying there is more to them and you have to respect Stallone for this, if you don’t already respect him for his huge impact on popular culture by creating two of the most legendary and iconic figures in movie history.
With Rocky, parts 1-4 all rule. Idiot people complain that IV is dated and cheesy, but it’s my favourite one. montages a plenty, a great score and a great fight.
Nr. 5 and 6 weren’t really necessary, although 6 was good.
i think the first one got an Oscar because it refelcted updon the zeitgeist and feelings of the american population at that time. something i don’t care about when i watch it today.
Mad Max didn’t get an oscar either, but it rules.
[/quote]
You seriously just summed up everything I was going to say. I couldn’t agree with you more.
Not about decades I think.But I still like it.I am hoping to watch more movies of Rambo.
Not about decades I think.But i still like.Hope to watch more movies of Rambo.