REVIEW: Rambo (F)

This review is actually written by Matt Anderson, subbing in for Mr. Getahun, who for some reason chose to avoid this one.

Background: After the 2006 release of Rocky Balboa, Slyvester Stallone continues his Farewell Tour by revisiting his other iconic character, John Rambo. Though I can’t honestly say I’ve seen a one of the first three Rambo movies from start-to-finish, being a lifetime subscriber to TNT has given me a fairly decent overview of what we’re dealing with here. Rambo is an ex-Vietnam vet with war in his blood and saltines in his mouth. He generally spends about thirty minutes engaging in some mind-numbingly clunky (and usually indecipherable) dialogue which serves to setup the unleashing of the killing machine that is Rambo, which incidentally is the Japanese word for violence. His opponents thus far have been a small-time police force (I), the Vietnamese (II), and the Russians (III). As for Stallone, at the age of 61 and fresh off an HGH smuggling scandal, cashing in on two characters from the 80s would seem to be a shameful move, but honestly, what else is he gonna do ? He’s Sylvester Stallone. Honestly, have you ever been the eyewitness to a DVD collection that included a Stallone movie in which he wasn’t playing one of these two characters ? Didn’t think so.

Synopsis: Rambo is living in Thailand and working in the snake trade. Along come a group of missionaries from some church in Colorado who need his boat expertise to travel into Burma so they can deliver food and bibles to the oppressed villagers. After rebuffing the leader’s request, the missionaries successfully use the one woman (as played by Julie Benz) in their group to convince Rambo, and off we go to Burma. He drops them off, returns home and then endures (more accurately, we all endure) a flashback montage that serves some sort of purpose. Along comes the leader of the Colorado church, who somehow knows that his group has been kidnapped. He also wants Rambo’s boat experience to take his group of hired mercenaries into Burma to rescue the missionaries. Rambo and the incredibly dumb mercenaries take out the evil Burmese, and we all learn a little something about using our free time wisely. Then at the end Rambo returns to the U.S. to his dad’s horse farm (???).

I Loved:
+ Uh…Rambo killed a fish with a bow-and-arrow. That was pretty cool.

I Liked:
+ Stallone. While other actors his age (DeNiro, Pacino, etc.) are embarrassing themselves as of late, at least Sly is doing what he does best. And really, who else could utter lines like “When you're pushed, killing's as easy as breathing.”

+ There is one great Bad Movie scene where the head missionary and Sara (the obligatory love interest) argue loudly about whether Rambo is worth approaching. The camera pans out and it turns out Rambo is sitting right next to them.

I Disliked:
- Other than Stallone, who is obviously in on the joke, the acting is terrible. The missionaries and the mercenaries all utter their lines like they’re in an actual movie and this is their big break. I predict most of them will be playing Cop #2 for the rest of their lives.

I Hated:
- The new style of making an action movie is just infuriating. Quick cuts and unnecessary close-ups don’t make it more exciting. And another thing, does a head/arm/leg have to fly off every time someone gets shot ? Damn you Braveheart.

- The villain. The key to making a Bad Movie work is having a good villain. This one is so forgettable that I can’t even remember what differentiated him from the other Burmese soldiers. He was either wearing a fedora or had a mustache. And to make matters even worse, Rambo finishes him off in about two seconds.

-The ending. Once the bullets stop flying Sarah and her obnoxious boyfriend are both still alive. They embrace, and the camera shows Rambo with a crushed look on his face, and then it’s off to the horse farm. The ultimate killing machine gets turned into a sexually frustrated horse trainer. Good luck selling Rambo V.

Grade:
Writing – 2
Acting – 3
Production - 6
Emotional Impact - 2
Music - 4
Significance - 1

Total: 18/50= 36% = F

Last Word: This is the part where I’m supposed to talk about how America’s culture of violence (the movie boasts a kill count of 236), Stallone’s trivialization of war, and the sad state of the Hollywood movie. But that would ignore this juicy little nugget---“Reuters reported today (Tuesday). In a report from Yangon, the wire service said that the movie, in which the country's military junta is portrayed as the enemy, is "fast becoming a talking point among a population eager to shake off 45 years of military rule." Reuters indicated that a paraphrased line from the movie, "Live for nothing, die for something," has become a rallying cry within the country and has buoyed the resolve of opponents of the military regime.” Take that Lions for Lambs. And the F rating listed above is unfair, as this movie delivers exactly what its target audience wants, none of which includes emotional impact or solid writing. It would be more fair to compare it to the ultimate Bad Movies (Over the Top and Roadhouse being the standard) and the recent trips down Nostalgia Lane (Rocky Balboa and Die Hard 4). Unfortunately when compared to those four movies, this movie still fails across the board. It doesn’t have the unintentional humor of the first two, nor the intentional humor of the last two. I’m sure you can find something better to do with ninety minutes and ten bucks.