Any chance of this being good? - Rambo: Last Blood (2019) Discussion

[–] PhoenixVanguard (45) 5 years ago

I think has a very good chance of being good. The last one was great and didn't shy away from showing the violent consequences of using a .50 calibre machine gun on a man. Furthermore, this one is directed by Adrian Grunberg, who directed a great film called Get The Gringo starring Mel Gibson (which is set in a Mexican prison), and also acted as First Assistant Director on Apocalypto (another great film).

reply

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 5 years ago

Smokin Aces also had an excellent .50 cal scene.

reply

[–] Galactus03 (4373) 5 years ago

Stallone has been enjoying a revival since Rocky Balboa. Almost 13 years now.

reply

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 5 years ago

I gave up on Rambo with the last one. They had a real chance to correct the mistake of Rambo 3 which praised Bin Laden's Mujahideen back in 1988. Rambo 4 could've been all about that mistake, but instead they went to Burma, and swept 3 under the rug by changing the title card. This one's in Mexico? Maybe Rambo can pretend he's doing the US a favor by putting a dent in the drug war. No thanks. I'm out.

reply

[–] PhoenixVanguard (45) 5 years ago

There was no "mistake" in Rambo 3. The US was supporting the Majahideen in their war against the USSR. Even Ronald Reagan, the US president at the time, called the Mujahideen freedom fighters who "are defending principles of independence and freedom that form the basis of global security and stability".

Reagan also went on to declare March 21st "Afghanistan Day" which "will serve to recall ... the principles involved when a people struggles for the freedom to determine its own future, the right to be free of foreign interference and the right to practice religion according to the dictates of conscience". This was the official position of the US during the Soviet-Afghan war from 1979 to 1989. They were supporting the Mujahideen with funding, training, and weapons.

What you call a "mistake" is just a reflection of changing politics over time, and the desire of the US to manoeuvre itself into a position to gain power and control over foreign countries. Keep in mind that the US also supported Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq War from 1980 to 1988, providing him with chemical weapons, only to invade in 1991 and again in 2003, for the stated reason of Iraq possessing chemical weapons.

If anyone made a mistake, it was the US government. Unfortunately, the US government, and the US population in general, have an acute case of historical amnesia, preferring to forget the past and always act like their fighting for the good of mankind.

reply

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 5 years ago

My blame wasn't on Rambo 3 as its mistake was an unknowable one. As I wrote, I gave up on 4, not on 3. My blame was on 4 for not addressing it, and also for the franchise sweeping it under the rug by changing Rambo 3's ending title card to save face.... proving indeed it was a mistake to have it in the first place. An unknowable mistake in 1988, but a mistake nonetheless.

reply

[–] PhoenixVanguard (45) 5 years ago

I hear you. I always find there tends to be this uneasy period after the US engages in a war, where the media in general seem reluctant to talk about their actions, let alone cast a critical eye over them. It usually takes about 5 or 10 years for a film company to work up the guts to make a film about the war, and even then they try to focus on the US soldiers somehow being a victim in the whole affair.

I notice that with a lot of films about the Vietnam War, which ended in 1975, but didn't see many films released until 5 or 10 years later. Of course, you had The Deer Hunter released in 1978, but that didn't focus at all on the politics of the war, and instead placed the focus on these poor American soldiers who were never the same, setting the trend for this aggressor-victim mentality.

Green Zone was one of the few films I can remember that addressed the mistakes made by the American government, in that case with regard to WMDs in Iraq. However, it did take 7 years after the Iraq War for it to come out. Considering Rambo 4 was released in 2008, I assume film companies would have found it to be "too soon" to make a film which was critical of the US involvement in Afghanistan. I'm not justifying it, in fact I'm quite critical of it, but it's just a reflection of the US being more incline to produce propaganda that portrays them as "the good guys".

reply

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 5 years ago

There was no problem at all in 2008 to criticize our support of the Mujahideen. It was the plot of Charlie Wilson's War in 2007, which was not a controversial film by any stretch. Even 2005's Munich touched on similar themes. Rambo 4 was the perfect opportunity, but they bitched out. Or they just didn't think of it. Ignorance is an excuse, I guess?

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I think Rambo 4 should have been the final one. It sort of felt like First Blood in which it really acknowledged more of his mental state than the previous two. In R4, they showed him as this faithless, cold bitter man who didnt care about the world. And at the very end of R4, it ended with John, dressed in an identical outfit in First Blood, deciding to return home for the first time in almost 25 or so years.
It left the franchise on a high note.

I used to love watching the credits roll in Rambo 4 because I used to watch John walk down that long path down to the "Rambo" ranch and wonder who was there waiting for him? His father? A brother? Who would be standing there mouth wide open in shock seeing John Rambo return home finally.
The ending to R4 also felt like a loop to me. In the first movie, he was in USA (presumably freshly returned from Vietnam) and in the ending of R4, the blonde preacher lady made John have a change of heart on the world and on himself & if he needed to fight anymore, thus he ended up back in USA again. I always saw the .50 cal massacre at the end of R4 as a way of John getting "war" & "bloodlust" out of his system for good.

Even now, just thinking about that shot of him dressed in jeans and his combat jacket walking down the highway towards his house makes me somewhat emotional, because moviegoers had spent almost 3 decades with Rambo always running around somewhere in Asia or such, mentally damaged and scarred and here he is FINALLY returning home for some sort of peace and closure. It truly felt like a complete character arc for John.

But now...11 years later, we see Rambo isn't at peace AT ALL. This just cheapens the ending and meaning to the last movie. Stallone had intended R4 to be the final one and you can see that intention in the final scene and theme throughout the movie.

I dont know if this will be a good continuation or not, but still optimistic to see it. After all, I have faith that Stallone wouldnt damage Rambo's legacy.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I do like the callbacks and references in the updates Stallone gives and the trailer seems okay. But I think its kind off odd that he is fighting the Cartel? Its a bit odd that someone he cares about just so happens to get taken. Its a bit cliche, so I dont know how to feel about that.

Also, he has short hair which keeps throwing me off haha. Rambo should always have long hair. But, I can see why he would have short hair this time. Perhaps the short hair is more of a visual symbol to the viewer that this is a different kind of Rambo. One who is trying to put his past behind him but is obviously failing at it.

Maybe that old lady he lives with on the ranch cuts his hair just to keep him looking presentable. It would be great to see a scene in the beginning where he has long hair and then she just cuts it all off, much to his protest. (Sort off like a gag)

reply