 |
Title: Rambo
|
Whether you love him or hate it, you have to admire Sylvester Stallone for giving the notion that you have to be a young man to make action films the middle finger. Yeah, yeah, I was one of those people who was into that whole “dude, you’re too old to be making these movies” ridicule, but I have to admit, “Rocky Balboa” proved to be a shockingly good film. If you may recall, it made my “Top Ten” list for 2006, placing at number four. Many people I know were shocked that I did this, but I must acknowledge quality where I see it. Which brings us to “Rambo,” where the end results are such a mixed blessing, that reviewing the film ends up being more complicated then it needs to be.
“Rambo” follows the title character, now living in Thailand, catching snakes for a living. He’s approached by a Christian ministry who hires him to take them to a village in Burma, an area engulfed in genocide as a result of extreme terrorists. As you can probably imagine something goes wrong, and it’s time for Rambo to save the day. What, you can’t honestly believe I’m spoiling anything there right? Anyway, when the movie opens it sets up a spiritual redemption for Rambo. The leader of the ministry is Sarah (Julie Benz), and while there is no romantic chemistry between the two, you can feel that if anyone can lead Rambo away from the rough life he lives, it’s her.
So it’s no surprise that when it comes time to save the missionaries, Rambo stays behind a few minutes longer to insure that Sarah gets rescued. Like “Rocky Balboa,” “Rambo” feels like it wants to be a solid closing on this characters life. The movie certainly sets itself up to be much deeper then it needs to be, but I welcomed the spiritual aspects of the movie. Then the action starts. And the bullets fly. And the limbs fly off. And...my, oh my, what a savage movie this turns out to be. When Stallone promised the final installment of the Rambo series would be the darkest, he wasn’t kidding. The amount of gore, blood, and violence in this movie out-do’s the previous three films. Unlike the forth Die Hard movie, “Rambo” retains it’s R rating, and it’s a very hard R.
This movie is as violent as “Saving Private Ryan,” and since it’s not nearly as historically important as that film, one has to wonder how much violence you can have before you get an NC-17. But I digress, chances are you aren’t reading this review because you want to know whether or not “Rambo” is intellectual entertainment, you just want to know if Rambo can still kick butt and take names. If that’s all you want, then the answer is yes, yes, and once again yes. Rambo is still “the man,” so you can still feel good about that action figure you have on your desk, the one that you saved from when the cartoon was still on TV. Though the movie still has the same amount of action from the previous films, the stark realism in the violence will likely have a different effect on you.
People in the theater I attended were shocked beyond belief. For many, I feel this film will be unpleasant to watch. It’s also strange that despite the title of the movie, Rambo himself feels reduced to a supporting role, appearing in roughly less then half the movie, and not doing much of anything significant (except killing bad guys of course). So in a sense this movie is a success and a failure. It succeeds in that it gives more action and violence then you could have ever dreamed in a Rambo film. It’s a failure if people think they are going to find themselves entertained.
- -Review By Kevin T. Rodriguez- -