John Rambo (Rambo 4) - Really damn violent! :D

dvdvision · Post by **dvdvision** » 29 Jan 2008, 08:11

I love Rambo 3 and fails to understand why so many think part 2 is better.

Part 2 is an ultra low budget movie. Just listen to the commentary by late director GP Cosmatos on the DVD, he did manage to make it look a higher budget than actual, but really, the movie was done in the editing room. I mean the swamp where Rambo is hanged, is full of instant coffee to make the water look like swamp LOL. It's all shot in mexico in carefully selected locations, no more distant than 5mn on foot than the stars hotel, and the base where Charles Napier and his gang resides is clearly just a warehouse with some empty crates and fake 1986 computers walls that look as cheap as the Buck Rogers TV series. Of course, the acting is superb, and helps, but it as B written all over it.

In comparison, 3 is an A big budget epic, right from the first frame, you can see there's much more production values up there, the attack of the russian camp is great, and the underground chase fantastic. I fail to see any action scene in 2 as good as the underground fight, where Rambo blows up russians with his bow and arrows. Of course it's silly, but no more than 2. I think 3 is less regarded just because it came out too late in the 80's, and wasn't a smash it as 2.

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 29 Jan 2008, 10:37

I never expected to have to say that to a movie friend, but a high budget film isn't automatically good, or better than a low budget film.

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 29 Jan 2008, 13:54

Old Pang Yau wrote:So I take it this new Rambo will be in the Guinness Book of World Records for most violent film (or whatever category Rambo III was in).

AFAIK Hard Boiled still has the highest body count in a live-action Action genre film. Rambo 4 is probably tied at 2nd or 3rd with Equilibrium (which also has a body count of 236, according to imdb).

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 29 Jan 2008, 14:43

EvaUnit02 wrote:Equilibrium (which also has a body count of 236, according to imdb).

Does that count the people who were bored to death watching it?

Old Pang Yau · Post by **Old Pang Yau** » 29 Jan 2008, 15:51

dvdvision wrote:I love Rambo 3 and fails to understand why so many think part 2 is better.

Part 2 is an ultra low budget movie. Just listen to the commentary by late director GP Cosmatos on the DVD, he did manage to make it look a higher budget than actual, but really, the movie was done in the editing room. I mean the swamp where Rambo is hanged, is full of instant coffee to make the water look like swamp LOL. It's all shot in mexico in carefully selected locations, no more distant than 5mn on foot than the stars hotel, and the base where Charles Napier and his gang resides is clearly just a warehouse with some empty crates and fake 1986 computers walls that look as cheap as the Buck Rogers TV series. Of course, the acting is superb, and helps, but it as B written all over it.

In comparison, 3 is an A big budget epic, right from the first frame, you can see there's much more production values up there, the attack of the russian camp is great, and the underground chase fantastic. I fail to see any action scene in 2 as good as the underground fight, where Rambo blows up russians with his bow and arrows. Of course it's silly, but no more than 2. I think 3 is less regarded just because it came out too late in the 80's, and wasn't a smash it as 2.

2 seems to stand out more because it seemed like it had more variety in its action than 3. 3 had too many similar looking sequences. Plus, 2 had more of an "America is the real bad guy, not just Vietnam/Russia" with the whole thing with Murdock. Let's not forget that in 3, they tried giving Rambo one liners to match with Schwarzenegger:

Trautman: [After Rambo dodges flaming helicopter] How are you, John?
Rambo: Well done.

Trautman: Sorry I got you into this.
Rambo: [Rather playfully] No you're not.

Rambo: You taught us to ignore pain.
Trautman: Is it working?
Rambo: Not really. No offense.

Rambo in 3 didn't quite seem the same, I dunno... maybe it's just me

dvdvision · Post by **dvdvision** » 29 Jan 2008, 16:56

I love these lines ! In the deleted scenes, there's an even crazier line, when the bad guy ask "who is this ?", Rambo answers "a lost tourist !" instead of the line "I'm your worst nightmare" which ended up in the final cut.

Any movie with the blue dialog

"what is this ?"
"Blue light"
"what does it do ?"
"blue"

should be reissued in a special 4 disc extended edition with all the making of, audio commentaries, new documentary one can think of. Part 3 was the true lost masterpiece

I agree better budget doesn't make better films, but I think, speaking of cinematography, that 3 is more pleasing and "well done" than part 2 which I always found cheap. 1 was cheap, but great anyway, 2 seems so caricatural to me, especially the love story "you did it, Rambo !", the action i found totally stupid with many shots a bit porno like. Nonetheless, I think it worked well with Cobra.

Old Pang Yau · Post by **Old Pang Yau** » 29 Jan 2008, 17:29

Well, the "blue light" dialogue seems a lot more subtle. Rambo just gives his direct-to-the-point answer. "What does it do?" "Turns blue." But, either way, both 2 and 3 pale in comparison to the new film...

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 29 Jan 2008, 17:34

My favourite bit is after Rambo has been beaten, stabbed, gouged, shot at, and generally fucked over, and Trautman says (deadpan): "How are ya?"

dvdvision · Post by **dvdvision** » 29 Jan 2008, 17:37

"What do you suggest now ?"

"Fuck them !" before going two against the whole russian army
:shock: :shock: :shock:

Masterpiece !

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 30 Jan 2008, 23:48

Passed '18' uncut for 'very strong bloody violence'.

http://www.bbfc.co.uk/website/Classifie ... enDocument

Old Pang Yau · Post by **Old Pang Yau** » 31 Jan 2008, 00:59

Btw, Meet the Spartans has dropped like a rock in the daily box office, and Rambo has taken over since Sunday.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 31 Jan 2008, 01:15

Markgway wrote:Passed '18' uncut for 'very strong bloody violence'.

http://www.bbfc.co.uk/website/Classifie ... enDocument

I'm suddenly interested after hearing that. I cannot say I was before. It makes for a wonderful change to see an 18 rated action film, with lots of violence and bad language.

I should check out First Blood though. Part 1 is the best right?

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 31 Jan 2008, 01:46

bradavon wrote:I should check out First Blood though. Part 1 is the best right?

Most definitely, First Blood passes for "legitimate" cinema and is pretty damn good.

The series devolves into Reganite "The Reds are bad" hockum with Rambo: First Blood Part Two. No.2 at least is still a super fun 80's action and is better than Commando. I can't remember Rambo 3, so I can't comment.

Old Pang Yau · Post by **Old Pang Yau** » 31 Jan 2008, 02:50

EvaUnit02 wrote:The series devolves into Reganite "The Reds are bad" hockum with Rambo: First Blood Part Two. No.2 at least is still a super fun 80's action and is better than Commando. I can't remember Rambo 3, so I can't comment.

Well, Rambo III was basically First Blood Part II, but missing most of the fun

dvdvision · Post by **dvdvision** » 31 Jan 2008, 07:25

Commando is way better than either Rambo 2 or 3 !

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 31 Jan 2008, 08:36

I'll check out the Rambos as well.
UK Rambo III is cut right?

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 31 Jan 2008, 11:07

Rambo 3 was great and very much underrated.i love them all,endless rewatch value.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 31 Jan 2008, 13:06

grim_tales wrote:UK Rambo III is cut right?

Only an illegal horsetrip (2 secs).

You asked me that not long ago. 8)

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 31 Jan 2008, 14:30

LOL, just heard that the film passed uncut in France with a 12-rating.

Is that true, Tom?

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 31 Jan 2008, 14:33

The French give everything a '12' unless its hardcore porn.

Shagfest 'Betty Blue' was an uncut 'U'.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 31 Jan 2008, 15:09

Swimming Pool was a U, 15 here and R in America (I think cut).

Interestingly the French aren't any more sick than the rest of us, nor is there any evidence (AFAIK) to show the French people commit violent acts more or it hurts them more seeing violent/sexual imagery at a young age. They do generally have a more open mind to sex than say the Brits, Yanks or Germans though.

What does this say about all these ratings?

EvaUnit02 wrote:I should check out First Blood though. Part 1 is the best right?

Most definitely, First Blood passes for "legitimate" cinema and is pretty damn good.[/quote]
Thanks, I'll have to check it out.

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 31 Jan 2008, 15:31

bradavon wrote:Interestingly the French aren't any more sick than the rest of us, nor is there any evidence (AFAIK) to show the French people commit violent acts more or it hurts them more seeing violent/sexual imagery at a young age. They do generally have a more open mind to sex than say the Brits, Yanks or Germans though.

LOL! How many generalistations did YOU count in this post?

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 31 Jan 2008, 16:41

There's nothing wrong with generalisations when the writer acknowledges them.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 31 Jan 2008, 17:08

Markgway wrote:
grim_tales wrote:UK Rambo III is cut right?
Only an illegal horsetrip (2 secs).

You asked me that not long ago. 8)

I remember now 8)
On film ratings, in France, American Beauty had a U rating (!) in the UK it was an 18...

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 04 Feb 2008, 16:00

RAMBO's dropped to #6 in its second week.

Not good. (And it's STILL a place behind MEET THE SPARTANS)

The new #1 you ask?

http://www.imdb.com/chart/

I shit you not.