2008 Woodie Awards
New Rambo movie both offensive and predictable
Jamie Metrick
Issue date: 2/8/08 Section: Forum
Over 20 years after John Rambo hit the big screen, the Sylvester Stallone character still
endears audiences with his guttural mumbling and thirst for bloody violence. That's what Hollywood bet on with last week's release of Rambo, the third sequel in the First Blood series.
Stallone, who co-wrote and directed, is back, facing a new batch of enemies. Gone are the eccentric Communist bad guys and insidious North Vietnamese rebels. Instead, Stallone must do battle with the malicious Burmese militia to save a group of American Christian missionaries.
The film opens with a montage of atrocities such as child soldiers, mass executions, rape and decapitated bodies covered in flies. Meanwhile, the real Burma is still in the midst of violent political conflict.
Bad taste sums up the premise of Rambo. "It was everything I thought it would be and worse," Ryan Furlough, a junior, said.
The villains are Asian heathens; the good guys are Caucasian Christians. The evil Burmese General kidnaps boy soldiers, burns villages, is a homosexual pedophile and, most dastardly of all, has a Fu Manchu moustache. Rambo saves the only female missionary, a pretty blonde, from savage soldiers. The native Karen rebels cannot take down the militia, but Rambo and seven Western mercenaries can wipe out a hundred men in an hour.
The message in Rambo is that the only way to stop violent oppression is to fight it with way more violence. Rambo is as gory as they come; bodies explode on land mines, bullets burst through small children, limbs are blown and hacked off, Rambo rips out a guy's throat with his bare hands. The only winners here are the hard-working fake blood manufacturers.
However, the most offensive thing about Rambo is that it has already made $18.2 million at the box office. Most reviews pan the film, "(Rambo) embodies enough jingoistic Imperialism to make Kipling puff up his chest with pride," scoffs KillerMovieReviews.com.
The acting is bad, the sparse dialogue lousy and there are too many close-ups of Stallone's leathery, scarred mug. Even if you're there for fantastic violence, Rambo's first half is too depressing. And it's hard to enjoy the explosive finale as the Burmese are still in turmoil while you're sitting in a theater, entertained by their suffering.
endears audiences with his guttural mumbling and thirst for bloody violence. That's what Hollywood bet on with last week's release of Rambo, the third sequel in the First Blood series.
Stallone, who co-wrote and directed, is back, facing a new batch of enemies. Gone are the eccentric Communist bad guys and insidious North Vietnamese rebels. Instead, Stallone must do battle with the malicious Burmese militia to save a group of American Christian missionaries.
The film opens with a montage of atrocities such as child soldiers, mass executions, rape and decapitated bodies covered in flies. Meanwhile, the real Burma is still in the midst of violent political conflict.
Bad taste sums up the premise of Rambo. "It was everything I thought it would be and worse," Ryan Furlough, a junior, said.
The villains are Asian heathens; the good guys are Caucasian Christians. The evil Burmese General kidnaps boy soldiers, burns villages, is a homosexual pedophile and, most dastardly of all, has a Fu Manchu moustache. Rambo saves the only female missionary, a pretty blonde, from savage soldiers. The native Karen rebels cannot take down the militia, but Rambo and seven Western mercenaries can wipe out a hundred men in an hour.
The message in Rambo is that the only way to stop violent oppression is to fight it with way more violence. Rambo is as gory as they come; bodies explode on land mines, bullets burst through small children, limbs are blown and hacked off, Rambo rips out a guy's throat with his bare hands. The only winners here are the hard-working fake blood manufacturers.
However, the most offensive thing about Rambo is that it has already made $18.2 million at the box office. Most reviews pan the film, "(Rambo) embodies enough jingoistic Imperialism to make Kipling puff up his chest with pride," scoffs KillerMovieReviews.com.
The acting is bad, the sparse dialogue lousy and there are too many close-ups of Stallone's leathery, scarred mug. Even if you're there for fantastic violence, Rambo's first half is too depressing. And it's hard to enjoy the explosive finale as the Burmese are still in turmoil while you're sitting in a theater, entertained by their suffering.
Be the first to comment on this story