Rambo Revisited,Revised,Reimagined
The Newest Installment of Stallone's Iconic 80s Franchise
A review of the new Rambo film from a fan's point of view and someone who looks at the character as more than a killing machine.
It is hard to argue with Sylvester Stallone, with a career that spans about forty years, and holds the title of (arguably) biggest action star of the 80s into the 90s. Last year we had Rocky Balboa. Now comes the fourth Rambo, aptly titled Rambo, written and directed by Stallone.
This story starts with news and audio feeds about Burma (Myanmar). We see villagers placed in a life or death game by the local military sadist. The opening sets the stage; people are going to die.
Rambo in Thailand
Then we get our first glimpse at Rambo, living in Thailand the past twenty years. He lives on the river, has a boat, and captures snakes for money. The guy lives pretty much on his own and that suits him.
A group of missionaries come to him to request his boat to go into Burma. Rambo asks if they’re bringing weapons. Their leader Michael (Paul Schultze) says, “Of course not,” to which Rambo replies, “You’re not changing anything”.
The film has received mixed reviews. The Philadelphia Inquirer labeled it a “slab of action porn”. No one can dispute the fact that people die incessantly but there is more to this film.
Rambo saying nothing will change is the most important line in the movie, because change is the underlying theme. Through words or force, perceptions and motives can be changed.
Ultimately, Rambo agrees to take the missionaries when Sarah (Julie Benz) tries to appeal to his humanity, trying to break down the walls. He sees something in her, probably an attraction, but also respect, something Rambo always valued.
The conflict of interest and naïve nature of the missionaries becomes evident when pirates attempt to highjack the boat, demanding Sarah. Rambo intervenes, killing the pirates and is chastised by Michael who says, “It’s never right to take a life”.
Time passes, and the missionaries do their work. Then the world explodes from a vicious attack by the militant forces, causing death and destruction. The missionaries that survive are taken captive. Ten days later, their pastor finds Rambo, explains the situation, and asks him to take a team of mercenaries for an extraction. Rambo agrees, appearing to be a simple boatman. Of course, he is not.
The film is well shot using similar techniques that worked for Balboa. The peak of the film is extraction sequence. The rescue team gives themselves fifteen minutes to get in and out, and the scene plays in close to real time. Stallone uses cover of dusk, muted tones and ambient lighting perfectly. A fantastic point of this entry is the fact that Rambo is not the lone gun. He has ex military men with him, nasty men who know how to kill. In short, he cannot do it alone.
The biggest problem here is the short running time of 91 minutes. Violence and bodies abound, but Stallone could have given more story for the characters. You never quite know these missionaries. The violence might have been better served with a longer introduction act. Twenty years for a character is a long time. What happened after Rambo III?
Another issue is the dated character, which might not find a “new audience”. Still, Rambo as of Feb. 24, 2008 had domestically grossed over forty million (Box Office Mojo, LLC).
A film in a series is part of a collective. To dismiss this film without knowing the series is ludicrous, especially when knowing First Blood, which is much different than the first two sequels. Knowing John Rambo gives the character substance and the ending to this film is perfect for him. This is not an Oscar chaser. This is Rambo, and as it happens, an enjoyable time.
