We all know that movie critics and fans of genre fare get along together like a giant serpent and Conan the Barbarian, but the maddening tug-o-war currently raging over Rambo’s merits is ridiculous. Consider: On IMDB, the Sylvester Stallone sequel has a fantastic user-rating of 8.5/10 based on more than 4,000 votes. This consensus is good enough to put the film at #195 out the top 250 films ever! Lest you think this gap is an anomaly limited to one site, Rotten Tomatoes’s critic meter has Rambo at just 38%, while the site’s users have it at 72%. On Metacritic, based on 19 reviews from the nation’s critics, it’s currently at 46/100, while around 100 users have it at a fantastic 9.1/10.
My review of the film will be in shortly, but we at /Film are more than curious to know what you thought about Rambo. Did the audiences seem this enthused and satisfied at your screening? Do you think the film’s terrible critical reception was enhanced by its lack of advance press screenings, always attributed by writers as a sign of a failed film or even a professional snub? Are New York-based film critics simply smarter than the rest of the human race? I kid. Are online users simply figuring in the film’s ginormous death inflation when compared to its predecessors? Did any of you dig Rocky Balboa but feel let down by Rambo, or vice versa for the bloodletters?
Can we make any sense of this divide? If you were apart of those who helped the film gross $18 million plus this weekend (rather impressive, I’d say), chime in. Somewhere deep in the jungle, Rambo is watching.
January 27th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
I think there needs to be more attention paid to the difference between a film and a movie. Not to split hairs semantically, but what Stallone makes are definitely movies. Entertainment, period. Film is the thing that people study and analyze. Critics — film history teachers, pretentious guys in sweaters, whatever — as educated as they might be, usually fail to see the fucking difference.
Okay, so what I’m saying might sound completely batshit ridiculous, but you know what I mean, right? Entertainment journalists go to school and learn how to professionally evaluate the artistic merit of a motion picture. People who pay nine bucks to see it will walk away feeling a little more satisfied if there was explosions involved.
Ah, Rambo… The great divider.
January 27th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
some people warn that some movies may contain violence well in this the violence may contain a movie and it was awesome
I loved Rambo
January 27th, 2008 at 4:54 pm
When I went and saw Rambo, it was Sat at 11:45 AM. Despite the early time, there was a 3/4 full house and there were audible cheers and high fiving going on. People are INTO this movie. I thought it was great. The best action movie I’ve seen in forever.
January 27th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Most violent movie I’ve ever seen, hands down. It made damned sure that the violence wasn’t entertaining - it had a point. However, the movie itself is basically pretty bad, and just plain weak. Having said that, I really quite enjoyed it.
I would be more verbose, but… I’m a torn man. I KNOW it’s no damned good, but I STILL LIKE IT!
January 27th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
fantastic head loppings and torso halvings - a new action classic.
hard to believe they wouldn’t screen this for reviewers.
oh …wait. right.
January 27th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
Max hit it on the head. Film is meant for study (and such) whereas movies are for the masses.
Rambo, as a movie, was lots of fun. Tons of violence wrapped in a nice little package.
As a film, Rambo is a mess. Dialogue, storytelling, and acting were just…mediocre, at the very best.
But that doesn’t it mean it wasn’t fun as hell!
January 27th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
@Darren
But “bad” in the same way you found Rambo 1, 2 and 3 “bad?”
How do you think Stallone would react if he asked you what you thought of Rambo IV and you replied, “..it’s basically pretty bad, and just plain weak. Having said that, I really quite enjoyed it.”
Hah. Good comments thus far. As Max said this film does seem like “the great divider.”
My question to movie critics/non-fans who paint the town brown with Rambo is this: are you saying with your scathing reviews that you’d rather Stallone stop making movies altogether? Would you rather live in a world where Rocky and Rambo never happened? Or do you look forward to these movies because they justify your feelings about art and commerce and thus give you a sort of warped pleasure by way of their banality?
Mebbs it’s just me, but any film critic who would choose to have Rambo and Rocky never happen to American cinema is in some sort of denial.
January 27th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
This was the funniest film I’ve seen in a while.
SO GOOD
January 27th, 2008 at 5:59 pm
I’m sure the reason why the movie goer rating was so his is because only the type of folks who would see the movie are the type who would like it. All the reviewers were forced to see it.
January 27th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
I await a download version
January 27th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
There’s something to be said about a movie that knows what it’s about and exploits it’s self to the content of an audience within the proper mindset to see it for what it is.
I mean man, you don’t go to McDonald’s for Souffl’e.
January 27th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
@esahn
Since Rambo is the third sequel in a franchise, yours is a valid statement/argument. But if that was the case universally, Saw IV or Spiderman 3 would be ranked (by fans alone) as high (or higher) as those films’ predecessors, or an older action film like Death Wish IV would rank with Death Wish for that matter. Also, there are younger audience members who are new to Rambo this go around.
And for that matter, not all of the 4,000 votes on IMDB come from hardcore Rambo fans. Action fans? Perhaps.
January 27th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
The movie shows the real damage of weapons in combat, not fluffed bullet wounds and gun shot holes. People get dismantled by guns and if you want to see that in a movie, Rambo is it. Stallone is on HGH, completely admits it and I applaud his effort to be in the ridiculous shape he is in for 61 years old. His dedication to his body, your cup of tea or not, is a spectacle in itself.
I can’t wait to convince some of my friends to see it again. This is one you have to see in the theater to get the full experience.
January 27th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
Short movie + extreme violence + little dialogue + neck rippings= Rambo/ Pure movie heaven.
I can’t wait wait to tell my friends. My theater was about 3/4 packed but the theater is pretty big so it is OK
January 27th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
If the masses like it, make more like it. Its that simple.
January 27th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Because for 1.its stallone…the critics were never kind to him..
and 2. its an action movie…it doesnt try to be more or less…if you are comparing this thing to “Juno” or whatever sure your gonna give it a bad rating…but as far as action movies go…this movie was the best action movie ive seen in years! if you love the older rambos, or movies like Total recall, Predator etc…this movies for you
January 27th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
This seems to be the season for split opinions. First Cloverfield, and now Rambo. I went in fully expecting it to suck after rumors of no pre-release screenings for critics and (at the time) 30% on RT.
Imagine my stunned surprise when I ended up thinking it was fantastic!
It’s bloody and gory as hell, as violence SHOULD be in movies, instead of the clean, bloodless and apparently painless death by gunshot shown in so many PG-13 movies.
Great stuff. I gave it 4.5/5 over at Screen Rant.
Looking forward to your review, Pete!
Vic
January 27th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Hunter -
I am a fan of all four, each for their individual merits and deficiencies. The first film has no deficiencies, as far as I’m concerned, and many, many merits. The second film is well, well made, but dumb. It’s technically exciting, with great music and fantastic visuals - the money is on the screen - and I love it because of that. The third one is much like the second one, only with Whitesnake hair and more of what the second one brought us - glorious action!
The fourth one is a different animal entirely. The violence (note: violence, NOT action) and gore in the fourth one is absolutely realistic, and elicits a visceral reaction. It’s horrendous, and it’s exactly what he was going for, I’m sure. The only problem, as some other astute individual pointed out, is that the dialogue is bad, the acting is stilted, and the story is paper-thin, at best.
But… I really enjoyed it. I was exhausted, and sad that it wasn’t nearly as good as the other films, but I did enjoy it. I don’t really have any reasoning as to why this is the case, but I can’t fight it.
January 27th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
I dont go to see movies that often, but as a fan went to see this one, and as a veteran, I am going to see it again, I cannot say that about any other movie. One thing is for sure Burma and the atrocities that happen there are now more known than ever has been in the past by the general public. Turning a blind eye or or being Naive in thinking this is just an action movie is wrong. He (Stallone) put a message out there and he did with out sugarcoating.
Good Job 5/5
January 27th, 2008 at 10:11 pm
I saw Rambo tonight, partly because of the comments in this thread, and it was one of the best movie-going decisions I have made in a long time.
This is one of the most unapologetically violent movies I have ever seen, and I loved every minute of it. What the movie lacks in dialogue and polish, it makes up for in complete and total badassery. I don’t know how, but Stallone still has it.
January 27th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
I have to say that this is by far one of the best action flicks. I know what I’m getting when I see a Rambo film. This however was much darker and much more realistic to me. I loved it! Stallone knew what he was doing. And I bet there is not one of us here that didn’t feel they made the right choice when we saw him use that bow and arrow best action entrance ever.
January 27th, 2008 at 11:36 pm
I thought it was awesome, I had fun and fell back in love with an action hero I forgot about. When that Rambo theme music played I just melted.
On the other hand. I just find it sadly psychotic that nobody cared about families being raped and slaughtered for the profit of a handful of rich old white men every single day. We just go to the mall, and watch Rambo.
I love Rambo. I just felt very out of place watching it this day and age.
January 28th, 2008 at 12:16 am
Oh god…as a movie it was absolutely awful…but it was damn fun to watch.
I have a hard time believing that anyone walked out of that theater thinking that they had just witnessed cinematic excellence…I personally walked gasping for air because I had been laughing almost non-stop for 90 minutes…
Honestly this piece of crap was the funniest movies I’ve sat down and watched since Superbad…
and in terms of it being a legitimate film…seriously who the hell is kidding themselves thinking that that ‘movie’ (because it is certainly not a ‘film’) was legit…it was absurd.
At one point Rambo shoots a man so much that he actually turns into liquid….HE RIPS SOMEONES THROAT OUT FOR GODS SAKE…
January 28th, 2008 at 2:21 am
i haven’t seen the film yet, however i think you need to ask one important question. IF you’re going to see a film you know that’s going to be about violence then do you really expect to see award winning performances, or even an amazing story line?! You just have to look at the previous offerings to know the answer to this. What we like about this film IS the violence, and this is why we’re seeing a split in the critics and the viewers. Personally i think critics are pretty rubbish on the whole, as they always seem to go with the view of a film has to tick certain boxes in their check list to say if it’s good or not. What they don’t do, is review it like a movie goer would, as Darren said, the film was pretty bad but he still liked it. In truth, thats how lot of movie goers will see it. It’s like when i read a review for transformers in The Times, here in the uk. Now, Transformers were a boys toy, and it would follow that it would be a boys film, so why on earth did they send a female reporter who slated it for being a boys film? Honestly, what was the point in writing the review?
I mean even the title of Rambo instantly makes you think of, explosions, guns, etc etc, not some thespian doing a master piece. This is why the critics fail. I ask, do the critics really know what the average movie goer wants? I know there are some critics out there that are good, but alas they are few and far between.
Can’t wait to see this film as i know what to expect, full on violence with the corny line here and there. Perfect cinema style movie.
Sorry about my little rant there.
January 28th, 2008 at 6:46 am
I seen Rambo last night and while I will agree that the film was violent I don’t think it’s far off from say ” Saving Private Ryan” or some of the more violent scenes from “Braveheart”. The reason people are saying it’s violent is because of what the “bad guys” do to everyone, including children.
Anyway I thought the movie was good, but could have been better. There could have been more “Rambo” moments but other then that it was a decent action flick.
January 28th, 2008 at 8:52 am
This film was great (yes I will call it a film). It was fun and had great action. The blood and bodyparts flying where great. It brought me back to the days of the old 80’s action flicks. I enjoyed it very much. Rambo rocks…
January 28th, 2008 at 10:00 am
This was gun porn. Pure and simple gun porn. And it satisfies in the same way.
I’m sure that critics hate regular porn too. But lots of people watch it, and it still makes tons of money.
January 28th, 2008 at 10:09 am
It’s just not accurate to say that critics were never kind to Stallone.
After the first Rocky, Roger Ebert and others said he could be the next Brando.
And is performance in Cop Land was pretty well received across the board.
January 28th, 2008 at 10:34 am
Listen. This is NOT a good movie. Nor is it a great movie, if you thought that’s what I was going to say. What it is, first and foremost, is a violent, unapologetic movie.
Pacing wise, I could have personally used a few more hand-to-hand combat scenes with John, mostly to break up some of the quieter parts, but considering the finished product, there was plenty to like and plenty to be entertained by. I haven’t seen people blow up on screen like this in a very long time, if ever. Stallone’s physicality is not to be messed with, his movements and overall screen presence have, if anything, improved since he was in his late forties.
In terms of a comparison to Rocky Balboa, this movie is fantastically similar. The Rocky movies were just more objectively likable from the getgo. This one has a lot of the same beats, similar flashback sequences, and the same overtly nostalgic feel. Sly knew exactly what he was doing both times (he’s a bright guy, if you don’t agree, fuck you) and accomplished pretty much everything he was going for. That said, I can’t wait for him to open the scope a little bit for part V. Bring on Predator.
January 28th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
This film isn’t gun porn… You would expect more specifics about calibres and jacketing and muzzle velocity, as well as glistening shots of guns being oiled and prepared for play. If you must liken it to pornography (and frankly, why wouldn’t you), I would say it is closer to death pornography.
As for it being on par with SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, it just isn’t. While RYAN was violent, and truly emotionally draining, I don’t recall close-ups of pre-teen boys being slowly bayoneted, or inserts of toddlers being ripped from their mothers’ arms and hurled with disdain into burning buildings. No, this is another ball park entirely.
The people being murdered in this movie weren’t fighting for anything other than their lives. They weren’t soldiers, or freedom fighters, and they were being languidly slaughtered wholesale. That’s just the civilians, mind you - the easily half-hour long soldier holocaust at the hands of Rambo and his mercenary acquaintances is very like a flipbook of a trauma ward’s greatest hits.
No sir, this is much more violent than anything I’ve heard mentioned. It’s in a different league.
January 28th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
I enjoyed the movie thoroughly. Everyone in the packed theater applauded at the end. There has been only a handful of movies that has gotten this response, that I have experienced.
Maybe it is part nostalgia, part being an escapist’s movie, or maybe it was just something to cheer for, but the movie was great.
Way to go Sly!
January 28th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Aside from labeling it as all kinds of non-sexual (I hope) pornography, I think fucked-to-death burning-pile-of-decapitated-explosion movies like that could also be considered cinematic red meat. They’re bloody, manly, maybe partially charred, frowned upon by sandal-wearing intellectuals, and probably not your date’s first choice. Probably not that good for you on a constant basis, but not something to avoid altogether.
After all, a balanced diet is important, right?
January 28th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Rambo is a movie about the Karen people and there struggle. Rambo is just the vessel that tells the story to the world. Now saying this, if this film was done by a more likeable director to the critics we would not have this debate. Rambo is a movie that puts you into the action as soon as the movie begins and keeps you there to the end. The critics should just go and see the movie. Well done, Mr. Stallone, ” LIVE FOR NOTHING OR DIE FOR SOMETHING, YOU’RE CALL”.
January 30th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
Great action movie!!! No crappy wirework, people flying around and doing roundhouse kicks etc….this was great, it brought me back to the good old days when you watched stunts, explosions, pyrotechnics on screen, not computer animation (although Rambo did have some) As for the critics of the movie who gave it bad reviews, they should recognize this movie for what it is, not for what it was never meant to be. It’s a straight forward action movie with an 80’s character returning to the big screen. It was meant to give Rambo one last mission and a send off. These critics don’t seem to get that. What are they looking for, Citizen Cane?
What they are doing is the equivalent of walking into a Keg Steakhouse, sitting down and then complaining that they want to order Japanese food. Don’t go and watch an action movie and then complain that it actually delivered what it promised to. The only people who weren’t blown away by Rambo were these pretentious, snobby “film critics”. Movies are made for the people, not these critics, and the people who have seen this movie all agree it is awesome!
January 30th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
I haven’t seen Rambo, but I’d like to offer my opinion on the difference between critics and audiences. I’m a movie reviewer in Australia, and I’ve noticed an ever-increasing rift between me and the average movie-going public.
I try and review movies for their entertainment values, but over time, this gets corrupted.
As I watch more and more movies, my general standard for ‘entertainment’ becomes different. I believe this is because film critics are comparing movies to other movies that they’ve seen, whereas the audience, especially for big blockbusters, is at the movies for the experience, like an event.
I despised I Am Legend, comparing it to all the other movies that did it better, but friends of mine enjoyed it just because it had monsters in it. C’est la vie.
I’m reminded of one day, when I opened up the Sydney Morning Herald and read the film reviews. They gave Norbit one star, calling it the worst movie of the year. Right next to it was the box-office numbers for Australia, and Norbit was #1. Sigh…
February 1st, 2008 at 1:01 am
ACTION MOVIES ARE BACK! Well 1 is :)
RAMBO IS FANTASTIC! RAMBO IS AWESOME! About time Stallone made a Rambo movie. This one is for the guys and it has been ages since I have seen a “guy movie” and Sly has not only done a great job but has provided with one hell of a entertainer!
I have always been a Rambo and Rocky fan and also a huge Sly fan. Personally I think Sly has the best entertaining movies average when compared to Arnold or Van Damme or Steven Seagal. Try to picture Matt Damon or Keanu Reeves with that now famous 50 cal. gun in Rambo.. it just doesn’t work! Only Sly can pull that off or Arnold.
OH BY THE WAY I NEVER GIVE A S**T ABOUT CRITICS AND THEIR REVIEWS!
As far as reviewing Rambo goes, it will be pretty short. This is an ACTION MOVIE and thats it. Simple story, bad guys being super bad, some missionaries get into trouble with the bad guys and Rambo decides to pull his bow and arrow out and do something about it.
There aren’t many movies where you go into the theater and sit down and the next thing you notice is that the movie is over and time flew by and you are wondering if the movie was only 5 minutes long or what. RAMBO does that to you. Totally blows you away.
Wish Stallone had made it longer, maybe add half an hour more with more focus on Rambo and his trademark guerilla warfare in the jungles. You know the stuff you see in Rambo 1 and 2. That was the only part that I was disappointed about.. WE WANT MORE RAMBO! Other than that the movie kicks ass. Lots of blood and guts, torn limbs. This movie is not for the weak hearted.
For those of you who were not lucky enough to see the previous Rambo movies, I would say watch those first and then go see this one. Somewhere I had read someone say that how the culture is changing and how guys are becoming more soft and metro sexual and sensitive, maybe he was right. I remember how the tv network TBS had “Man movies” and now that channel has turned into “comedy”. Conspiracy of feminists perhaps? lol Who cares!
But yeah, Rambo is an awesome movie for the guys and for Stallone fans and Rambo fans.
WARNING: THIS MOVIE COULD BE DANGEROUS FOR THE WEAK HEARTED.
I hope Sly makes RAMBO 5 real soon and uses that Holy War Treatment script that Alpha1media had published online. That script was an easy way to pull major bucks in from international territories. If you don’t know what I am talking about then just google this: Rambo Holy War Treatment Alpha1media
Here is the link for it as well: http://www.alpha1media.com/files/R_H_W_Treatment.pdf
Seriously guys GO SEE THE MOVIE in theaters. Good thing I didn’t choose to go to Meet the Spartans, then again how could I when Rambo was playing. I am going to see it a few more times and definitely buying the DVD when it comes out.
February 1st, 2008 at 8:55 pm
I was recently asked if the recent RAMBO movie’s violence contained “gratuitous (unecessary)” violence or not. My answer was in the context or applying that question to what the very plot of the movie is based upon I said that there may have been some unecessary violence. Yet based upon what the movie (and the series) is all about, it requires some violence.
What I liked the most about this film was what I believe Stallone played upon us all: The unknown. We know that age & looks working against SLY, and simply wearing-out this character and plot, we didn’t know what would happen to RAMBO as the movie went on. Sylvester played this to the hilt. We went through the movie wondering if RAMBO dies or not. Thus, it was some-what of a roller coaster ride.
Yes, the violence was graphic. Yet, the special effects in almost every violent scene was (what I thought to be) pretty-well put together.
I enjoyed the film. But, I just hope RAMBO retires now!
February 6th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
this movie was tight and more realistic than rambo 2 and not boring like rambo 3, however i did also like the first 2 rambo’s and they all had a point except for part 3 which just plain sucked