Alone, I went to see Rambo 4 last night. I thought it might suck a lot, although I was hopeful because Tom had liked it so much. And as it turned out, I did too. It was pretty intense and visceral and you couldn't really say it romanticized violence. I don't feel like the Rambos are about glorifying violence in any sense. I reckon their just trying to make us think about that side of ourselves. The bit with the rock at the end didn't feel like it was trying to demonstrate that violence was right and necessary, just that everyone has a breaking point.
The fourth film looked much, much better than the others. I think they took a lot more care. It was still a simple film, without a lot of nuance. And it is the same ideas, but then the issues haven't changed that much. A lot of stuff happens in this film that looks like it's demonisation because it is so unbelievably barbaric. I don't know much about Myanmar, but having read a little about the Khmer Rouge, I didn't doubt that any of the stuff that happened in this film was based on true stories.
Most people would probably hate it, and there's plenty to hate. And plenty of killing. I'd reckon only about half of it is done by John himself though.
It’s a good film if you go in with the right expectations. That is, the expectation that, on average, 2.59 people will be killed per min.
http://pics.livejournal.com/sean_kennedy/pic/0003b9kc
Miles / 9:33am / 23 March 2008
rambo. i think im confusing rambo with ‘rocky’. i think the rambos are just a bit full-on with the violence… perhaps i prefer the ‘period’ costuming of rocky– (80’s style tracksuits!?! and ‘eye of the tiger’ as a cheezy funny memory). next time you go see a movie like that & would like some company– give us a bell– if you dont mind me laughing all the way through it…
van / 1:31pm / 27 March 2008
I will. I don’t know how often I end up seeing movies like that, but I will ask you if I do.
Are you thinking like Eddie Murphy movies? I mostly want to punch him.
Ryan / 9:06pm / 27 March 2008