Reply to Topic
Rambo: First Blood Part II tried so hard to out-do its predecessor. The creators of that movie failed in almost every way.
The fact that Rambo is now the hunter and not the hunted ironically diminishes his mystique as a trained killer. Part of what makes Rambo's efforts heroic is the fact that he is struggling through adversity. Part I presents a stark contrast between Rambo's experience in Vietnam and the peace he never was able to experience at home. Rambo's fear about his situation is evident. But that contrast is gone in Part II. Here, Rambo is in actual enemy territory with actual enemies. Yet Rambo seems like less of a badass. In Part I, Rambo doesn't actually kill anyone. Watching the poor, helpless National Guardsmen fall prey to Rambo's non-lethal but dangerous traps paints Rambo as a silent but deadly killer. But in Part II, Rambo is constantly in soldier mode, so there is no contrast between his personality and his actions. it's just Rambo running and gunning with a bow and arrow, of all weapons. This gimmick is pulled out of nowhere and only makes Rambo less realistic.
Despite now having a love interest, Rambo seems less human. In Part I, Rambo's human side was shown in the first few minutes of the movie, where he acts like a normal person talking to the widow of a friend of his. That one scene, which only lasted a few minutes, highlights the tragedy that Rambo wants to live and act like a normal person but cannot escape his past. In Part II, Rambo has a love interest, Co-Bao, but there is absolutely no chemistry between them. The sparse conversations they have--mostly her asking about life in America and him answering in grunts--makes Rambo seem more like a Terminator than a person. Rambo's grief over her death in his arms wasn't convincing the way the death of his friend in Part I was.
Part II's villain, although more outlandishly evil than Part I's, is less compelling of a character. In Part I, when Teasle is introduced, there are a few scenes where he talks with some of the town's residents, with whom he seems to have a genuine connection. His cruelty to Rambo stems from being overprotective toward his town, and although that doesn't justify his actions, it at least illustrates why he acts the way he does. But Murdock's actions were confusing. I never understood why he sabotaged the very mission that, if successful, would make him a hero. When telling a story, it's important to build up hate for the villain to make his defeat more satisfying. But it's hard to hate a villain whose motives aren't clear.
Last, by trying to modernize the message by talking about the POW/MIA issue, the writers end up making the move more dated. Part I's message about the struggles veterans face after coming home from the war could apply to any war. Today, there are plenty of people returning from Afghanistan and Iraq for whom the message in Part I rings clear. But in Part II, the message only applies to a nonexistent issue that was prominent in the 1980s. Rambo's speech to Trautman about wanting his country to love its veterans as much as veterans love their country also seems to come out of nowhere because we see no average civilians in this movie as we did in Part I.
Although I'm ripping this movie apart, it's not a bad movie. It's a stupid, mindless action flick like Kill Bill, Inglourious Basterds, and Top Gun, and that's ok. The bar is low for these types of movies, but unfortunately, so is the ceiling.
The fact that Rambo is now the hunter and not the hunted ironically diminishes his mystique as a trained killer. Part of what makes Rambo's efforts heroic is the fact that he is struggling through adversity. Part I presents a stark contrast between Rambo's experience in Vietnam and the peace he never was able to experience at home. Rambo's fear about his situation is evident. But that contrast is gone in Part II. Here, Rambo is in actual enemy territory with actual enemies. Yet Rambo seems like less of a badass. In Part I, Rambo doesn't actually kill anyone. Watching the poor, helpless National Guardsmen fall prey to Rambo's non-lethal but dangerous traps paints Rambo as a silent but deadly killer. But in Part II, Rambo is constantly in soldier mode, so there is no contrast between his personality and his actions. it's just Rambo running and gunning with a bow and arrow, of all weapons. This gimmick is pulled out of nowhere and only makes Rambo less realistic.
Despite now having a love interest, Rambo seems less human. In Part I, Rambo's human side was shown in the first few minutes of the movie, where he acts like a normal person talking to the widow of a friend of his. That one scene, which only lasted a few minutes, highlights the tragedy that Rambo wants to live and act like a normal person but cannot escape his past. In Part II, Rambo has a love interest, Co-Bao, but there is absolutely no chemistry between them. The sparse conversations they have--mostly her asking about life in America and him answering in grunts--makes Rambo seem more like a Terminator than a person. Rambo's grief over her death in his arms wasn't convincing the way the death of his friend in Part I was.
Part II's villain, although more outlandishly evil than Part I's, is less compelling of a character. In Part I, when Teasle is introduced, there are a few scenes where he talks with some of the town's residents, with whom he seems to have a genuine connection. His cruelty to Rambo stems from being overprotective toward his town, and although that doesn't justify his actions, it at least illustrates why he acts the way he does. But Murdock's actions were confusing. I never understood why he sabotaged the very mission that, if successful, would make him a hero. When telling a story, it's important to build up hate for the villain to make his defeat more satisfying. But it's hard to hate a villain whose motives aren't clear.
Last, by trying to modernize the message by talking about the POW/MIA issue, the writers end up making the move more dated. Part I's message about the struggles veterans face after coming home from the war could apply to any war. Today, there are plenty of people returning from Afghanistan and Iraq for whom the message in Part I rings clear. But in Part II, the message only applies to a nonexistent issue that was prominent in the 1980s. Rambo's speech to Trautman about wanting his country to love its veterans as much as veterans love their country also seems to come out of nowhere because we see no average civilians in this movie as we did in Part I.
Although I'm ripping this movie apart, it's not a bad movie. It's a stupid, mindless action flick like Kill Bill, Inglourious Basterds, and Top Gun, and that's ok. The bar is low for these types of movies, but unfortunately, so is the ceiling.
