Dir: Sylvester Stallone
Starring: Sylvester Stallone, Julie Benz, Graham McTavish
Run time: 91 minutes
The fourth entry into the Rambo canon had an interesting production history. For years, Sylvester Stallone was hesitant to return to the character. There was also the matter of the series’ original studio Carolco closing its doors after the third film released. All things told, the John Rambo saga seemed to be done and dusted.
Over the years, several ideas for a fourth Rambo movie were written, but Stallone simply didn’t believe in any of them enough to bring the wounded soldier out of retirement. Interestingly, in one version Rambo gets revenge on white supremacists who kidnap his wife and son. Another saw him working as a United Nations diplomat, when the UN headquarters gets taken over by terrorists.
I’m glad that none of these initial drafts saw the light of day, because what we got in the end – despite its lukewarm critical success – felt like it belonged within the Rambo pantheon. Many (but not all) of the key ingredients are there; Rambo’s reluctant return to war, his use of survival tactics, eye-popping action and crazy practical effects.
Although, averaging at 2.59 on-screen kills per minute, it’s clear to see that while 2008’s Rambo has many of the series’ core ingredients, it actually operates in a completely different orbit to the dramatic story of First Blood.
That movie‘s moral narrative about how the US treats wounded veterans is gone, replaced with Stallone’s grunting about finding purpose amid combat. On paper that sounds like the same John Rambo, but overlay it with footage of him evaporating Burmese soldiers with a mounted cannon for ten straight minutes, and something feels lost in the wash.
For the record, I weirdly do enjoy this movie. It makes me feel genuinely uncomfortable and provoked a reaction from me that many movies (action or otherwise, don’t). That’s because I actually find this to be a dirty, mean-spirited movie. It features shocking gore, the slaughter of countless women and children, and a cast that is mostly completely unlikeable.
From Graham McTavish’s lout of a mercenary – who swears at an incredible rate of knots- to the dumb as fuck missionaries who refuse to heed Rambo’s warnings, most of these characters are off putting and give you little to root for. Even lead missionary Sarah (Julie Benz) comes across as a pain in the arse, and her attempts to befriend Rambo feel like an irritating religious foist.
And yet, I still sort of love it. The movie follows basically the same plot beats as First Blood Part II, with Rambo going on an initial mission, something going terribly wrong, leading to an explosive rescue that’s comes with a ludicrous death toll.
If you were wondering, In this movie Rambo himself scores 254 on-screen kills.
That’s actually mental.
I typically prefer my action movies to have a decent plot and characters, and a high kill count alone doesn’t cut it. We need a solid hero to care about, and a proper rationale for all the carnage that unfolds. Rambo doesn’t really have this, but I think it’s still magnetic due to just how violent it is.
The squib work and practical effects are genuinely shocking. Limbs are hacked off, bodies melt or break apart under ceaseless gunfire, and heads snap off after being pelted by high velocity sniper fire. You don’t see this in movies every day, especially not in the PG-13 movie landscape of 2019. So perhaps there’s an element of nostalgia here?
Plot wise it’s even thinner then First Blood Part II, which I reviewed recently. I half-jokingly called the second Rambo outing the best video game movie ever made, but perhaps I was being too hasty. The 2008 sequel confidently steals that crown.
By the time the guns have fallen silent, you’ll feel like you need a shower. There’s a palpable layer of grime and dried blood caked over this movie that tries to make you uncomfortable by depicting the true horrors of war. Maybe in some ways that gives the movie something tangible to say, after all? Or maybe some viewers feels it fetishises the violence?
Either way, the movie provoked a response from me that I hadn’t felt since watching Saving Private Ryan for the first time in the cinema. That same level of shock and morbid awe that plainly states that ‘yes, war is fucking atrocious and humans can be terrible.’
Can Rambo: Last Blood have the same impact? Stay tuned to find out.
Final score: 5 reloads out of 10
Pros:
- For all it’s seemingly trigger happy dumb noise, it’s hard not to feel shocked by what happens in this movie
- Despite a modest $50 million budget, it’s a well made production
- The practical effects (squibs, models, stunts, explosions) are best in class
- That Rambo score still gets the blood pumping
Cons:
- No character is likeable. Not one of them.
- Some of the violence is hard to stomach, such as the village raid where children are shot and/or thrown into fires
- It’s just a nasty, mean spirited movie to be honest. It doesn’t make you feel good by the end.
- While I’m a fan of Graham McTavish his character is just a one note dickhead
The Hipfire 