Episode 634 - "Rambo: Last Blood" (2019)

Hi everyone!

It’s still catchup week and... oof, today’s film is not a good one. In fact, it’s a bad one and quite clumsy with its story and message, which is a shame given the landmark franchise opener, “First Blood”. It won’t be a favorable review, but don’t let that seem like I hate Sylvester Stallone. You can catch him in both “Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2” (Episode #099) and in Garrett Wright’s review for “Creed II” (Episode #335). And if you haven’t seen it, I have found “The Expendables” to be one of the most self-aware actioners of all time.

Before the review, we’ll have a promo from Dave and Chris from the Comics in Motion Podcast. Every episode, they look at a film based on a comic book or graphic novel, exploring its faithfulness and effectiveness in the transition from the page to the screen, and sometimes back again. Definitely check out their guest review here of “Alien vs Predator” (Episode #605), where they fare only slightly better than the franchise did after that movie. 

Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation.

Here we go! 

///// 

<< COMICS IN MOTION PROMO >>

/////

Today’s movie is “Rambo: Last Blood”, the franchise closer directed by Adrian Grunberg and written for the screen by Matthew Cirulnick and Sylvester Stallone, based on a story by Dan Gordon and Sylvester Stallone, based on the character created by David Morrell. Years after the events of “Rambo”, John Rambo (Sylvester Stallone) has returned to his family’s horse ranch in Arizona, living out his years in relative peace. When his ranch manager’s granddaughter Gabriela (Yvette Monreal) is forced into sex slavery, Rambo must come to her rescue. 

No spoilers.

Franchises have always been a part of the film industry, often the cash cows that keep production and distribution companies afloat to help finance other, less profitable pictures. Our modern box office is dominated by franchises, which draw huge crowds and huge dollars to the theater. Modern franchises are heavily outfitted, with billion-dollar corporations and hundred-million-dollar special effects companies, with multi-year plans for expansion into multiple media. Huge investments that are yielding huge profits. 

But some franchises spring out of a very popular and influential first film, like the “Rambo” franchise did with the incredible “First Blood”. John Rambo, played by a youthful Sylvester Stallone, is a PTSD-laden Vietnam veteran being bullied by some yokels in a small town, who is finally pushed to the point of fighting back to survive. An exceedingly complex character that dies at the end of the novel, but survives in the film to launch an entire franchise. John Rambo, as a character in the first film, was “a man out of time”, but the subsequent films each lose another portion of the complexity behind the character, even as they upped the ante on every action scene. But if John Rambo in “First Blood” was a man out of time, this final entry in the franchise makes John Rambo a man without a time. 

So, why go back to the well? I’m guessing two reasons. First, Stallone has a great deal of attachment to his two prize franchises. The success of “Rocky” and “Rocky II” definitely played into the success of “First Blood”. Stallone has returned to both franchises as he finds investors, or more likely, as investors find him. Which brings us to the second reason for dipping back into the well: money. “Rambo: Last Blood” has made roughly $90 million on a $50 million budget, so it definitely wasn’t a loss. 

Of course, there’s a risk in going back to the well, namely tarnishing the brand that makes up your franchise. Most franchises fizzle out, although the resurgence in remakes and reboots and retcons has given new life to old franchises. One reason franchises fizzle is a string of bad, forced films, which do nothing to expand the character. “Rambo: Last Blood” feels forced, from concept through execution, intending to serve as a nostalgic capstone for a complex character, and failing horribly in the process.

Every sequel to “First Blood” seems to have taken the wrong lessons about the Rambo franchise, with each rendition of John Rambo stepping further and further away from the original character. Rather than focusing on PTSD or the relationship of solider to country, each film has doubled down on explosive action, increased firepower, and an escalating series of gruesome deaths. “Rambo: Last Blood” definitely delivers in this case, with a healthy amount of violence porn towards the end, if that’s your thing, although it definitely lacks the choreography of “The Raid” or “John Wick”. 

But that violence doesn’t make up for the criminally stupid plot or underdeveloped characters, all of which are as disposable as the henchmen in previous films. And the film, likely in an effort to be politically relevant, plays fast and loose with the current climate of the United States and Mexico border, showing Trump’s idiotic wall, painting an overly horrific picture of Mexican cartels, and ending with some misguided notion of freedom and/or patriotism. It’s definitely not the only time since “First Blood” that the franchise played poorly with politics, what with “Rambo III” being originally dedicated to the resistance fighters of Afghanistan, lead by one Osama Bin Laden at the time. 

“Rambo: Last Blood” is a disappointing franchise closer, one unworthy of the complex character that launched the franchise, but also one perfectly understandable given the franchise’s diminishing returns. While the film has all the elements that have brought box office success, it also has all the elements that have disappointed fans in the past. Rambo fans, fans of 1980s action thrillers, or fans of awkwardly patriotic films will probably enjoy parts of this film. Just be ready to forgive a lot.

Rotten Tomatoes: 27%

Metacritic: 26

One Movie Punch: 4.2/10

“Rambo: Last Blood” (2019) is rated Rand is currently playing in theaters.

Hi everyone!

It’s still catchup week and... oof, today’s film is not a good one. In fact, it’s a bad one and quite clumsy with its story and message, which is a shame given the landmark franchise opener, “First Blood”. It won’t be a favorable review, but don’t let that seem like I hate Sylvester Stallone. You can catch him in both “Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2” (Episode #099) and in Garrett Wright’s review for “Creed II” (Episode #335). And if you haven’t seen it, I have found “The Expendables” to be one of the most self-aware actioners of all time.

Before the review, we’ll have a promo from Dave and Chris from the Comics in Motion Podcast. Every episode, they look at a film based on a comic book or graphic novel, exploring its faithfulness and effectiveness in the transition from the page to the screen, and sometimes back again. Definitely check out their guest review here of “Alien vs Predator” (Episode #605), where they fare only slightly better than the franchise did after that movie. 

Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation.

Here we go! 

///// 

>

/////

Today’s movie is “Rambo: Last Blood”, the franchise closer directed by Adrian Grunberg and written for the screen by Matthew Cirulnick and Sylvester Stallone, based on a story by Dan Gordon and Sylvester Stallone, based on the character created by David Morrell. Years after the events of “Rambo”, John Rambo (Sylvester Stallone) has returned to his family’s horse ranch in Arizona, living out his years in relative peace. When his ranch manager’s granddaughter Gabriela (Yvette Monreal) is forced into sex slavery, Rambo must come to her rescue. 

No spoilers.

Franchises have always been a part of the film industry, often the cash cows that keep production and distribution companies afloat to help finance other, less profitable pictures. Our modern box office is dominated by franchises, which draw huge crowds and huge dollars to the theater. Modern franchises are heavily outfitted, with billion-dollar corporations and hundred-million-dollar special effects companies, with multi-year plans for expansion into multiple media. Huge investments that are yielding huge profits. 

But some franchises spring out of a very popular and influential first film, like the “Rambo” franchise did with the incredible “First Blood”. John Rambo, played by a youthful Sylvester Stallone, is a PTSD-laden Vietnam veteran being bullied by some yokels in a small town, who is finally pushed to the point of fighting back to survive. An exceedingly complex character that dies at the end of the novel, but survives in the film to launch an entire franchise. John Rambo, as a character in the first film, was “a man out of time”, but the subsequent films each lose another portion of the complexity behind the character, even as they upped the ante on every action scene. But if John Rambo in “First Blood” was a man out of time, this final entry in the franchise makes John Rambo a man without a time. 

So, why go back to the well? I’m guessing two reasons. First, Stallone has a great deal of attachment to his two prize franchises. The success of “Rocky” and “Rocky II” definitely played into the success of “First Blood”. Stallone has returned to both franchises as he finds investors, or more likely, as investors find him. Which brings us to the second reason for dipping back into the well: money. “Rambo: Last Blood” has made roughly $90 million on a $50 million budget, so it definitely wasn’t a loss. 

Of course, there’s a risk in going back to the well, namely tarnishing the brand that makes up your franchise. Most franchises fizzle out, although the resurgence in remakes and reboots and retcons has given new life to old franchises. One reason franchises fizzle is a string of bad, forced films, which do nothing to expand the character. “Rambo: Last Blood” feels forced, from concept through execution, intending to serve as a nostalgic capstone for a complex character, and failing horribly in the process.

Every sequel to “First Blood” seems to have taken the wrong lessons about the Rambo franchise, with each rendition of John Rambo stepping further and further away from the original character. Rather than focusing on PTSD or the relationship of solider to country, each film has doubled down on explosive action, increased firepower, and an escalating series of gruesome deaths. “Rambo: Last Blood” definitely delivers in this case, with a healthy amount of violence porn towards the end, if that’s your thing, although it definitely lacks the choreography of “The Raid” or “John Wick”. 

But that violence doesn’t make up for the criminally stupid plot or underdeveloped characters, all of which are as disposable as the henchmen in previous films. And the film, likely in an effort to be politically relevant, plays fast and loose with the current climate of the United States and Mexico border, showing Trump’s idiotic wall, painting an overly horrific picture of Mexican cartels, and ending with some misguided notion of freedom and/or patriotism. It’s definitely not the only time since “First Blood” that the franchise played poorly with politics, what with “Rambo III” being originally dedicated to the resistance fighters of Afghanistan, lead by one Osama Bin Laden at the time. 

“Rambo: Last Blood” is a disappointing franchise closer, one unworthy of the complex character that launched the franchise, but also one perfectly understandable given the franchise’s diminishing returns. While the film has all the elements that have brought box office success, it also has all the elements that have disappointed fans in the past. Rambo fans, fans of 1980s action thrillers, or fans of awkwardly patriotic films will probably enjoy parts of this film. Just be ready to forgive a lot.

Rotten Tomatoes: 27%

Metacritic: 26

One Movie Punch: 4.2/10

“Rambo: Last Blood” (2019) is rated Rand is currently playing in theaters.