Rambo Iv

I'll have to check out Rambo especially now that Sly stood up for HGH use and he isn't ashamed of using. He also talked about the difference between HGH and steroids so he's trying to educate the un-educated masses.
 
:dl:
Alexander said:
True dat, I'll take Stallone at 75 over Vin Diesel, dude is awful.
Click to expand...

I actually like Vin Diesel, but he should have kept going with the sci-fi roles like Pitch Black. That movie was freakin' serious. Instead, we get 'The Pacifier'. Which actually wasnt a bad movie...but Arnold made a multitude of badass films before he went on to soften his image with comedy.
 
Alex is always hating on Vinny D. Vinny D would "American Me" his gimpy a$$ in 20 seconds. :lol: (sorry semi-inside joke)

I thought Pitch Black was terrible personally. Maybe we have different tastes in movies Big V.

Van Damme > Stallone + Vin D + Arnold :twisted:
 
BigVrunga said:
:dl:

I actually like Vin Diesel, but he should have kept going with the sci-fi roles like Pitch Black. That movie was freakin' serious. Instead, we get 'The Pacifier'. Which actually wasnt a bad movie...but Arnold made a multitude of badass films before he went on to soften his image with comedy.
Click to expand...
HOW could you like Vin Diesel? He has zero acting skills and is just bothersome. Sorry man, not trying to put you down, I just don't get it. Do you like "The Rock"?
 
Alexander said:
HOW could you like Vin Diesel? He has zero acting skills and is just bothersome. Sorry man, not trying to put you down, I just don't get it. Do you like "The Rock"?
Click to expand...

Are action stars really ever that good at acting? Hell, the bad acting is half the entertainment. You watch the guy stumble over lines, give really lame punchlines, and kick some freakin' ass.

Vin Diesel was the man in Pitch Black and Triple X.
 
This guy is a great action star,

Invalid Link Removed

I have read some reviews of this new Rambo film and they are horrid to say the least. The rocky films are pretty good. The last one wasn't that bad. I guess the new Rambo is pretty hard to watch and not walk out on though....I haven't seen it, I'm just going by what I have read online.
 
Diesel is trying to make another Riddick movie but he and the director had a falling out with Universal. They are trying to buy the rights to Riddick but it doesn't look good at this point. Screenplay is written..but can't go any farther.

I liked the Riddick films as Diesel was able to carry off the ridiculously macho lines. As long as you take it all with a grain of salt it's a cool flick but like any action movie..if you start to over analyze it, you may as well not even watch it. You kind of have to shut off part of your brain to enjoy most Arnold movies, lol, but they are still fun.
 
I'm sorry Sin, but XXX was literally the worst movie ever; ridiculous concept, CGI, acting, plot-line, I actually considered taking my own life whilst watching that movie.
 
jas123 said:
Alex is always hating on Vinny D. Vinny D would "American Me" his gimpy a$$ in 20 seconds. :lol: (sorry semi-inside joke)

I thought Pitch Black was terrible personally. Maybe we have different tastes in movies Big V.

Van Damme > Stallone + Vin D + Arnold :twisted:
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's all good bro. I'm a big sci-fi fan, so anything with an alien-type theme get's a few points from me. I did like Pitch Black quite a bit however, thought it was really well done.

I saw Rambo IV last night, and I have to say don't listen to the 'critics' who would give the film 1 star or say its horrible or any **** like that. Your typical asswipe critic may pan the film, but the average fan review is 4/5 stars, and rightfully so.

The movie was pretty badass. Sure, the dialog and acting was kinda throwaway, but Stallone was just a killing machine! Everytime he killed a badguy, the whole theater erupted in applause...it was a really good time.

Action movies are like what you thought in your head as a kid while playing with GI Joe's in the sandbox. They dont have to make sense, or be on the level with The Shawshank Redemption in terms of dramatic flair...the just have to make you stare in awe at this badass dude kicking all kinds of ass through incredible, unbelievable odds.

If you can still watch Arnold's 'Commando' with a smile on your face,then go see Rambo IV - you wont be disappointed.
 
I thought 'Cloverfield' was OK - but the 1st person camera thing got old really fast. I would have liked to have seen more of the monster, and less shaky video of the sidewalk and people's feet.
 
BigVrunga said:
Yeah, it's all good bro. I'm a big sci-fi fan, so anything with an alien-type theme get's a few points from me. I did like Pitch Black quite a bit however, thought it was really well done.

I saw Rambo IV last night, and I have to say don't listen to the 'critics' who would give the film 1 star or say its horrible or any **** like that. Your typical asswipe critic may pan the film, but the average fan review is 4/5 stars, and rightfully so.

The movie was pretty badass. Sure, the dialog and acting was kinda throwaway, but Stallone was just a killing machine! Everytime he killed a badguy, the whole theater erupted in applause...it was a really good time.

Action movies are like what you thought in your head as a kid while playing with GI Joe's in the sandbox. They dont have to make sense, or be on the level with The Shawshank Redemption in terms of dramatic flair...the just have to make you stare in awe at this badass dude kicking all kinds of ass through incredible, unbelievable odds.

If you can still watch Arnold's 'Commando' with a smile on your face,then go see Rambo IV - you wont be disappointed.
Click to expand...

Meh, I'd disagree, but that's me. Believe it or not (as often times it doesn't seem like it) Action films, though a far derivative, are still forms of cinema. I enjoy action films which at least attempt to create a tangible sense of pathos in the protagonist; that is what makes films, of all genres, good - the feeling of emotional relativity. Even in the most improbable and unexpected situations, the emotive response ingrained in the writing, manifested by the actor, is what makes films good.

Without some semblance of emotional investment within a main character, a film fails in my eyes. Even if I am watching somebody 'blow sh!t up', I want to feel there is a reason which is plausible within the story line; even something like the Matrix, where the individuals were doing impossible physical feats, had a plausible explanation for their actions and developed the characters.
 
Mulletsoldier said:
Meh, I'd disagree, but that's me. Believe it or not (as often times it doesn't seem like it) Action films, though a far derivative, are still forms of cinema. I enjoy action films which at least attempt to create a tangible sense of pathos in the protagonist; that is what makes films, of all genres, good - the feeling of emotional relativity. Even in the most improbable and unexpected situations, the emotive response ingrained in the writing, manifested by the actor, is what makes films good.

Without some semblance of emotional investment within a main character, a film fails in my eyes. Even if I am watching somebody 'blow sh!t up', I want to feel their is a reason which is plausible within the story line; even something like the Matrix, where the individuals were doing impossible physical feats, had a plausible explanation for their actions and developed the characters.
Click to expand...


Live Free or Die Hard definitely is a good action film. It is much better than the senseless violence in other films. The best action film of last year anyway in my opinion.
 
I may be alone on this one, but Christian Bale is one hell of an actor. He makes Batman! Also, the movie Hostile and 3:10 to Yuma are awesome as hell. I know some of those are not action films, but he gives an awesome performance in them.

Sly is awesome! I loved the new Rambo - takes me back to my childhood watching him and Arnold blow the enemy up with one liners. Love IT!
 
matthew76 said:
I may be alone on this one, but Christian Bale is one hell of an actor. He makes Batman! Also, the movie Hostile and 3:10 to Yuma are awesome as hell. I know some of those are not action films, but he gives an awesome performance in them.

Sly is awesome! I loved the new Rambo - takes me back to my childhood watching him and Arnold blow the enemy up with one liners. Love IT!
Click to expand...

I like Christian Bale too - Equilibrium and The Prestige were awesome movies. He's supposed to be in the next Terminator film too I guess.
 
Without some semblance of emotional investment within a main character, a film fails in my eyes. Even if I am watching somebody 'blow sh!t up', I want to feel there is a reason which is plausible within the story line; even something like the Matrix, where the individuals were doing impossible physical feats, had a plausible explanation for their actions and developed the characters.
Click to expand...

What if one builds an emotional attachment to a main character just by how well they blow **** up? :D
 
I totally forgot, but Stone Cold (even though the movie was poorly reviewed) did an outsatnding job in The Condemed.
 
Mulletsoldier said:
I'm sorry Sin, but XXX was literally the worst movie ever; ridiculous concept, CGI, acting, plot-line, I actually considered taking my own life whilst watching that movie.
Click to expand...

Now you see, with these sorts of action flicks, I prefer them to be ridiculous. **** needs to blow up without logical physically explanation, acting needs to be kinda corny, and a plot line AT ALL is 100% optional. I wanna see crazy stunts, people getting their asses kicked, and things blowing up at the expense of the overall quality of the film.

If I wanna see a "good" movie (with regards to acting, storyline, and character development), I wouldn't be watching a movie with Arnold, Sly, Vin, Jet Lee, or Van Damme in the cast. As for Steven Seagal, well his stuff's just terrible, even for a lame action flick.
 
thesinner said:
Now you see, with these sorts of action flicks, I prefer them to be ridiculous. **** needs to blow up without logical physically explanation, acting needs to be kinda corny, and a plot line AT ALL is 100% optional. I wanna see crazy stunts, people getting their asses kicked, and things blowing up at the expense of the overall quality of the film.

If I wanna see a "good" movie (with regards to acting, storyline, and character development), I wouldn't be watching a movie with Arnold, Sly, Vin, Jet Lee, or Van Damme in the cast. As for Steven Seagal, well his stuff's just terrible, even for a lame action flick.
Click to expand...

That is my point though, at one time, believe it or not, 'action' films were not lowest common denominator fodder.

Think of a film like Get Carter (1971, not remake), easily one of the best gangster films of all time. At the time this was an action film, as the LCD brand of hyper-sexualized, plot-line devoid, over-the-top 'action' films did not exist until the shift from production (industrial) to consumption based economic cultures began to pervade (**** from production to consumption and the exacerbation of 'consumer culture' cemented the quick-fix brand of entertainment and media we see now).

This film had action, along with sadistic character elements, symbolism with dominant cultural themes, great dialogue, and Michael Caine was bad-ass as hell; far more bad ass than Sly, Arnold, or Vin Diesel could ever dream of being. He was utterly callous and soulless, and whooped ass in dramatic fashion.

Now, you'll say "this isn't an action film", which, to a certain degree, is my point. Action films, or films which I characterize as action films, were at one time a legitimate form of cinema. You had real directors, writers, and actors producing films which have all the elements of classical cinema (empathy, emotive response, pathos, symbolism, proper setting, dialogue, etc.,) stuffed in a package ripe with death and destruction.

Michael Caine, Lee Marvin, Bruce Lee, Sean Connery (to a degree, Bond has some rather cheesy elements), and Steve McQueen. These were action stars. Today, 'action stars' are horrible actors and even worse CGI.

For the record though, T2 is the greatest action film of all time; of course, it contains emotive response and an empathetic connection between the Terminator and John Connor as the dominant plot
theme.

I'd add that the drive to watch an often scantily-clad man ooze masculinity on a large screen, especially in congregation with other grown men, is unbelievably homo-erotic. Death has always been an incredibly sexual and romanticized theme, and I think it's ironic that watching these films characterizes prototypical masculine behavior in North American culture; I'd also add that the actors you listed have consistently been sex icons in the gay community (insert joke along the lines of "you would know"). Just a thought.
 
I'd add that I agree 3:10 to Yuma showed how one can amalgamate action with acting. I thought that was one of the year's best films, and Russell Crowe was most definitely bad-ass.

More action films should follow this trend.

Sadly, this is not what the average North American wants to see.

(cue World's smallest violin)
 
For the record though, T2 is the greatest action film of all time; of course, it contains emotive response and an empathetic connection between the Terminator and John Connor as the dominant plot
theme.

I'd add that the drive to watch an often scantily-clad man ooze masculinity on a large screen, especially in congregation with other grown men, is unbelievably homo-erotic. Death has always been an incredibly sexual and romanticized theme, and I think it's ironic that watching these films characterizes prototypical masculine behavior in North American culture; I'd also add that the actors you listed have consistently been sex icons in the gay community (insert joke along the lines of "you would know"). Just a thought.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree here - homo-erotic for someone attracted to the same sex maybe. Most muscle-bound hero films come with a full compliment of scantily clad damsel's in distress. In the case of the Terminator films, Linda Hamilton was in her prime and I must say one of the hottest ladies on the big screen.

I don't thing seeing Arnold's physique has anything to do homo-eroticism for anyone who isnt a homosexual. Seeing his movies when I was a kid made we want to take up bodybuilding as soon as I could hoist a dumbell, in part because somewhere in the back of my adolecent brain I figured looking like that would afford me better chances with quality ladies, like the ones that were falling at his feat in nearly all of those films.
 
BigVrunga said:
I have to disagree here - homo-erotic for someone attracted to the same sex maybe. Most muscle-bound hero films come with a full compliment of scantily clad damsel's in distress. In the case of the Terminator films, Linda Hamilton was in her prime and I must say one of the hottest ladies on the big screen.

I don't thing seeing Arnold's physique has anything to do homo-eroticism for anyone who isnt a homosexual. Seeing his movies when I was a kid made we want to take up bodybuilding as soon as I could hoist a dumbell, in part because somewhere in the back of my adolecent brain I figured looking like that would afford me better chances with quality ladies, like the ones that were falling at his feat in nearly all of those films.
Click to expand...

This is the nature of homo-eroticism, it is a subversive, latent sexual phenomena (this goes for both sexes), not the purposive, overt act you're making it out to be. These conflations aren't new stuff, quite accepted social phenomena. Themes like death, violence, masculinity, these have always been very hyper-sexual and romanticized activities.

Don't take this as an insinuation that you, or anybody else who watches Arnold, are gay; even if you were, I'd be the last person to take issue with that. Homo-erotic does not equate to homosexual, but I'm surprised you fail to see how two sweaty, muscle bound dudes jostling with each other isn't a little homo-erotic.

EDIT:

I would add this stems from the differing nature of male and female sexual expression. If a scantily-clad female, with a large gun was jostling with another female on the stage, that is homo-erotic as well; a latently expressed sexual tension between members of the same sex. However, as you perceive it, that is normal and you accept that is a somewhat sexual symbol. But, you have trouble grasping how two dudes doing the same thing is homo-erotic, understandable. I mean, really though, Rambo's gun is one large, monolithic, phallic symbol.

I don't mean to go so Freudian, so to speak, over an action-film critique, but in Social Psych/Psych/Soci these are pretty covered themes. Not a big issue by any means, but they are definitely there.
 
This is the nature of homo-eroticism, it is a subversive, latent sexual phenomena (this goes for both sexes), not the purposive, overt act you're making it out to be. These conflations aren't new stuff, quite accepted social phenomena. Themes like death, violence, masculinity, these have always been very hyper-sexual and romanticized activities.

Don't take this as an insinuation that you, or anybody else who watches Arnold, are gay; even if you were, I'd be the last person to take issue with that. Homo-erotic does not equate to homosexual, but I'm surprised you fail to see how two sweaty, muscle bound dudes jostling with each other isn't a little homo-erotic.

EDIT:

I would add this stems from the differing nature of male and female sexual expression. If a scantily-clad female, with a large gun was jostling with another female on the stage, that is homo-erotic as well; a latently expressed sexual tension between members of the same sex. However, as you perceive it, that is normal and you accept that is a somewhat sexual symbol. But, you have trouble grasping how two dudes doing the same thing is homo-erotic, understandable. I mean, really though, Rambo's gun is one large, monolithic, phallic symbol.

I don't mean to go so Freudian, so to speak, over an action-film critique, but in Social Psych/Psych/Soci these are pretty covered themes. Not a big issue by any means, but they are definitely there.
Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying - but I try not to look that deep into the psychology behind a genre. It gets in the way of the suspension of my disbelief which is key to enjoying the films. I also don't think the people involved in making these movies have the cultural subconscious in mind when developing the plot. Subconsciously, perhaps.:)
 
Most Van Damme, Arnold, Stallone, Diesel, and "the Rock" type movies are just about red cars, big guns, and explosions. I gotta go with Mullet on this one, I don't consider these action movies... more like "explosive humor". If I want to see an action movie I'll go with Scorsese, or Mann as their movies will have active dialog along with a semi-believable plot. I mean take movies like "The Departed" or "Collateral" - both were incredible films IMO, but had very minimal "muscle" or "explosion" scenes. To me, that is what makes a movie "action-worthy". When the plot is ACTIVE, instead of the giant guns, and the story is somewhat close to believable. Not when stuff goes "BOOM!!" and I see one too many naked man-torsos. Just my 2 pennies.
 
Hurleyboy05 said:
Most Van Damme, Arnold, Stallone, Diesel, and "the Rock" types movies are just about red cars, big guns, and explosions. I gotta go with Mullet on this one, I don't consider these action movies... more like "explosive humor". If I want to see an action movie I'll go with Scorsese, or Mann as their movies will have active dialog along with a semi-believable plot. I mean take movies like "The Departed" or "Collateral" - both were incredible movies, but had very minimal "muscle" or "explosion" scenes, IMO that is what makes a movie "action-worthy". When the plot is ACTIVE and somewhat close to believable. Not when stuff goes "BOOM" and a see one too many Man-torsos. Just my 2 pennies.
Click to expand...


Don't you dare put "The Departed" in the same catagory as "Collateral". Collateral was complete crap and "The Departed" is my new favorite movie since I saw it on DVD when it was first released.
 
BigVrunga said:
I understand what you're saying - but I try not to look that deep into the psychology behind a genre. It gets in the way of the suspension of my disbelief which is key to enjoying the films. I also don't think the people involved in making these movies have the cultural subconscious in mind when developing the plot. Subconsciously, perhaps.:)
Click to expand...

For sure. I would add that often in these films the protagonist defeats and often kills the main threat and/or antagonist, this is the ultimate affirmation of heterosexual masculinity; the completion of a task and the reaffirmation of alpha-male dominance.

Just the stuff in between is homo-erotic. :)
 
T-Bone said:
Don't you dare put "The Departed" in the same catagory as "Collateral". Collateral was complete crap and "The Departed" is my new favorite movie since I saw it on DVD when it was first released.
Click to expand...

T-Bone... I'm not even sure this argument is worth it, because you totally missed what I was saying, but I too view "The Departed" as one of the best films in creation. I'm sorry you disliked "Collateral" but I was talking about plot believability and active dialog, rather then abundance of giant forearms/machine guns/catch-phases. If you truly cannot understand what I'm saying because you simply just didn't like a film I mentioned, I'm sorry. There are other posts here you may understand/enjoy more.
 
Hurleyboy05 said:
T-Bone... I'm not even sure this argument is worth it, because you totally missed what I was saying, but I too view "The Departed" as one of the best films in creation. I'm sorry you disliked "Collateral" but I was talking about plot believability and active dialog, rather then abundance of giant forearms/machine guns/catch-phases. If you truly cannot understand what I'm saying because you simply just didn't like a film I mentioned, I'm sorry. There are other posts here you may understand/enjoy more.
Click to expand...

I agree with you Hurleyboy. My post was just worded wrong. I was just trying to show my dislike for Collateral and how much I love the movie Departed.
 
Aside form all the damn psycho-babble, Rambo was a good movie.. It was graphic, it touched on a subject we never really think about, and it wasn't all just him killing everyone.. :thumbsup:


Collateral and The Departed were dramas that happen to have action scenes, shouldn't even consider them action movies.. :ntome:
 
Hurleyboy05 said:
Most Van Damme, Arnold, Stallone, Diesel, and "the Rock" type movies are just about red cars, big guns, and explosions. I gotta go with Mullet on this one, I don't consider these action movies... more like "explosive humor". If I want to see an action movie I'll go with Scorsese, or Mann as their movies will have active dialog along with a semi-believable plot. I mean take movies like "The Departed" or "Collateral" - both were incredible films IMO, but had very minimal "muscle" or "explosion" scenes. To me, that is what makes a movie "action-worthy". When the plot is ACTIVE, instead of the giant guns, and the story is somewhat close to believable. Not when stuff goes "BOOM!!" and I see one too many naked man-torsos. Just my 2 pennies.
Click to expand...

Action Film, shoot 'em up flick, whatever ya wanna call it. Can we agree that a Sly/Arnold/Van Damme type flick is on a different level/ different genre than a movie like The Departed? I can dig that.
 
WOW, it was freaking great! Go Sly, bringing action back! There seriously had to be a beheading, or some kill every minute of the movie!
 
TheMyth said:
WOW, it was freaking great! Go Sly, bringing action back! There seriously had to be a beheading, or some kill every minute of the movie!
Click to expand...

LOL yes! It was like being a kid all over again...

And its not that gratuitous violence makes a film...it was just great to see an old-school action hero still kicking ass and taking names - and doing it better than many of the new actos getting action roles today.
 
Hey check it out, an interview with Stallone:

Invalid Link Removed

And I quote:

So what’s next for Sly? He hints at working with his fellow 80’s relics, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Bruce Willis, which immediately calls the fanboys of the room to rapt attention. “I always talk to Arnold about it,” Sly says with a chuckle. ‘When are you going to get over this job? Let’s go back to having some fun!’ Every weekend, I ask him… I think that Bruce is a possibility.”
Click to expand...

Stallone and Arnold back for Predator 3, directed by James Cameron - Ill die a happy man:)
 
Just you wait, mullet.

By the year 2015, I will star in an action movie. I will not have a shirt on throughout the entire film, will be oiled down at all times, and it will be your ALL-TIME FAVORITE MOVIE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top