“Rambo”

Rating: 6/10

Starring:

Sylvester Stallone, various bandannas & irrationality

Plot:

After a group of missionaries go missing in a war-afflicted Burma, John Rambo (Stallone) and his mercenary friends set out to rescue them by any means necessary.

The Good:

Twenty years after the last “Rambo” film, Sylvester Stallone has successfully re-vamped another one of his trademark characters for a new generation.

After treading the waters with the surprisingly decent 2006 film “Rocky Balboa,” Stallone writes and slickly directs this excruciatingly necessary action movie.

This isn’t a PG-13 friendly or lame action movie like “Transformers,” and it’s not an over-the-top mess like “Shoot Em’ Up.” “Rambo” is reminiscent of all the unapologetic and brutal action movies of the past, before Jerry Bruckheimer ruined all of that.

Stallone proves not to be just another geriatric attempting one last comeback, riding the success of something that made him famous. He takes “Rambo” and surprisingly

makes a film that succeeds in what it set out to do: entertain America by thwarting

genocide.

The real star of this movie isn’t even the aging Stallone, but the tremendous amounts of blood and guts on the screen. Appendages blown up, heads shot off, children

being thrown in fire – what more could the action fan want?

In the last explosive (get it?) battle of the film, Stallone proves he has what it takes to be an almost reputable director. The intensity is at a fever pitch when Rambo tries to save the day and the action escalates into a nicely formulated climax.

When all is said and done, it’s clear that John Rambo is still a delightful and divine model citizen and action hero.

The Bad:

For those expecting rich dialogue and sturdy character development, look elsewhere.

It’s hard to be over-analytical of a mindless, ‘80s throwback, action flick, but it gets so frustrating to understand the actual character of John Rambo.

Sometimes he comes off as a soldier still fuming at President Johnson for drafting him to war. Other times, especially when he’s dealing with the missionaries, he seems like he has been watching “First Blood” on a loop for the past twenty years and has been trying to imitate himself.

It would be interesting to know exactly what Rambo has been doing in the jungles of Thailand for three decades. Rambo looks like he’s been spending his checks on

massive amounts of Botox, bandannas and hairpieces in addition to all that explosive weaponry.

Although it’s an action movie where all logic and rational thinking should be left at home, there’s just certain points that drag and drag and drag until finally something gets blown up and all is good with the world again.

The Low Down:

It’s hard to look into Stallone’s cosmetically engineered face and still see the one man war machine that immortalized action cinema two decades ago. Yet, the fourth film in the “Rambo” series can offer two things; a suitable rebirth of one of America’s

most beloved bad-asses and the looming threat of a new “Judge Dredd” movie.

Either way, “Rambo” is a surprising action movie with more blood than dialogue, and

that’s a good thing.