Sylvester Stallone returns to one of his franchises with the fourth installment in the “Rambo” series. Without stroking his ego too much, Stallone reinvents Rambo in a way that is appealing to fans of the series and some new viewers. While “Rambo” can be a stand alone film, to fully understand it, it’s best to go back to the beginning.

In 1982, the original Rambo film, “First Blood” was released. Unlike the following sequels, the film featured the returned Vietnam vet on the receiving end of a battle. When Rambo enters a small town he finds a corrupt police force attempting to exile him from their town, which results in him being hunted throughout most of the movie.

In “Rambo: First Blood Part II”, he goes back to Vietnam in order to find surviving POW’s. After essentially taking on the entire Vietcong army singlehandedly, Rambo returns to the United States triumphant and practically unscathed. This was the beginning of the end for taking Stallone seriously. The character was no longer the reserved and clever Rambo that worked so well in the first film, but instead yelled at everything imaginable while being a one man army.

“Rambo III” was yet another step down for Stallone. This time Rambo is fighting the Russians with assistance from the Afghanis army. Based on current worldwide affairs, the irony of this film is not lost on anyone who suffered through it. The film is full of one-liners that turned Rambo into a joke.
 

This brings us up to “Rambo”. First of all, look at the titles in the series: “First Blood” “Rambo: First Blood Part II” “Rambo III” and “Rambo”. This really couldn’t be any more confusing. Title aside, we find Rambo living south of the conflict in Burma. He’s grumpy, isolated, and has become bilingual. This is the closest thing to the Rambo from “First Blood” that audiences have seen, so immediately this film is superior to the previous two.

When a group of missionaries arrive, they go to Rambo in order to get upriver to help the people in Burma. Initially, Rambo turns them away, but when the only female, Sarah (Julie Benz), talks to Rambo, he changes his mind. This was one of the most confusing parts of the movie. Sarah speaks almost entirely in questions, and every time Stallone grunted a response, I could hear members of the audience whispering “What did he just say?”

After Rambo drops off the missionaries, they all get captured, and that leads Rambo to do what he does best, kill a whole bunch of people. For a nice change, Rambo does get some help from mercenaries and the Burmese rebels when the time comes to kill an army. I guess as Rambo gets older, he can only kill half an army by himself.

The acting in this film can only be described as mediocre. However, audiences don’t go to a Rambo film for the sake of hearing dialogue. The writing is jerky at best and at the end of the film I felt that I might have dozed off for a few minutes and missed the plot, but no, it’s really just not there. Stallone ultimately delivered a film that felt incomplete, as if an entire act had been cut out in the editing room. In fact, during the last two acts of the film, Rambo says nothing at all.

The action in this movie was revolutionary. While there are bloodier horror films, this movie had the most realistic blood compared to any previous war movie. “Saving Private Ryan” looks cute compared to the bloodbath that is “Rambo.” Now, I believe that this wasn’t unnecessary violence. Much like 2006’s “Rocky Balboa” it seems that Stallone is trying to redeem himself for his previous egotistical films. In this case, he does it by bringing attention to a real conflict in the world in which his character has no direct connection. By at least showing what the people in Burma see, Stallone does do a decent job at raising awareness of their suffering. The violence just makes the audience uncomfortable, and is really only enjoyable on the level of seeing how far the special effects can be taken. The uncomfortable feeling is reversed every time Rambo rushes in and kills everything in sight. Let’s face it, that’s why people go to see “Rambo.” People want to see a senior citizen running around killing everything he can get his hands on; for some reason that just makes us happy.

As a final remark, if you’re not already a fan of the “Rambo” films, or just like watching stuff get blown up, don’t bother with this movie. This could be a stand alone film, but it lacks any element that would bring in an audience aside from having the name “Rambo” attached to the it. Additionally, the last scene of the film really lacks meaning unless you’ve seen “First Blood.” For those who are already fans of Stallone, go see the movie. It may not be the best action film of all time, but you will at least leave the theater happier than when you saw “Rambo III.”