So, I’m sitting here watching the DVD of First Blood, the first Rambo movie. (Sorry, it’s on my guilty pleasure list).
Are/were there soldiers who were really as well-trained as Rambo?
Well, they say the real-life model for the Rambo character was Colonel James “Bo” Gritz, who does indeed sound like a superbly trained soldier. Seems he’s turned into a bit of a wacko in his autumn years, though.
What reason is there to be guilty ? That movie stands as an all-time classic and the standard for every action flick made since then. No shame in that, my friend !
If you have ever seen a Navy Seals training documentary you would have to believe our military is churning out some seriously bad-ass motherf*ckers. I suppose a bit of luck never hurt people like Bo Gritz either…
Well, he was supposed to be a Green Beret (the Army’s Elite), with plenty of Vietnam combat experience to boot. That would probably make him kick ass.
And he’s not so much of a one man army that he is in the sequel.
The other thing to remember about Green Berets is that, unlike say, SEALS or Rangers, or Marine Force Recon, or various other elite troops, the purpose of the Green Berets is supposed to be Counter-Insurgency/Insurgency Cadre. In addition to shooting things and blowing them up, therefore, Green Berets all have training in some field (e.g., civil engineering, agronomy, veterinary medicine, etc.) intended to be useful in “winning the hearts and minds” of civilian populations in the context of waging guerilla warfare.
It’s been a while since I’ve seen First Blood. I seem to remember the Rambo character as being a bit brighter than all the Stallone jokes (and the sequals, for that matter) make him out to be, but I don’t know if they reference just how well educated he’s supposed to be.
“I’d think twice, Sheriff. Rambo could kill your men one by one… and construct an effective irrigation system while he was doing it.”
“What we call hell, he calls home.”
What Lockfist said. There’s no reason to feel guilty for liking First Blood. It’s a good movie. Just because the sequels were tripe is no reason to condemn it.
How 'bout another reason to condemn it?
SPOILER WARNING!
In the book, Rambo was a pychopath who killed the entire police force, and was killed himself at the end, leaving no room for sequels. The movie utterly destroyed the premise of the original book by David Morrell.
Morrell won’t complain, though. He apparently made millions because he retained the character rights on the advice of his attorney, though he had no idea that character would be resurrected and made into a hero of numerous sequels.
I wouldn’t be so upset about the movie bastardizing the book if somebody paid me millions to sit back and shut up about it.
Well see, I didn’t even know it was a book.
:shrug:
I still think it was a pretty good movie in it’s own right. Although it probably would have been better if they stuck with that book ending. Those sequels were awful.
Actually, if you read Morrell’s forward in the novelization of First Blood Part II (someone bought it for me a long time ago, I swear), he talks about that very thing as a difference between literature and movies.
He said something like: “In my book, Rambo died. In the movie, he lived, which provides something of a dillema but also an opportunity to more deeply explore the character.”
Interestingly, Kirk Douglas was initially offered the Colonel Trautman role. He says in his autobio that the ending he suggested was for Trautman to see Rambo as this Frankenstein’s monster he had created and kill Rambo at the end. Stallone had much more input, though, and wanted the character to survive, so Douglas turned the role down.
Douglas’s version is actually what happened in the book. The colonel DOES kill Rambo.