Is a January 24 release date for a movie, especially an action movie, a sign that the studio thinks it is terrible and is just dumping it?
What, “Rambo IV” wasn’t enough of a hint?
More often then not, but you never know. They haven’t been pushing it as much as I would have expected a new Rambo either.
Frankly, I’m reasonably sure it’ll suck mostly because it’s Rambo, but I pretty much hate the franchise so I’m a bad person to ask.
Rocky Balboa was pretty good, but of course it was released in December, so someone thought it might be up to snuff for Oscarhood.
Rambo, from what I can tell from the trailer, would never be up for an Oscar, so missing December doesn’t say anything from that respect. As an action flick, you would expect it to go for Summer, but Rambo is going to bring in audiences who are more middle-aged and up so Summer break might not be as important and the writer’s strike means that right now is a bit of a void for entertainment; it’s possible that it’s smart timing for the execs to release it now–assuming that it is good.
Personally I would tend to doubt that level of planning though, so my guess would be that it sucks.
There are over 1000 IMDB votes for this and it has an 8.8 rating- the comments I read are pretty much all glowing. Granted these may be Sly’s hardcore fans, but still- I’m starting to think this may not be so bad.
Anyone seeing it today, please advise.
Take the ratings on IMDB for any new release with an extremely big grain of NaCl. Fanboys routinely vote up a new release to stratospheric heights, but the rating inevitably falls 2-3 points a few months after release. RottenTomatoes has it at 31%, which is higher than what I expected.
Well, RottenTomatoes is at 31% and Metacritic is at 41/100, so I’m guessing it’s probably not any good at all (unless you’re a Sly/Rambo junkie).
Definitely. The thing that got me wondering here though was many of the posts said something to the effect of “I thought this was goin to be shit, but it actually wasn’t” 
I’m not looking for an Oscar caliber film here, but a really good gory action film would be nice- hasnt’ been one in a while.
I haven’t seen any of the Rambo movies, but I’ve seen the trailer for this a few times, and I always think it’s a bad sign when the trailer shows you nothing of the movie but rapid jump cuts of things exploding. There’s almost no dialogue, and Stallone hardly appears in it at all.
The franchise topped out on First Blood Part 2. You cannot top shooting a man in the genitals with an explosive tipped arrow. If you go to the part where the guy is chasing him through the water and he hits him with the boom arrow, and go frame by frame, not only is it a horrible looking dummy, but the explosion starts in the crotch.
Thank you dad for buying that $900 VCR in 1984.
If the New York Times review is on target, it’s got plenty of gore.
I’m guessing it’s as good as the rest.
The Baltimore Sun critic liked it enough. . .
and funny quote. . .
I sort of suspect that these movie aren’t so much marketed to teens, (like a Transformers) but more like guys like me who were teens when the first ones came out. My brother and I loved watching the movies together. We had a great Rambo poster in our bedroom. We used to quote it. They’re cashing in on the nostalgia angle.
I guarantee I’ll see it on DVD.
Well, although it’s the fourth installment in the “Rambo” franchise - or “First Blood” or whatever - it doesn’t have the Roman numeral “IV” in the title. It’s just called “Rambo.”
Rambo IV originally was scheduled for a Christmas release, but a lot of the effects shots weren’t finished on time, so they moved it back a month. Also, Christmas was just swamped with other releases (as it usually is), and it wasn’t possible to position this movie as a PG-rated heartwarmer for the whole family like Rocky Balboa.
I haven’t seen it, but from what I hear it gets four stars on the “Rambo sees, then slaughters, a bunch of bad guys in a foreign country” scale. I saw a chart somewhere showing that it averaged 2.59 kills per minute of its running time, a series record.
My husband wants to see it just because of the commercial tagline “Heroes never die; they just reload”
He laughs out loud every time it comes on screen!
They aren’t playing the Rambo music in the trailer?
This series has the most fucked-up series of titles I’ve ever seen. Actually, it had that already, but somehow it’s actually gotten worse.
First Blood
Rambo: First Blood Part II
Rambo III
Rambo
:dubious:
I hereby vow to forever refer to this year’s release as “Rambo: First Blood Part II Part II”.
And nobody can stop me! Nobody … Gah! Exploding arrow! [thunk, boom!]
I saw it today and it was actually pretty good.
I mean, the dialogue was all rather TV Land “A Special Moment”-esque, but it was a nice tight story, good action, and something different from anything else you’ve seen in the last couple of decades. Not sure that you’d call it realism, but I wouldn’t call it splatter action either.
I’d give it a solid 7/10
How can you not go see Rambo? It’s like not watching the next Terminator movie when it comes out in a year or so (no Arnold though…too bad).
I saw it today. I really enjoyed it. Yep lots of violence and gore.
So I really liked the ending about him going home to his dad. It was like he was finally at peace with himself. However it made the wife and I discuss how the movie should have ended with him opening the door to his house, and then seeing someone getting to play the best cameo role ever! So let’s discuss… who would make a great cameo as John Rambo’s father?
The two favorites we came up with were either Clint Eastwood or Charles Bronson. However we couldn’t remember if Bronson was still alive (he isn’t; he died in 2003).
So what do you guys think?