so he starts by blowing up the gas station for no reason, and ends up destroying half the city - not caring who gets hur
-
-
Hendry_William_French — 10 years ago(September 07, 2015 11:27 AM)
Besides, I think the announcement over the PA was during the time he ran amok
That's true. I guess we're just supposed to think Rambo knew the gas station was empty, or it was indeed creative license on the part of the film makers to just have Rambo blowing up empty buildings and for us just to assume there was no one there. When you watch a movie like this you're not supposed to think too much bout stuff like. The very fabric of the film itself is telling us Rambo is a good guy, therefore no innocent people are being killed in the film.
What sets off the metal detectors first? The lead in your ass or the s*** in your brains? -
Times_Up — 10 years ago(September 07, 2015 10:10 AM)
It's definitely a bit of a cop out, both
First Blood
and
Rambo
would have us believe that in the heat of the moment Rambo knew the people had evacuated the town and, in part II, the army base. You can decide which one requires more suspension of disbelief. I'd say part I does, b/c I have never seen a town where the police have a PA intercom system to communicate with everyone. In part II, the simple nod from Trautman tipped him off that everyone was out. Little things like that give these movies a fairytale like quality.
Rambo III
and
IV
do not contain these moments.
All good things must come to an end - Chaucer -
Hendry_William_French — 10 years ago(September 07, 2015 11:23 AM)
Little things like that give these movies a fairytale like quality. Rambo III and IV do not contain these moments
Rambo III felt like a fairytale version of Rambo haha.
What sets off the metal detectors first? The lead in your ass or the s*** in your brains? -
Times_Up — 10 years ago(September 07, 2015 01:55 PM)
Yea, I am not implying
Rambo III
does not feel like a fairy tale, it is most certainly the most childish of them all, no doubt. In looking how
First Blood
and
Rambo
and
Rambo III
mirror each other, the end rampage with a no killing of civilians awareness is left out of the 3rd movie.
All good things must come to an end - Chaucer -
gabby_bm — 10 years ago(September 07, 2015 03:50 PM)
It was a good war strategy. If they can't refuel the cars and trucks they can't mobilize them. It was also a good distraction as he went for the next objective of destroying their armory (the Outpost gun store)
Then he takes out the electricity to hinder visibility and outside communications.
I think Rambo was acting methodically and strategically.
I dont need you to tell me how good my coffee is.
.
. -
DeadandBuried81 — 10 years ago(September 09, 2015 12:51 PM)
so he starts by blowing up the gas station for no reason, and ends up destroying half the city - not caring who gets hurt. Why?
Growing up, I thought Rambo was the good guy. Watching this crappy movie today I realize he is the villain. Funny.
Growing up, I wanted to be Rambo. Now that I am grown up and not Rambo, I am sad and realized I should have applied myself more.
www.thecultofhorror.blogspot.com -
ralph_2ndedition — 10 years ago(September 11, 2015 12:57 PM)
I always saw the "rampage" as him turning the town-environment into his own element.
He understand chaos, noise and darkness, Teasle doesn't (or at least functions less well in those circumstances).
So my take on it is that it is a combination of strategy (hindering communication and lowering visibility for his enemy) and making his surrounding more comfortable for him while making it less comfortable for his adversary. -
beierfilms — 10 years ago(September 11, 2015 04:54 PM)
It's hard to get angry at Rambo given that he's suffering a PTSD episode and more than a little crazy. In many ways, it's to his credit that he didn't kill any of the cops.
I think at this point in the film, things have escalated that he's in full blown delusion mode and thinking of the town as an enemy base he has to lay siege to. He buts power and he cuts the fuel supply as one might in an assault. Perhaps he knew the place had been evacuated or, maybe more likely, at this point he's just extra nuts and thinks he's still fighting a war. We could assume that the reason he doesn't kill the cops is actually seeing them reminds him that they aren't enemy soldiers which is why he just disables them rather than killing them. By the same token, I don't think he's blow the gas station if he saw anyone in there. Granted that's just easy movie logic (since there totally could have been someone in there), but I'm willing to give him a pass in this film (not the ultra-violent sequels), because he's obviously crazy and has had a really bad last few days.
Or, to put it another way, I'm against deadly force in theory but, if I'd just found out my last friend was dead, been brutally beaten by corrupt cops, and spent the last two days with the cops trying to murder me; I'd probably blow up the damn gas station too. I'd also probably have killed that damn cop with the sniper rifle on purpose instead of on accident (cuz seriously, while I respect a lot of police officers, when you try several times to shoot an un-armed man, you deserve whatever retaliation you get). -
spartanmerc — 10 years ago(October 14, 2015 09:17 AM)
My take on why he did that was because
A) It cripples their capacity to persue him
B) It served as a distraction to get closer to Teasle
C) He had been warning them not to push him, they pushed too far and he showed them what kind of war he coud bring to them.
Like he said before, he gave them a war they wouldn't believe. In town (peaceful areas) Teasle was in charge, in the wild (in combat, war) Rambo was the superior fighter. -
tub51461 — 10 years ago(September 19, 2015 10:15 AM)
He's a good guy in the sense that the police department antagonized him & coerced him into attack mode. He's a bad guy in the sense he's a violent person with a high degree of rage and insanity against those who mess with him. Fought this town like he did Vietnam. Make sure the innocent are out of the way and trick the enemy into making a mistake which they did. The villains is Bryan Dennehy & Jack Starrett (Teasle & Gault). Neither should ever been officers of the law.
-
banditsroost — 10 years ago(September 30, 2015 07:11 AM)
I don't think he cared about the town or the people in it. He lost his last friend to cancer and was hopeless after that. His grudge was against Teasle. He gave him the chance to let it go but Teasle just kept pushing.
How I sell 2 items on Ebay for huge profits!
http://WWW.wideworldinfo.com -
JoeCorrao — 10 years ago(October 02, 2015 09:58 PM)
He was far from the villain. It's the story of a stressed out vet pushed too far. One of Stallone's top 2 or 3 movies.
~I see a little silhouette of a man, Scaramouche, Scaramouche, will you do the Fandango.
