John Rambo releases some of the most violentest movie footage ever.
By Burbanked on May 21, 2007 in Movie Marketing 101, Movies, Trailers | 1,588 views |
I caught the new footage from next year’s Stallone-returns-again-to-the-fountain-of-youth actioner John Rambo from Sean over at Film Junk this weekend, but I didn’t watch it right away. Once I did, I realized that it was some of the goriest, most graphic and unsettling violence I’d seen in a while. You notice that I don’t refer to this footage as a “trailer”, because although it looks like a trailer and it functions like a trailer, this thing would have to be red-banded like crazy to be an official trailer release. In fact, I think they’d have to come up with a red band for the red band to show this in theaters.
It’s pretty amusing to me that this is as graphic as it is. It’s as if everyone involved - which of course is primarily Stallone as the director and co-writer - knows full well that their character, concept, vigilante-styled reluctant hero and overly predictable plotting are all throwbacks to a bygone decade. This style of movies has more or less gone the way of Van Damme and Lundgren, and now here we’re given a not-really-updated Rambo in a movie that is spilling blood and guts everywhere and is shot in the style of 28 Days Later and Saw and Dawn of the Dead and any number of neuvo-slasher-porn movies that young audiences are flocking to in droves…
And holy crap but now I’m thinking that John Rambo might just be the smartest frigging thing I’ve ever heard of.
What better way to make this character relevant to a new audience? How much more effective could this be as Stallone releases the footage to AICN and Harry claims that he’ll “only host it for two days” - and on the YouTubes, no less? This sounds a whole lot like the dust-up over the “oops billboard” for Captivity - only this is quite a bit more effective in its ability to spread like crazy across the blogs and the Internet at large because it’s content that users are able to post themselves and reuse as they see fit.
To give you an idea of how this plays, I’ll borrow a page from the Job Bob Briggs handbook to break it down for you:
The John Rambo footage includes:
- Seven cowering innocents
- Two rifle head-smashes
- Four exploding body bits
- At least five gratuitously unpleasant injuries
- Two shots of splattering viscera
- One sliced-up set of innards
- Two bodies on fire
- One torn throat
- One bootprint in a puddle of blood
- One decapitation, seemingly without the use of a weapon
And this all takes place within the span of 3½ minutes. That’s pretty efficient, considering they also tell us the entire story here.
But I have to say that although this is clearly being aimed and marketed at moviegoing youngsters who have no clue who this character is or what it’s supposed to be about, why has Stallone decided to stick with the goofy mullet-wig? Why not update Rambo’s look just a bit so that it feels a little realistic, a little bit believable and not so distracting?
Dedicated screenwriting 101 here: From an interview with Harrison Ford on the MTV Movies Blog in which the inevitability of another Indiana Jones movie is mentioned:
How do I get out of this? I love going to the movies with my boys, opening up their minds to the great pleasures of cinema and all that, but this is a hard one. Please help me: do I suck it up and just go, or can anyone out there provide me with a plausible, kind-hearted, permanent way out? (
© Copyright
MC | May 21, 2007 | Reply
The Holy Shit factor on that is high… I was watching it, and it didn’t seem so bad… and then… 2:05-2:16.
All I have to say is…DAMN!
Burbanked | May 21, 2007 | Reply
Yeah, it starts pretty innocuously…but then once it kicks in it’s pretty extreme stuff.
But really; what do you think about the mullet?
Ray | May 21, 2007 | Reply
Pretty brilliant move on Stallone’s part.
I HATE HATE HATE the very end with the credits - can that look any cheaper???
MC | May 22, 2007 | Reply
I am still shocked about the way that guy blew up in the front of that jeep… that was insane.
Burbanked | May 22, 2007 | Reply
Ray - What it sounds like from AICN where Stallone sent this was that this was a reel he was putting together to show at Cannes, so I guess it’s “intentionally” unfinished. That’s part of what’s fascinating to me, though. It’s clearly shot and edited in a new filmmaking kind of style, but there are these blatant and rather pointless throwbacks - such as the credits and (AGAIN!) the Rambullet (rambo + mullet) - that are so cheesy!
MC - and not only do you get to see the guy blow up, but then you get to see the contents of his innards sliding down the shield that covers the gun! Yay!
Nick Mc corn | May 27, 2007 | Reply
Stallone knows what sells movie tickets in the 2007,2008. I hope it stays pure in its brutality only to show the entire scope of vision Stallone in mind for his Rambo character. Gibsons Apoclypto? was was aslo true to the violence he showed in the final cut of the movie. Im all for 70 year old vietnam vets walking around in the jungle of vietnam who live off berries and worms but of course manage to have Golds Gym right behind the second land mine. Go Stalone cant wait for this one. Yo Adrian.
Randy | May 28, 2007 | Reply
I want to see this movie:
Rambo 4 Return to Afganistan
John Rambo returns to save the U.S. from the same terrorists that he HELPED defeat the Russians.
LOL, not politics-just funny irony.
As a First Blood fan, I’m happy to see Johnny is back and not going all PC. Gore haters please leave this alone. Stallone set the bar (at the time) for movie graphic violence with the “explosive tipped” arrow that exploded an ememy soldier, leaving only boots behind. If you aren’t looking for over the top (sorry for the movie pun) blood and guts, YOU ARE NOT A RAMBO FAN!
jeff | May 28, 2007 | Reply
ok well if they are talking bout this movie being nc-17. then there has to be some people that need to go back and review the “texas chainsaw massacres”, along with “hostel” and the “hills have eyes”, not to forget the “saw” movies. they were far worse then this could ever be. they think this deserves it. if they give this movie that rating they should give the others the same. if they do i will be severly upset. that is just stupid. the rating system for movies today are just horrible.