It's a shame that the "Rambo" series de-evolved into a cheap knock-off of other countless action movies. Most people write off the first film like they do the sequels. The original is a brutal, vicious, fight for survival against a small town that rejected the Vietnam War hero, based off an even more violent book. "First Blood" is not for the squeamish, but a great way to spend an evening if you don't mind some pretty grim scenes.
John Rambo (Sylvester Stallone) visits the small town of Hope, trying to find a friend he met in Vietnam. Upon his arrival, he finds his friend is dead (from cancer caused by the war) and is ushered out of town by the local sheriff (Brian Dennehy). Refusing to leave, he is taken in and abused by the authorities. After lashing out, he heads for a forest just outside of town where the battle between the Green Beret and local police force begins.
One of the most often misinterpreted facts about this film is that Rambo himself never really kills anyone until the end, and even then, he is only doing so in order to defend himself. He is simply struggling to survive in the world that rejected him. Though he is a trained killer, he simply wants to forget the things that have happened to him and move on. People refuse him that right.
Sylvester Stallone creates his second most recognizable character (just behind Rocky) in this film and does a great job considering he hardly speaks until his final mental breakdown in the end. The tension created by director Ted Kotcheff (who more recently directed episodes of "Law & Order") is wonderful. The forest photography is great, giving the lead character his only real advantage other than a survival knife.
As usual, not everything is perfect here. The final twenty-minutes really dumb down the entire film, featuring Rambo mindlessly destroying the small town, mimicking what is about to come with sequels. The scenes of him holding a massive weapon in one hand while the ammo dwindles away in the other have been the subject of countless parodies. Richard Crenna, playing the Colonel who trained Rambo, is just laughable, overacting every line given to him.
Still, "First Blood" is easily one of the best "one-man-army" movies ever made. The subtexts are obvious, giving the movie some purpose, unlike so many other action films (including the sequels). The book, as usual, is better, but watching Stallone in action against all odds is unforgettable. (**** out of *****)
Article comments
1 - Eric Olsen
I vividly recall the visceral impact this had the first time I saw it - it was tht impact (and the ticket sales, of course) that led to the seemingly endless sequels, but we are dishonest if we deny that initial impact. Good job!
2 - poof pants
Ok,
I have just watched the original "First Blood" from 1982 again, for the 1st time in like about 10 years & it got me to thinking how Hollywood ended up skewing the original message intended by the 1st movie, by making all the sequels.
The 1st one was clearly meant to depict how hard life was for the Vietnam Vets, whom had come home & how they faced difficulty adjusting to Civillian life. The whole message behind the movie is summed up beautifukky in Stallones performance at the end, where Col. Troutman is trying to calm him down. This scene dramatically, I believe communicates the anguish these guys went through.
The part where Hollywood screwed up though, was all the destruction & action scenes. Whether they intended to, or not, that touched off a public demand for more of the same & soon you had your Rambo's 2, 3 & Die Hards etc...so while Hollywood got big $$$ from the spin-off effect. I believe that it only distracts from the original, which was more like a Docu-Drama, with lots of explosions.