WhileFirst Bloodmight be surprisingly realistic in its depiction of an army veteran’s struggle against a corrupt police force, the laterRambomovies prove this didn’t last long. TheRambofranchise might have one of the strangest, most ironic, and most regrettable trajectories in cinema history.Rewatching theRambomovies provesthat Sylvester Stallone’s eponymous character became unrecognizable after the first sequel, changing from the tragic antihero of the original movie to a cartoonishly superhuman mass murderer by 2008’s rebootRambo.
In 1982’sFirst Blood, Stallone’s Vietnam War veteran John Rambo is mistreated by the corrupt sheriff of a small Southern town and ends up pushed to violence by this injustice.First Bloodis a lot like2024’sRebel Ridge, pitting a likable, soft-spoken veteran against an odious small-town police force rife with corruption. Stallone’s character tries to avoid violence and de-escalate conflicts early on but, once pushed past his limit, he ends up utilizing his Special Forces training against the police.
First Blood Was A Genuinely Accurate Survival Movie
First Blood Is More Grounded And Realistic Than Later Rambo Installments Imply
In anInsiderinterview that may surprise some fans of theRambofranchise, former US Army Special Forces andDelta Force Operator Bob Keller awardedFirst Bloodan almost perfect score when it comes to accuracy. Keller is not quick to compliment the accuracy of Hollywood blockbusters, with many notable titles earning less than 6 out of 10 from the hard marker. However, Keller admitted that the adaptation of David Morrell’s novel is pretty unimpeachable in its depiction of a Special Forces soldier using his training out of necessity.
Keller conceded that some moments fromFirst Bloodcould look “A little hanky,” but nonetheless insisted that “The reality of it, of this guy doing all that stuff to these guys and it being that easy? 100% legit.” This could come as a shock consideringRambo’s Saturday morning cartoonThe Force of Freedomwas part of the same movie franchise. However, viewers who question Keller’s claims would do well to revisit the series and see firsthand just how dramatically its tone and content changed between movies.
Rambo III turned Stallone’s character into a James Bond-esque super-spy sent to the Middle East to intervene in Afghanistan.
As early as 1986’sRambo: First Blood Part II, Stallone’s character had changed considerably. The tortured, psychologically wounded antihero of the original movie became a one-liner-spouting, perpetually shirtless action hero who returned to Vietnam to relitigate America’s bloody invasion and ensure “We get to win this time.” The series only got more far-fetched from thereon out, asRambo IIIturned Stallone’s character into a James Bond-esque super-spy sent to the Middle East to intervene in Afghanistan. 2008’sRambowas a shockingly gory reboot that ramped up the grotesque violence and abandoned any attempts at realism.
The Rambo Sequels Ramped Up The Action Way Too Much
Later Rambo Movies Soon Became Outright Ludicrous
By the time Rambo turned an anti-aircraft gun on soldiers inRambo’s finale and reduced them to chunks of gore, it was tough to claim that the series felt anything like the elegiacFirst Blood.2019’sRambo: Last Bloodwas the critical nadirof the franchise, following Rambo as he booby-trapped a ranch and slaughtered an entire Mexican drug cartel in an ultra-violent remix ofHome Alone. FromRambo: First Blood Part IIonwards,the series became more cartoonish, over-the-top, and detached from reality with each new movie.
Tarantino criticized First Blood for softening Morrell’s novel, but it is First Blood’s sequels that completely alter the franchise’s tone and turn Rambo into an unambiguous hero.
As Rambo was alreday taking down helicopters with arrows inRambo: First Blood Part II, it took a lot for subsequent sequels to up the ante even further. A franchise that began life by critiquing the treatment of American veterans and questioning the invasion of Vietnam ended by reveling in the indestructible Rambo’s indiscriminate murder of one-dimensional, irredeemably evil villains.Tarantino criticizedFirst Bloodfor softening Morrell’s novel, but it isFirst Blood’s sequels that completely alter the franchise’s tone and turn Rambo into an unambiguous hero and cheerleader for permanent war.
You Can Easily Forget What The First Rambo Was About After Watching The Sequels
Rambo’s Sequels Completely Undid The Original Movie’s Entire Message
First Bloodoffers an uncompromising look at small-town corruption in America and raises questions about the Vietnam invasion’s bloody historical footprint. While hardly as antiwar asPlatoonorBorn on the Fourth of July,First Blooddoes question the training Rambo received and how his experiences during the war impacted his worldview when he returned home.
86%
$47.2 million
$125.2 million
33%
60%
$150.4 million
$300.4 million
41%
45%
$53.7 million
$189 million
38%
69%
$42.7 million
$113.2 million
26%
81%
$44.8 million
$91.4 million
Like theFirst BloodhomageRebel Ridge, the originalRambomovie is more concerned with police corruption than the American military-industrial complex. In contrast, every sequel offers a progressively more positive image of the uncomplicated hero Rambo, and an aggressively pro-conflict depiction of warfare. It is almost impossible to recallFirst Blood’s criticisms of war when watching Rambo gleefully annihilate Burmese troops or decapitate interchangeable, faceless cartel enforcers. TheRambosequels reduced their antihero to a cartoon, meaningFirst Blood’s surprisingly accurate view of the veteran’s experience ended up almost forgotten.
