Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!pesnta!pyramid!decwrl!decvax!bellcore!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!mmm!mkr
From: mkr@mmm.UUCP (MKR)
Newsgroups: net.followup,net.politics,net.movies
Subject: Re: Rambomania
Message-ID: <868@mmm.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 19-May-86 11:06:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: mmm.868
Posted: Mon May 19 11:06:00 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 22-May-86 05:11:46 EDT
References: <818@mmm.UUCP> <475@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu>
Reply-To: mkr@mmm.UUCP (MKR)
Distribution: net
Organization: none
Lines: 37
Xref: lsuc net.followup:2111 net.politics:5698 net.movies:4063

In article <475@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> alfke@cit-vax.UUCP (J. Peter Alfke) writes:
>In article <818@mmm.UUCP> mkr@mmm.UUCP (MKR) writes:
>>	If people would watch the movies (especially the first one, the
>>second was largely a shoot-em-up with lousy acting, weak plot, bad 
>>direction and stupid stunts) they should be able to see that Rambo is
>>actually a very worthyideal to emulate - he is a peaceful man who
>>just wants to be free to lead his life in peace - but when he needs
>>strength and violence is the only solution - he's strong.
>
>That was the FIRST movie.  You may have noticed that people didn't start
>pointing to Rambo as an example of, well, everything people use Rambo as
>an example of, until the SECOND movie came out.  You yourself gave a
>fair description of that flick.

	Yes, the second movie was a little more bloodthirsty. But remember,
he didn't want to go in the first place - the only reason he did was to
get out of busting big rocks into little ones. And it was a "good" cause,
with no planned casualties. He was supposed to get pictures of American
prisoners and leave without anyone knowing he was there. It was only after
being double-crossed by his own side (Murdoch - I'm comin' for YOU) and
tortured by the bad guys that he started getting nasty.

	He did get a little carried away blowing up innocent civilians,
but most of the people he killed were enemy soldiers trying to kill
him. If I were in his shoes, I would have done the same thing. (except
jumping out of the water to commandeer a flying helicopter - that
was too silly, and I would have refused. :-))

>
>The first film was based upon a (apparently pretty good) novel.  The
>second came solely out of Sylvester Stallone's ugly little brainpan.
>
	It's not ugly - it's just a little stunted. Yo Adrian!

>						--Peter Alfke

	--MKR