I really liked the ending monologue for First Blood. His breakdown is heart wrenching and really underrated because people only focus on Rambo being a badass killing machine.
I adore First Blood the movie. The fact alone that the protagonist is a gun-toting, muscle-bound hero who never actually kills somebody except for an accidental death, while also breaking down emotionally at the end makes First Blood quite unique in my eyes.
Leo Peridot this movie was literally 40 years before trump, god what is your peoples obsession with trump being the ultimate hitler bad guy. Stop with the ORANGE MAN BAD shit and look at things objectively. If you honestly believe that modern people would support police shooting at an unarmed person, regardless of race, then you are part of whats dividing this country and part of the problem.
macsikar Mackay did they shoot the soccer player or him? Also any idea why he did it? If its a similar situation to rambo thats a lottle bit badass, if not then thats horrible
On behalf of myself and all other Vietnam Veterans that I've talked with, we salute Stallone for his excellent portrayal of Rambo in First Blood. The way he expressed the airport scene about the veterans returning home was what we felt in our hearts, yet most of us could not express. This is a message that needed to be spoken. Sylvester Stallone is a great actor second to none, not only in our time but any time. First Blood was a beautiful movie! - Ronald Koontz - RonKoontzMovies
I was born in 74.. I watched this movie when it was on TV one year in the early 80s. It was my first glimpse about anything that is "Nam". So was the second movie, Rambo 2. At an early age I saw what you guys went through and also went through when you returned to home. It made war and its life after much more complicated that I was more aware of back then. Thank you for your service. Welcome home.
yes thank you for your service & Court we can easily watch videos and read books and try to understand what they went through i was born in 78 so i don't remember jack shit from the 70's. but we will never get what those guys went through over there or any other war because we weren't there. it's a shame that vets find it hard to express and talk about the shit they saw over there at least with other vets but than the shit they saw it's no doubt really hard to put to words even to themselves. i find it amazing that when none of them don't come back with PTSD or whatever they call it now a miracle. a friend of mine was telling me he talking to a vet once i think he was a family member or a friend of his i forget which, and he asked him about shit he'd seen well to prove a point to him how bad it was he told him a little bit and my friend pretty much went white in the face & said okay you can stop now. or he asked his father i forget as it's been quite awhile since he last told me this story. my point is they went through a lot of bad shit over there. & it really is nice that they take that shit serious now compared to back than and vets can get help if they are able to. i dunno how to phrase it but you get my point
The ending change in the movie I think was for the best. It really brought a more satisfying conclusion to the story and probably Stallone's most compelling performance as we see his character break down completely.
+FrankLightheart True, but only because Rambo was portrayed as a "good guy". In the book he doesn't seem to come out like a "good guy", more like a maniac torn apart by war. As a movie the new ending works but as a statement it doesn't, the point of the book was more to show what human can become if you program them for one thing only and that is killing in order to survive a war zone. Or something like that i guess.
+FrankLightheart Also keep in mind that ten years had passed from the time the book was published to when the film was made. Society had a drastic change in those ten years and the story changed to reflect that. Had the book been written in the 80s we might have seen a Rambo that is closer to the movie version. I agree that Stallone gave a good performance during the breakdown scene.
The novel Rambo is supposed to be more pitiable than sympathetic, like a crazed fighting dog that has to be put down even though it's not the dog's fault. In a way, Teasle is actually the more sympathetic character because his motives are understandable and his backstory relatable.
They mention Teasles past in this breakdown but it is very much a part of the story in the book. In the movie Teasle comes across more like an embittered Vietnam vet than a Korean war vet. I like both but truthfully the book is much more honest, accurate and realistic just not as "convenient" as the movie was.
My biggest takeaway from the book was, if Rambo and Teasle had just talked to each other, maybe everything that happened wouldn't have had to. At the end of the day, it's just a story of two people who refuse to give ground
It was just one Sheriff too many that had done the same exact thing to him. He intentionally sets out to commit violence in the novel. And the forest scene is much more brutal as he kills all the deputies. Only to be put down by Trautman which is a deleted scene and alternate ending of the movie. Except in the novel, Trautman hunts him down and kills him, he doesn't shoot him because Rambo begs him to.
@@cactusmalone They do that with every summary, just the smug way this channel does things. Same with how CinemaSins acts like he has a hot rod up his ass.
Neat tidbit according to one of the Uncle John's Bathroom Reader books: When David Morrell was negotiating with Hollywood for the rights to his novel, his lawyer reportedly charged him an extra $500 for a clause that would allow David to retain any "merchandising rights" that would come from the Rambo movie. David was like, "Merchandising? Who'd want to buy stuff about a movie where a guy goes around killing people and ends up dead?" His lawyer replied, "It's Hollywood, for all we know they might turn it to a musical!" Well, along comes Rambo II and, among other things, they made a ton of action figures, plastic "Rambo" knives, even duplicated that charm bracelet thing that Co-Bao wears. Morrell later said it was the BEST $500 he ever spent.
wow.too bad they sold the rights to the replica knives to Hollywood collectible.jimmy lile estate and gil hibben don't see a Penney now for the knives they designed.Hollywood Collectible owns the rambo knife merch.anyway.stallone can't even put the name rambo on a knife.i think it has to be under a title.like LAST BLOOD.it can't say rambo on it I guess
I know George Lucas had a clause like that too.studios weren't hip to merchandise.he had the foresight to do that and knew nerds well enough to know they'd be all over merch.if it was a bit succesful
I had that little "jade" charm. Mine came in a little plastic Rambo bow and arrow set with the plastic knife and I also had both Rambo figures from First Blood One and the no-shirt Rambo from Part Two. The part one Rambo came with the outfit from the movie and with the M60 and a little knife and the other Rambo doll came with the bow, a little knife and a plastic RPG that fired a little plastic rocket tied to a string. This was right after James Cameron did Part Two. A year or two later, the cartoon came out and even more toys. I'm sure Morrell made a pretty penny.
I first read First Blood when I was 10 years old in 1988, I remember my teacher saw what I was reading in class and confiscated the book saying it was not appropriate for children. She later rang my father to see if he approved, my father having spent 9 years in the British army during that era told her that he did approve and he was glad I was reading it. My teacher gave the book back reluctantly and I finished reading it, I done my book report on it giving a presentation to my class. After the presentation all the other boys in my class wanted to read it next. The film is good but the book is way way better.
Frankly, that was good judgement on your teacher's part. Not all 10-year-olds can handle adult themes like that, and she returned the book after deferring to your old man.
Heck! When I was in elementary school in the late '80s (I would have been eight in 1988), I had a teacher take away a 1970s Old Dominion marine biology textbook that my mom gave me just because it was abnormal to have such nerdy interests. I think all authority is on a power trip just like in First Blood. The earlier in life we learn not to trust authority, the better.
Fun fact: "Rambo" (or alternatively, "Ranbo") is Japanese for "violent". I have no idea if this was intentional or pure coincidence. Just something I noticed when I took Japanese in college.
The author said he was trying to come up with a name for his character when he came across the name Rambo from apples, it rolled off the tongue good enough
I always found it interesting that the film is less of a bloodbath than the book. In fact the sequels are closer to the character of the book than this more thoughtful version.
I feel the greatest part of this film is that Rambo kills no one, except, arguably, the Sheriff, and even then his gun shots weren't enough to kill the Sheriff. I would've loved to have seen an alternate ending where, when the Sheriff is on the ground wounded and begging Rambo to finish him off if Rambo would've said, "Was it all worth it for not allowing me to have the soup and sandwich special at Melanie's Diner?" I mean, the funniest part of the movie is when Rambo takes control of that munitions truck and tells the driver "Don't look at me, look at the road, that's how accidents happen." It's not really funny, but it's funny in the context that Rambo hardly says a word throughout the film.
@@jeromea1659Exactly, not to mention he crashes through glass, falling 10' to the floor, landing on his back, then lays there unattended for 10 minutes but somehow survives...I love the movie but I always questioned that scene, even as a kid
It's quite the reverse on how movies are made nowadays when they draw on litterary material. Now they turn mostly compassionate, complex and interesting human characters into nearly sociopathic killers who rack up improbable body counts in the name of questionable ethics.
Ryder Draconis in BvS he kills quite a few people straight up Like, not indirectly or by accident. He blows them up, crushes them with his badass Batmobile, etc. I love Batfleck but they did indeed make him into a killer
The breakdown scene at the end is to me what catapulted this movie into superstar status, culminating in the acknowledgment of ptsd, a poorly understood condition. It has the same effect as Vader telling Luke he's dear old dad. Watching Stallone break down explains his actions and decisions throughout the film.
I really like the first scene though . Everything seems peaceful and serene . Children playing happily , a sunny day , a beautiful lake and then Rambo learns that his last brother in arms had died , he realizes that he is alone in the world and dies inside ; next scene a remote road entering the small town . Now everything is grey and depressive
A lot of the changes stems from the fact that movies need a hero. They chose the hero to be John Rambo, and because of this, they had to make John Rambo more sympathetic to the audience.
@@reckless20 It's childish to pretend there are no differences in character between people. Some people rise to the occasion under extremely dire circumstances , others show their dark , true nature. People are NOT all the same.
There was actually a real Arthur John Rambo in the Vietnam War, he died in the war, & his name is on the Vietnam War Memorial in Washington D.C. aka The Wall... I know in the movie his name is John J. Rambo, but that's just an odd coincidence huh???
After the movie, they actually did a story on Arthur John Rambo who died in Vietnam. I remember them interviewing his company commander who said a character like Rambo in the movie would have cost many American soldiers lives if he existed in Vietnam.
Silver Star Citation Silver Star Awarded posthumously for actions during the Vietnam War The President of the United States of America, authorized by Act of Congress July 9, 1918 (amended by an act of July 25, 1963), takes pride in presenting the Silver Star (Posthumously) to Sergeant Arthur John Rambo, United States Army, for gallantry in action while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an armed hostile force on 26 November 1969 while serving as an artilleryman with the Howitzer Battery, 3rd Squadron, 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment, in the Republic of Vietnam. On this date he was located at the squadron command post when it suddenly came under an intense mortar and ground attack from a North Vietnamese Army force. In the initial moments of the firefight, a rocket propelled grenade slammed into a cargo vehicle next to him, and the vehicle erupted n explosions and fire. Sergeant Rambo immediately began alerting the personnel in the area and directing them away from the area. He then crawled to the fiercely burning vehicle and attempted to drive it out of the area. Suddenly another grenade hit the vehicle and he was thrown to the ground. Undaunted, he crawled to a self-propelled howitzer and started the engine. As he began driving out of the area, the vehicle was hit by yet another rocket propelled grenade and he was fatally injured in the ensuing fire and explosions. Sergeant Rambo's heroic actions were in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service and reflect great credit upon himself, his unit and the United States Army. General Orders: Headquarters, II Field Force Vietnam, General Orders No. 4896 (December 23, 1969) Action Date: November 26, 1969 Service: Army Rank: Sergeant
Rambo was loosely based on Audie Murphy- the most decorated soldier in U.S. military history. Murphy was a WWII vet who, while wounded, took out a whole squad of Elite German Stormtroopers, and commandeered a German Sturmgeshultz battle tank. I think he was in a film about his experience in the war called " TO HELL AND BACK!" He later did a few Intelligence missions during the Vietnam War in the late 1960s. And plus Morrell might have gotten inspiration from a soldier in the war named "ARTHUR JOHN RAMBO".
The movie paints a prettier picture and I believe a far more entertaining narrative. The book probably had more to say, but at the end of the day you have to ask yourself, would it work as a film?
Truthfully, I wish someone would give the book another crack. It needn't be a "message" film either, just a straight up gritty thriller as the book is way more dark and violent. Almost like a horror film.
Two other points in the book. 1) Teasle isn't just a Korean War veteran, he was a war hero who won The Distinguished Service Cross. He feels a sense of competition with Rambo, who is a Vietnam War hero who won the Medal of Honor. 2) Trautman in the book hasn't come to save Rambo but to kill him. He and Teasle are actually in a competition to see who can kill him first. Trautman talks about responsibility, since Rambo was military and so is he. Teasle talks about duty, since he's chief of police and it's his town. But at the end of the day, it's a masculinity contest with Trautman and Teasle both secretly wanting only to know if they're better than the other, and better than Rambo. In that sense, while Movie Trautman comes across as sympathetic and compassionate, book Trautman's much more of a self-centered b*****d. The book is a great read and has a lot of subtext going on, but I still love the movie better in a lot of ways. If you've never read the book, I recommend it.
Wrong, the Col. showed up to save Rambo. There was no "competition". The Col. only put Rambo out of his misery, following up on the foreshadowing of Orville killing his gut shot dog. And the Chief felt nothing but love for Rambo after shooting him in the chest.
I first read First Blood when I was 10 years old in 1988, I remember my teacher saw what I was reading in class and confiscated the book saying it was not appropriate for children. She later rang my father to see if he approved, my father having spent 9 years in the British army during that era told her that he did approve and he was glad I was reading it. My teacher gave the book back reluctantly and I finished reading it, I done my book report on it giving a presentation to my class. After the presentation all the other boys in my class wanted to read it next. The film is good but the book is way way better.
The relationship between Trautman and Rambo is explored further in the second book. In a flashback, Rambo remembers a conversation with Trautman during the war; "Trautman had said "I've got two daughters, I'm glad they were daughters. I love them, I wouldn't want anything different, believe me. But if I had a son, I'd want him to be you." And Rambo had replied "My father drank and beat my mother. I was glad to be in the army, to get away from him. If I had a decent father, I'd want him to be you."
I would say that Full Metal Jacket (film) is also better than the books. By the last book, Joker has joined the North Vietnamese and actively kills US military personnel.
The audience said it was too depressing... It's SUPPOSED to be depressing! It's about grief! It's about post-traumatic stress! It's about how hard it is for a soldier to return to a normal life - it's basically a retelling of the Odyssey ffs!
+notoriouswhitemoth Test audience, though you're right, but the movie would had gotten a negative backlash if shown to the actual audience. It likely that they had relatives who fought in the war
+notoriouswhitemoth i agree , it is but the change was still justifiable and had proper PTSD breakdown also. i do applaud the the goal the book was trying to reach , i also love the books ending , soldiers ending with honor.
+notoriouswhitemoth i never understood the whole test audience angle, why would you tailor your art for an audience. if you think about it isn't your original story the main reason you made the film?
Yes, this is about grief, bug it's Rambos grief, detached from the audience. We as the audience should nor try to connect with a trauma victim, yet remain sympathetic to him. Another movie that illustrates this disconnect and ptsd is "the war at home". You should watch this movie as it involves the audience more in a family dealing with PTSD.
I love both versions! The movie for being an action movie where almost nobody dies and showing that Sly can really act (much like Rocky), and the book for being really well written and giving us dueling PoVs as an allegory to both sides of the war. The follow up movies (and novelizations) are also super fun.
Just read the book and at 47 and probably seen First blood 100x and love the movie the book blows the movie away. The movie almost is completely different. I would love to see the books version on the big screen
A well thought out and researched breakdown, guys. You clearly put some serious effort into not only making this informative, but entertaining as well. I look forward to the next one. How about Die Hard / Nothing Lasts Forever by Roderick Thorp?
The book is more visceral and at the same time more cerebral than the movie, but it would take a genius to make another movie adaptation that is both faithful to the material and successful with general audiences. Not to mention, a "minor" problem...the score...is there any modern composer out there who could top the work of Jerry Goldsmith?
As a person who has read the book and loves the movie... I feel the book, while it plays as a two sided story, just potrays an anti-war and anti-(Vietnam)veteran propaganda tone. The book is almost wholeheartedly for Teasle, but presents it with a subtleness as to sway peoples opinions without shoving it down their throat (which is how propaganda works...). The author has pretty much admitted to this more or less. The movie humanizes Rambo, while still showing he's fucked up. It also points out a lot of other things which I believe captures the reality far better, even if it was overblown and packed into one story.
This really makes me want 1) to read the book and 2) a remake to actually happen one day. I really think a modern filmmaker could do the novel some serious justice. Setting it in the 70's and starting the movie out by pulling the audience into the historical context could make for an amazing cinematic experience. Modern audiences I feel could be more accepting of the dual narrative where both protagonists are equal parts in the wrong and in the right. It'll make the tragic ending equally satisfying. I think it can be made. Given enough time after Stallone makes the last of his John Rambo movies that is.
Thanks Franco, this was actually episode 1 and we're on #5, check out the rest in our cinefix high playlist: ua-cam.com/play/PL1AXWu-gGX6KqZNxQzNA1vx1YlcZVaRQM.html
+CineFix Although throughout most of the novel the character is only referred to as Rambo. At one point Colonel Trautman asks Rambo, How you hanging in there Jonny? Which suggests but not confirms that the characters first name may either be John or Jonathan.
The movie incorporated national politics about how poorly veterans were treated after returning from the War. The book was far more of a generational struggle between the establishment and counterculture. The book was far more complex than the movie.
I saw somewhere that the scene was an actual true story that was told to Stallone by a Vietnam veteran. that scene was one of Stallone's best ranks right up there with Mickey dying in Rocky
Another big change had to do with the teenage boy that Rambo came across in the woods while hiding from the authorities, in the movie Rambo lets him go after holding his knife above the kid, in the novel Rambo kills him which pretty much took away any sympathy you had for him.
No reason why Rambo shouldn't have killed the kid. Letting him go nearly got him killed. Its not like he'd never killed a teenager before. But yeah, the audience would've short-circuited because their self-righteous principles weren't followed.
The reason rambo even exist dumb fuck is to make people more aware of vets and what it is going on in their head. If he killed the kid because of reason you came up with while playing call of duty no one would feel bad for vets and want to help them they would instead be afraid of them and not help them.
From an objective point of view, killing the kid prevented the cops from finding him. The novel was to be seen as a very hyper representation of the disgruntled and disgraced war vet and as a Frankenstein the US was unwittingly creating. Despite that, I think the film addressed the subject better.
I read the book in 1975 while in high school, and was quite thrilled to hear of a movie version. The differences were immediately noticed, but then again, how could you have a sequel if the central character gets killed off?
I know it's been said before, but the breakdown scene was pure acting gold for Stallone. It felt pure, raw, and, authentic. I'm surprised to learned it wasn't part of the original novel. But it's placement into the film made total sense. I think Kirk Douglas, who was originally casted as Trautman, was right in wanting the original ending. It would've lent a greater emotional weight if were combined with the breakdown scene. The film would've been a bigger classic than it already is. This film also makes me sad in that it (along with Copland) shows the kind of actor that Stallone can be. But people only see him as an action, and so that's what he stuck with.
I watched the movie then read the book when I was a kid. The book had crazier stuff that I wish made it into the movie. It's been years, so I vaguely remember reading how he burrowed feet first into the muddy embankment below the roots of a tree, burying himself completely, to evade the search party.
I got my degree partly due to my thesis about Rambo, comparing him to Griffin, the Invisible Man in H.G.Wells story. I wrote to David Morrell and got a very helpful personal letter from him (he is a university professor himself) which gave me a much stronger basis for my theory. The film is one of my all time top 5 favourites (First Blood, Dirty Harry, True Grit, Casablanca and Tombstone.)
Just finished the First Blood novel. Rambo is a far less sympathetic character, ultimately making a conscious decision to kill all those people just because he wanted to (save for killing Galt with the razor, which was triggered by his PTSD). The most interesting thing about the book is the internal dialogue, with Rambo constantly questioning himself and realizing what he's doing is for his own edification yet finding ways to rationalize it, and Teasle being thrust into this horrible situation, bungling it and dealing with the consequences mentally and physically. Troutman is a cold and almost sadistic representation of the government using and abandoning soldiers. He watches with mild amusement as the killing machine he trained goes to work, then finally kills Rambo after all the damage has been done and doesn't seem to give a shit about any of it. Something that bothers me is that Rambo clearly dies at the end of this novel, but Morrell miraculously resurrects him for the second novel which never would have (or should have) been written without the success of the film franchise.
First Blood is one of my favorite movies. A lot of people look at it as a testament to action movies and I do,too. I also feel that the movie is pretty heart-wrenching in what goes on with Rambo. I have yet to actually read the book but I've heard great things about it. Great job on the video!
It's worth noting that Kirk Douglas was originally cast as Col. Trautman, but he left the movie just a few days before production began because of creative differences. Douglas was adamant that Rambo should die at Trautman's hand at the end of the film. He thought it would be more artistic. But the producers would not change the script, because they felt that if the movie was successful, there could be potential for a sequel or two ... or five! So, Douglas quit the movie. The producers had the scramble to find a new actor to play Trautman, and veteran actor Richard Crenna was hired the day before shooting started, and he learned his lines on the plane on his way to the film set! There are First Blood posters out there with Kirk Douglas on them!
the breakdown scene at the end gets me every time, i feel that. and ive always thought shows a lot more range than most people are willing to give Stallone credit for.
Why did they make the changes? The first biggest change (killing) was because we still haven't hit the point of acceptance to show a mentally disturbed man as a protagonist killing civilians and cops. Second, as CineFix said, it was too depressing. I like both the book and movie, each had their own charm. I think Rambo is the best thing Stallone has ever brought to life
no not at all. The point of the story is to make people feel bad for the character if he is killing people no one would think he is redeemable. Would you want to help the character from the book who literally was just gunning everyone down. I've read the book and I completely think the message is non existent in the book. I've never seen someone give a good reason why the killing should be in the movie its just edgy fucks who most likely would kill someone in real life.
one of the differences i thought the book did wonderfully was where he injured himself (just like in the film) but this actually is what messes with him for the rest of the story and gives him a fever. I thought it was interesting how originally he had planned to actually escape but kept staying for personal reasons until he was injured and then it was pain and difficulty of movement that was more of a factor in restricting his actions instead of just pure revenge. Either way, was really surprised by the book, and it really does make watching the movie better imo like no other movie. For once one of these big hollywood stories really does have some sick stuff behind it.
Here are my theories about the changes that were made to the film: 1. For 1982, a movie depicting a lot of civilians and police officers being murdered, in addition to Rambo being shot in the head, would be too gruesome and controversial. 2. The biggest reason for the film being so different from the book was because If the film was true to the book, then the audience would have had the bad image of Vietnam Vets embedded in their minds. I think the changes in the film were necessary to keep the image of military veterans in a more positive light. MAYBE in the near future, they could reboot "First Blood" (starring a new actor) and make it more true to the book it was based on. I would see the film if they did that.
Fun fact: in the book version, Rambo is fresh out of Vietnam when the story picks up. And I mean less than a year being home from war. But in the movie, it he had been home from war for 10 years
I would like to see a "What's the Difference" episode with "The Hunt for Red October". I am reading the book right now, there are huge differences, would be interesting to hear your take on it.
5:05 Captain Kirk is equivalent to a Navy Captain, which is the same rank as an Army Colonel. An Army Captain is a Navy Lieutenant, like Uhura or Sulu.
This was a great video. I've actually never seen the film version of First Blood but I've read the book twice and I have to say this video made me want to watch the film and compare them for myself.
Please do "Die Hard versus "Nothing Lasts Forever", the book from which it was adapted. The plot is basically the same, but the book is more morally ambiguous. It would be perfect for you to do.
The fact he "Could've" killed everyone but didn't leans more heavy to his skill. Im not saying it's easy to kill efficiently from a distance, but to move in close enough to not kill them but only teach a lesson, repeatedly. I love it
I am legend and the book. Literally every single thing is completely different. The only thing the movie used was the main protaginists name. And the name of the movie. Thats it. Period
I;m excited for this series I've always been a fan of analyzing the differences between movies and their source material be it novel, comic book, tpb, or other.
I read the book when I found out that Rambo was based on a novel (back when they were working on the 4th one - yeah, I didn't use to pay attention to credits). It was a great read. It actually diminished the movie a bit for me, but after re-watching it, I think each one has its pros and cons when you compare them.
The Novel was Great, but I like the film better, since we feel more symphatetic towards rambo's character, and made us understand more about how PTSD affects people..
I have just gotten to purchase the book just recently with the intention of reading it soon, and I am really excited to read it and learn just how different it really is from the movie. The movie is a favorite of mine in the Rambo series.
The book seems to be more of an indictment of how they treated war heroes when they returned than about cheering for the underdog like hte movie is. In the book Rambo is nuts and goes on a killing spree. There's no underdog in that. It's just depressing. But is highlights how vets returning from the war sometimes had issues resulting from it which needed to be addressed first before they could reintegrate into society. There does some to be a little bit of both in each other. Even in the movie you can get the impression Rambo is messed up and needing help. And in the book there's the sense the authorities are falling short. Esepcially the Teasal is given much more attention in the book. He's not just a bad guy on the hunt. Much more depth. Personally I think this has more to do withg the venue. Books have always been more deep than movies, IMHO. Movies are more visual and cliche. There're just some things you can't communicate effectively in a movie. To be fair, I suppose the same thing happens with books. Maybe there're things in movies which're harder to get across in books. And frankly I'm biased. I always prefer books. I don't watch a lot of movies.
If you remember the book character is truly, truly tragic. He's not just another vet coming home. He's not only suffering from PTSD, he hears voices, he has substance abuse problems. He mentions he had repeatedly tried to go back into the Army after coming home. And is rejected. I enjoyed the movie but the book is much more honest and realistic. It also tells Teasles past in much greater detail. Making for the idea that some men come home, some men are brought home(KIA) and some come back but never make home. Peace!
The novel Rambo seems to have no redeeming qualities. He just indiscriminately kills people, including civilians. What was the point of the guy writing the book? That Vietnam war vets are crazy murders to be dealt with harshly or something? The movie version of a guy shook to his core by his war experience, and then reacting, even violently overreacting, due to provocation and thinking he needed to defend himself as if he were still in war; and showing him having to deal mental health issues, is a much more useful and insightful portrayal.
The novel Rambo is supposed to be more pitiable than sympathetic, like a crazed fighting dog that has to be put down even though it's not the dog's fault. In a way, Teasle is actually the more sympathetic character because his motives are understandable and his backstory relatable.
Rambo symbolizes what the Vietnam war did to the USA. He is My Lai, Kent state, the police charges, the shit thrown at returning veterans, Nixon boicotting the peace conference so he could win the election, The killings of MLK and Bob Kennedy. All that NOT wrapped in candy paper for ease of mind. There is no compassion in him because there is none in war.
In the novel Rambo is the victim as much as in the movie. The big difference is that in the movie Rambo is a big cuddly action hero with emotions. Book Rambo on the other hand is a dangerous man, who've been through a lot, who was made a weapon to serve his country and then discarded once he was of no use. Book Rambo is by far more realistic and tragic character. And that few people can find sympathy for him in these comments shows just how little we changed since those times.
If you actually read the book it make's sense why he kills indiscriminately. It shows how a lot of vets were coming back addicted to combat while exaggerated yes but people always talk about vets with PTSD and fail to realize some get addicted to combat. A part of the book "Dispatches" is all real stories and touches on a couple of them. Oliver Stone and Dale Dye also talk about it on Platoon commentary saying people get Nam vets twisted thinking they all did drugs because of what they saw when a lot of them were just trying to catch the rush of guerrilla warfare.
I just finished the book and the literary Rambo outdoes Michael Myers from Halloween several times over. He comes across as a slasher villain, in that he kills A LOT!
The book was INCREDIBLE. I remember a printed handwritten note on the very first page of the paperback that said, "We envy you, the reader, for getting to read this for the first time.. - The Publisher." And they were right. Pretty good movie, too. Loved the Frank Stallone sung theme song... 😁
To answer the question in the description box "Did you watch the movie/read the book/neither/both?", I first got introduced to Rambo via the 'First Blood' movie. Also, I noticed as a kid where it stated "Based on the novel by David Morrell" in the credits.
Funny how the movies changed over the sequels. He went from killing no one (intentionally) in First Blood and by Last Blood, he's killed more people then Freddy, Jason, and Michael Myers combined. Yeah, he's a serial killer.
Honestly, i had no idea this was based on a book, I first saw the movie when I was little and then when I started looking it up, then realized it was based on a book.
I really liked the ending monologue for First Blood. His breakdown is heart wrenching and really underrated because people only focus on Rambo being a badass killing machine.
Chad L who said badasses can have big hearts?
Its a long road.....
When you're on your own...
The ending monologue makes the movie
Every time I cry when he breaks down
I adore First Blood the movie. The fact alone that the protagonist is a gun-toting, muscle-bound hero who never actually kills somebody except for an accidental death, while also breaking down emotionally at the end makes First Blood quite unique in my eyes.
OnlyRoke he killed those puppies 😢
Leo Peridot this movie was literally 40 years before trump, god what is your peoples obsession with trump being the ultimate hitler bad guy. Stop with the ORANGE MAN BAD shit and look at things objectively. If you honestly believe that modern people would support police shooting at an unarmed person, regardless of race, then you are part of whats dividing this country and part of the problem.
@Leo Peridot you're a jackass
macsikar Mackay did they shoot the soccer player or him? Also any idea why he did it? If its a similar situation to rambo thats a lottle bit badass, if not then thats horrible
S if you seriously think that then maybe you should go research Hitler
"They drew first blood, I just wanted something to eat." - John Rambo
It's true, if he had something to eat none of this would have ever happened.
Me in real life.
"it's just a prank bro"
Ain't nothing funny about it.
''They drew first blood. Not me.'' Is the quote. The part about the ''something to eat''
happened earlier in the conversation.
If anyone thinks stallone can't act, they haven't watched the end of first blood
Or rocky or creed.
Or Spy Kids 3
Or all films he did
He's won a Golden Globe and been nominated for Two Oscars... Dude can act.
Imagine being capable of acting with his facial problems, that must be damn difficult.
"They found Rambo's body. It stole an army truck, and blew up a gas station on the other side of town" Best line in the movie!
Best line in the movie is " I could've killed them all, I could've killed you... In town your the law, out here it's me... let it go, let it go..."
On behalf of myself and all other Vietnam Veterans that I've talked with, we salute Stallone for his excellent portrayal of Rambo in First Blood. The way he expressed the airport scene about the veterans returning home was what we felt in our hearts, yet most of us could not express. This is a message that needed to be spoken. Sylvester Stallone is a great actor second to none, not only in our time but any time. First Blood was a beautiful movie!
- Ronald Koontz
- RonKoontzMovies
I was born in 74.. I watched this movie when it was on TV one year in the early 80s. It was my first glimpse about anything that is "Nam". So was the second movie, Rambo 2. At an early age I saw what you guys went through and also went through when you returned to home. It made war and its life after much more complicated that I was more aware of back then. Thank you for your service. Welcome home.
Thank You for your service, Sir.
A VERY belated Welcome Home to you!!
yes thank you for your service & Court we can easily watch videos and read books and try to understand what they went through i was born in 78 so i don't remember jack shit from the 70's. but we will never get what those guys went through over there or any other war because we weren't there. it's a shame that vets find it hard to express and talk about the shit they saw over there at least with other vets but than the shit they saw it's no doubt really hard to put to words even to themselves. i find it amazing that when none of them don't come back with PTSD or whatever they call it now a miracle. a friend of mine was telling me he talking to a vet once i think he was a family member or a friend of his i forget which,
and he asked him about shit he'd seen well to prove a point to him how bad it was he told him a little bit and my friend pretty much went white in the face & said okay you can stop now. or he asked his father i forget as it's been quite awhile since he last told me this story.
my point is they went through a lot of bad shit over there. & it really is nice that they take that shit serious now compared to back than and vets can get help if they are able to. i dunno how to phrase it but you get my point
Thank you for your service! 💜🖤❤️
Sorry about all the shit you went through. I'm glad you and others were able to return home.
The ending change in the movie I think was for the best.
It really brought a more satisfying conclusion to the story and probably Stallone's most compelling performance as we see his character break down completely.
+FrankLightheart True, but only because Rambo was portrayed as a "good guy". In the book he doesn't seem to come out like a "good guy", more like a maniac torn apart by war. As a movie the new ending works but as a statement it doesn't, the point of the book was more to show what human can become if you program them for one thing only and that is killing in order to survive a war zone. Or something like that i guess.
mustekkala Just goes to show that changing the medium the story is told on really can change the context of that story.
It really only adds something to the movie. It would have been extremely anticlimactic in the book.
AJ Lindberg Yeah, that ending speech Stallone gives at the end really sticks with me. I remember it more than the actual action scenes.
+FrankLightheart Also keep in mind that ten years had passed from the time the book was published to when the film was made. Society had a drastic change in those ten years and the story changed to reflect that. Had the book been written in the 80s we might have seen a Rambo that is closer to the movie version.
I agree that Stallone gave a good performance during the breakdown scene.
The video is over.
Rambo: "NOTHING IS OVER!"
Underated comment
Dave R you just don’t turn it off!!
NOTHING!!!
*you forgot that part, just wanted to slide that in. 😁
Just you don't turn it off!
Back there, I could fly a gunship. I could drive a tank. I was in charge of $1,000,000 equipment! Back here, I can't even hold a job parking cars!
The novel Rambo is supposed to be more pitiable than sympathetic, like a crazed fighting dog that has to be put down even though it's not the dog's fault. In a way, Teasle is actually the more sympathetic character because his motives are understandable and his backstory relatable.
They mention Teasles past in this breakdown but it is very much a part of the story in the book. In the movie Teasle comes across more like an embittered Vietnam vet than a Korean war vet. I like both but truthfully the book is much more honest, accurate and realistic just not as "convenient" as the movie was.
My biggest takeaway from the book was, if Rambo and Teasle had just talked to each other, maybe everything that happened wouldn't have had to. At the end of the day, it's just a story of two people who refuse to give ground
It was just one Sheriff too many that had done the same exact thing to him. He intentionally sets out to commit violence in the novel. And the forest scene is much more brutal as he kills all the deputies. Only to be put down by Trautman which is a deleted scene and alternate ending of the movie. Except in the novel, Trautman hunts him down and kills him, he doesn't shoot him because Rambo begs him to.
@@cactusmalone They do that with every summary, just the smug way this channel does things. Same with how CinemaSins acts like he has a hot rod up his ass.
Idk. I hate Teasle in the book and movie. In the book he hassled Rambo for no reason
Neat tidbit according to one of the Uncle John's Bathroom Reader books: When David Morrell was negotiating with Hollywood for the rights to his novel, his lawyer reportedly charged him an extra $500 for a clause that would allow David to retain any "merchandising rights" that would come from the Rambo movie. David was like, "Merchandising? Who'd want to buy stuff about a movie where a guy goes around killing people and ends up dead?" His lawyer replied, "It's Hollywood, for all we know they might turn it to a musical!" Well, along comes Rambo II and, among other things, they made a ton of action figures, plastic "Rambo" knives, even duplicated that charm bracelet thing that Co-Bao wears. Morrell later said it was the BEST $500 he ever spent.
wow.too bad they sold the rights to the replica knives to Hollywood collectible.jimmy lile estate and gil hibben don't see a Penney now for the knives they designed.Hollywood Collectible owns the rambo knife merch.anyway.stallone can't even put the name rambo on a knife.i think it has to be under a title.like LAST BLOOD.it can't say rambo on it I guess
I know George Lucas had a clause like that too.studios weren't hip to merchandise.he had the foresight to do that and knew nerds well enough to know they'd be all over merch.if it was a bit succesful
Even I as a kid had a small toy Rambo kit, with plastic knife and something else. 10 or 12 years after the first movie
I had that little "jade" charm. Mine came in a little plastic Rambo bow and arrow set with the plastic knife and I also had both Rambo figures from First Blood One and the no-shirt Rambo from Part Two. The part one Rambo came with the outfit from the movie and with the M60 and a little knife and the other Rambo doll came with the bow, a little knife and a plastic RPG that fired a little plastic rocket tied to a string. This was right after James Cameron did Part Two. A year or two later, the cartoon came out and even more toys. I'm sure Morrell made a pretty penny.
I first read First Blood when I was 10 years old in 1988, I remember my teacher saw what I was reading in class and confiscated the book saying it was not appropriate for children. She later rang my father to see if he approved, my father having spent 9 years in the British army during that era told her that he did approve and he was glad I was reading it. My teacher gave the book back reluctantly and I finished reading it, I done my book report on it giving a presentation to my class. After the presentation all the other boys in my class wanted to read it next. The film is good but the book is way way better.
Frankly, that was good judgement on your teacher's part. Not all 10-year-olds can handle adult themes like that, and she returned the book after deferring to your old man.
THE BOOK IS AWESOME.
lol, i remember in i guess 1978, i was 11, and had a copy of star wars, of which i had covered with paper and written "wind in the willows" on it !
f that teacher man, you go and read what ya like 👊
Heck! When I was in elementary school in the late '80s (I would have been eight in 1988), I had a teacher take away a 1970s Old Dominion marine biology textbook that my mom gave me just because it was abnormal to have such nerdy interests. I think all authority is on a power trip just like in First Blood. The earlier in life we learn not to trust authority, the better.
Fun fact: "Rambo" (or alternatively, "Ranbo") is Japanese for "violent". I have no idea if this was intentional or pure coincidence. Just something I noticed when I took Japanese in college.
Is That How John Rambo Got His Name From?
He was named after 19th Century French poet Arthur Rimbaud.
You are right-@Conor Dowd. Rambo is an apple.
But Rambo is swedish...
The author said he was trying to come up with a name for his character when he came across the name Rambo from apples, it rolled off the tongue good enough
I always found it interesting that the film is less of a bloodbath than the book. In fact the sequels are closer to the character of the book than this more thoughtful version.
Rambo 4 and 5 resemble the book character.
Yes but the execution of part two...
I feel the greatest part of this film is that Rambo kills no one, except, arguably, the Sheriff, and even then his gun shots weren't enough to kill the Sheriff. I would've loved to have seen an alternate ending where, when the Sheriff is on the ground wounded and begging Rambo to finish him off if Rambo would've said, "Was it all worth it for not allowing me to have the soup and sandwich special at Melanie's Diner?" I mean, the funniest part of the movie is when Rambo takes control of that munitions truck and tells the driver "Don't look at me, look at the road, that's how accidents happen." It's not really funny, but it's funny in the context that Rambo hardly says a word throughout the film.
I totally agree,like that part where he's in the army truck is not funny but still funny
What about the scene where Rambo rams another truck off the road? If my memory serves me correctly it looked like a fatal incident to me
I love when he pushes the guy out the truck.
He sent at least 20 7.62mm M60 rounds through the roof into the Sheriff 😂 . That would have actually shredded his Arms and legs clean Off.
@@jeromea1659Exactly, not to mention he crashes through glass, falling 10' to the floor, landing on his back, then lays there unattended for 10 minutes but somehow survives...I love the movie but I always questioned that scene, even as a kid
For me the breakdown is the part that makes this film a memorable classic. Its a true display of amazing acting if nothing else
At the end when Rambo was having his breakdown in the movie, he said a lot of things that I am sure A LOT of vets out there would say!
It's quite the reverse on how movies are made nowadays when they draw on litterary material. Now they turn mostly compassionate, complex and interesting human characters into nearly sociopathic killers who rack up improbable body counts in the name of questionable ethics.
+Maxime Boileau Like what?
+Ryder Draconis Batman comes to mind
Tiddly Winks
He doesn't kill....
Ryder Draconis in BvS he kills quite a few people straight up
Like, not indirectly or by accident. He blows them up, crushes them with his badass Batmobile, etc. I love Batfleck but they did indeed make him into a killer
+Tiddly Winks Batman killed people in the comics too ya know -_-
The breakdown scene at the end is to me what catapulted this movie into superstar status, culminating in the acknowledgment of ptsd, a poorly understood condition. It has the same effect as Vader telling Luke he's dear old dad. Watching Stallone break down explains his actions and decisions throughout the film.
I really like the first scene though . Everything seems peaceful and serene . Children playing happily , a sunny day , a beautiful lake and then Rambo learns that his last brother in arms had died , he realizes that he is alone in the world and dies inside ; next scene a remote road entering the small town . Now everything is grey and depressive
A lot of the changes stems from the fact that movies need a hero. They chose the hero to be John Rambo, and because of this, they had to make John Rambo more sympathetic to the audience.
@@reckless20 It's childish to pretend there are no differences in character between people. Some people rise to the occasion under extremely dire circumstances , others show their dark , true nature. People are NOT all the same.
There was actually a real Arthur John Rambo in the Vietnam War, he died in the war, & his name is on the Vietnam War Memorial in Washington D.C. aka The Wall... I know in the movie his name is John J. Rambo, but that's just an odd coincidence huh???
After the movie, they actually did a story on Arthur John Rambo who died in Vietnam. I remember them interviewing his company commander who said a character like Rambo in the movie would have cost many American soldiers lives if he existed in Vietnam.
Silver Star Citation
Silver Star Awarded posthumously for actions during the Vietnam War The President of the United States of America, authorized by Act of Congress July 9, 1918 (amended by an act of July 25, 1963), takes pride in presenting the Silver Star (Posthumously) to Sergeant Arthur John Rambo, United States Army, for gallantry in action while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an armed hostile force on 26 November 1969 while serving as an artilleryman with the Howitzer Battery, 3rd Squadron, 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment, in the Republic of Vietnam. On this date he was located at the squadron command post when it suddenly came under an intense mortar and ground attack from a North Vietnamese Army force. In the initial moments of the firefight, a rocket propelled grenade slammed into a cargo vehicle next to him, and the vehicle erupted n explosions and fire. Sergeant Rambo immediately began alerting the personnel in the area and directing them away from the area. He then crawled to the fiercely burning vehicle and attempted to drive it out of the area. Suddenly another grenade hit the vehicle and he was thrown to the ground. Undaunted, he crawled to a self-propelled howitzer and started the engine. As he began driving out of the area, the vehicle was hit by yet another rocket propelled grenade and he was fatally injured in the ensuing fire and explosions. Sergeant Rambo's heroic actions were in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service and reflect great credit upon himself, his unit and the United States Army. General Orders: Headquarters, II Field Force Vietnam, General Orders No. 4896 (December 23, 1969) Action Date: November 26, 1969 Service: Army Rank: Sergeant
More like an eventuality given the number of soldiers.
Rambo was loosely based on Audie Murphy- the most decorated soldier in U.S. military history. Murphy was a WWII vet who, while wounded, took out a whole squad of Elite German Stormtroopers, and commandeered a German Sturmgeshultz battle tank. I think he was in a film about his experience in the war called " TO HELL AND BACK!" He later did a few Intelligence missions during the Vietnam War in the late 1960s. And plus Morrell might have gotten inspiration from a soldier in the war named "ARTHUR JOHN RAMBO".
@@ramonantoniodejuanbennett6239 Audie Murphy, not Audrey.
NOTHING IS OVER! NOTHING!!
***** NOTHING!!!!!!!!
***** That´s what I tell my washing machine, when it break, and stop working.. :D Sorry for my english
You just don't turn it off. That's all!
IT WASN'T MY WAR!!!
You asked me, i didn't ask you!
The year I was born (1982) my Dad had a Tumor removed in his lower thigh caused by his exposure to Agent Orange while serving in Vietnam.
Sorry to hear that Otis.
Aside from some minor nerve damage he's now a very active 68 year old man.
Otis McNutt Glad to hear it!
Otis McNutt If it's not too rude of me to ask: how do you know what the cause of the cancer was?
weavehole we can't know 100% but seeing as other Vietnam Vets exposed to Agent Orange have had cancer it's a safe bet.
The movie paints a prettier picture and I believe a far more entertaining narrative. The book probably had more to say, but at the end of the day you have to ask yourself, would it work as a film?
Truthfully, I wish someone would give the book another crack. It needn't be a "message" film either, just a straight up gritty thriller as the book is way more dark and violent. Almost like a horror film.
Yes it would but not in the context of a popcorn summer film
Brandon Hendrix like a Coen brothers adaption
George Havenhand Sure. If they can tap into that Blood Simple/No Country For Old Men vibe they'd do a pretty stellar job.
The guy who wrote the book apparently hates war vets or something
The way he was treated in the movie is the way a lot of Vietnam veterans were treated including my father..
Two other points in the book. 1) Teasle isn't just a Korean War veteran, he was a war hero who won The Distinguished Service Cross. He feels a sense of competition with Rambo, who is a Vietnam War hero who won the Medal of Honor. 2) Trautman in the book hasn't come to save Rambo but to kill him. He and Teasle are actually in a competition to see who can kill him first. Trautman talks about responsibility, since Rambo was military and so is he. Teasle talks about duty, since he's chief of police and it's his town. But at the end of the day, it's a masculinity contest with Trautman and Teasle both secretly wanting only to know if they're better than the other, and better than Rambo. In that sense, while Movie Trautman comes across as sympathetic and compassionate, book Trautman's much more of a self-centered b*****d. The book is a great read and has a lot of subtext going on, but I still love the movie better in a lot of ways. If you've never read the book, I recommend it.
Wrong, the Col. showed up to save Rambo. There was no "competition". The Col. only put Rambo out of his misery, following up on the foreshadowing of Orville killing his gut shot dog.
And the Chief felt nothing but love for Rambo after shooting him in the chest.
I first read First Blood when I was 10 years old in 1988, I remember my teacher saw what I was reading in class and confiscated the book saying it was not appropriate for children. She later rang my father to see if he approved, my father having spent 9 years in the British army during that era told her that he did approve and he was glad I was reading it. My teacher gave the book back reluctantly and I finished reading it, I done my book report on it giving a presentation to my class. After the presentation all the other boys in my class wanted to read it next. The film is good but the book is way way better.
I have the book is better in my opinion.
The relationship between Trautman and Rambo is explored further in the second book. In a flashback, Rambo remembers a conversation with Trautman during the war;
"Trautman had said "I've got two daughters, I'm glad they were daughters. I love them, I wouldn't want anything different, believe me. But if I had a son, I'd want him to be you." And Rambo had replied "My father drank and beat my mother. I was glad to be in the army, to get away from him. If I had a decent father, I'd want him to be you."
Agree. I choose the book rather than hollywood propaganda.
>>---------------------------> A rare instance where the film's storyline appears to be better than the original novel's. Rare indeed.
+surearrow Agreed. The books ending would have been viewed as cliche to a movie audience.
ABU HAJAAR, WHAT ARE YOU DOING?! YOU'RE HITTING US WITH ARROW CASINGS!
I would say that Full Metal Jacket (film) is also better than the books. By the last book, Joker has joined the North Vietnamese and actively kills US military personnel.
+22steve5150 Private Joker, what have you done to my beloved Corps?!
I'd argue that both Jurassic Park and Forrest Gump films are superior to their novel counterparts as well
The audience said it was too depressing... It's SUPPOSED to be depressing! It's about grief! It's about post-traumatic stress! It's about how hard it is for a soldier to return to a normal life - it's basically a retelling of the Odyssey ffs!
+notoriouswhitemoth Test audience, though you're right, but the movie would had gotten a negative backlash if shown to the actual audience. It likely that they had relatives who fought in the war
+notoriouswhitemoth i agree , it is but the change was still justifiable and had proper PTSD breakdown also. i do applaud the the goal the book was trying to reach , i also love the books ending , soldiers ending with honor.
+notoriouswhitemoth i never understood the whole test audience angle, why would you tailor your art for an audience. if you think about it isn't your original story the main reason you made the film?
Larnelle Chambers They to know how movie audience are going to react to the movie, know they what they like and don't like.
Yes, this is about grief, bug it's Rambos grief, detached from the audience. We as the audience should nor try to connect with a trauma victim, yet remain sympathetic to him.
Another movie that illustrates this disconnect and ptsd is "the war at home". You should watch this movie as it involves the audience more in a family dealing with PTSD.
I love both versions! The movie for being an action movie where almost nobody dies and showing that Sly can really act (much like Rocky), and the book for being really well written and giving us dueling PoVs as an allegory to both sides of the war. The follow up movies (and novelizations) are also super fun.
I'm so glad to hear those guys didn't die in the EXPLODING car , which he forced off the road with his truck.
Just read the book and at 47 and probably seen First blood 100x and love the movie the book blows the movie away. The movie almost is completely different. I would love to see the books version on the big screen
A well thought out and researched breakdown, guys. You clearly put some serious effort into not only making this informative, but entertaining as well. I look forward to the next one. How about Die Hard / Nothing Lasts Forever by Roderick Thorp?
Wyld staar thanks!!
Is Die Hard based on a book?
It is, and as far as I know its not even the first book in the series.
Breakdown? This is literally a recitation of the wikipedia article.
Fun fact: Kirk Douglas was originally casted as Trautman but left because of the change to the ending.
And less women were raped on set as a consequence (Natalie Wood)
He insisted Rambo that Rambo must die.
@@MagicAyrtonforever "Fewer" women
I'm glad that he wasn't, Richard Crenna was Awesome!
The book is more visceral and at the same time more cerebral than the movie, but it would take a genius to make another movie adaptation that is both faithful to the material and successful with general audiences. Not to mention, a "minor" problem...the score...is there any modern composer out there who could top the work of Jerry Goldsmith?
As a person who has read the book and loves the movie... I feel the book, while it plays as a two sided story, just potrays an anti-war and anti-(Vietnam)veteran propaganda tone. The book is almost wholeheartedly for Teasle, but presents it with a subtleness as to sway peoples opinions without shoving it down their throat (which is how propaganda works...). The author has pretty much admitted to this more or less.
The movie humanizes Rambo, while still showing he's fucked up. It also points out a lot of other things which I believe captures the reality far better, even if it was overblown and packed into one story.
There's a definite undercurrent of "conversation not confrontation" in the novel
The movie and book are not anti veteran, they are anti war
They Drew " First Blood " Not Me
They Drew " First Blood "
-John Rambo/ Sylvester Stallone
First Blood 1982
This really makes me want 1) to read the book and 2) a remake to actually happen one day. I really think a modern filmmaker could do the novel some serious justice. Setting it in the 70's and starting the movie out by pulling the audience into the historical context could make for an amazing cinematic experience. Modern audiences I feel could be more accepting of the dual narrative where both protagonists are equal parts in the wrong and in the right. It'll make the tragic ending equally satisfying. I think it can be made. Given enough time after Stallone makes the last of his John Rambo movies that is.
Coming in 2050: "First Blood, but this time it's sadder yet more poignant".
Not all books NEED the be told 100% accurately. They're both different mediums, and don't always work taking from one to the other.
Coming to a theatre near you in 2025 first blood with jada Pinkett smith as GI Jane Rambo …..
No way a film with that many cops killed would get funded by any Hollywood studio
The book has so many of Rambo’s and Teasle’s thoughts, that’s hard to translate into a movie. I bet they would fuck it up.
I love these videos, you need to make a lot more!
Thanks Franco, this was actually episode 1 and we're on #5, check out the rest in our cinefix high playlist: ua-cam.com/play/PL1AXWu-gGX6KqZNxQzNA1vx1YlcZVaRQM.html
+CineFix Although throughout most of the novel the character is only referred to as Rambo. At one point Colonel Trautman asks Rambo, How you hanging in there Jonny? Which suggests but not confirms that the characters first name may either be John or Jonathan.
+CineFix Brilliant channel guys, loving your videos. Keep up the great work, look forward to future videos.
+Jeffrey Coogan could really just be a throw away nickname
VicciiPlaysStuff True.
I freaking love First Blood. Much prefer the movie to the book.
Everybody knows that.
Me too. I always preferred the movie over the book, because of Sylvester Stallone's sympathic role and iconic portrayal of the character.
The movie incorporated national politics about how poorly veterans were treated after returning from the War. The book was far more of a generational struggle between the establishment and counterculture. The book was far more complex than the movie.
I saw somewhere that the scene was an actual true story that was told to Stallone by a Vietnam veteran. that scene was one of Stallone's best ranks right up there with Mickey dying in Rocky
Great job cinefix! Really looking foward to more of these in depth videos!
PinkZeppelin6667 Thanks!
Another big change had to do with the teenage boy that Rambo came across in the woods while hiding from the authorities, in the movie Rambo lets him go after holding his knife above the kid, in the novel Rambo kills him which pretty much took away any sympathy you had for him.
No reason why Rambo shouldn't have killed the kid. Letting him go nearly got him killed. Its not like he'd never killed a teenager before. But yeah, the audience would've short-circuited because their self-righteous principles weren't followed.
The reason rambo even exist dumb fuck is to make people more aware of vets and what it is going on in their head. If he killed the kid because of reason you came up with while playing call of duty no one would feel bad for vets and want to help them they would instead be afraid of them and not help them.
@@rorschach1985ify hm.
From an objective point of view, killing the kid prevented the cops from finding him. The novel was to be seen as a very hyper representation of the disgruntled and disgraced war vet and as a Frankenstein the US was unwittingly creating. Despite that, I think the film addressed the subject better.
He doesn't kill a boy in the book.
I read the book in 1975 while in high school, and was quite thrilled to hear of a movie version. The differences were immediately noticed, but then again, how could you have a sequel if the central character gets killed off?
I know it's been said before, but the breakdown scene was pure acting gold for Stallone. It felt pure, raw, and, authentic. I'm surprised to learned it wasn't part of the original novel. But it's placement into the film made total sense. I think Kirk Douglas, who was originally casted as Trautman, was right in wanting the original ending. It would've lent a greater emotional weight if were combined with the breakdown scene. The film would've been a bigger classic than it already is. This film also makes me sad in that it (along with Copland) shows the kind of actor that Stallone can be. But people only see him as an action, and so that's what he stuck with.
Yes, combining the two endings would have been perfect.
I watched the movie then read the book when I was a kid. The book had crazier stuff that I wish made it into the movie. It's been years, so I vaguely remember reading how he burrowed feet first into the muddy embankment below the roots of a tree, burying himself completely, to evade the search party.
Superbly done! It's always interesting comparing movies to the books that they are based upon.
Thanks Chris!
Agreed Chris! Keep them coming CineFix. This is the best video series I have seen in a long time.
I got my degree partly due to my thesis about Rambo, comparing him to Griffin, the Invisible Man in H.G.Wells story. I wrote to David Morrell and got a very helpful personal letter from him (he is a university professor himself) which gave me a much stronger basis for my theory. The film is one of my all time top 5 favourites (First Blood, Dirty Harry, True Grit, Casablanca and Tombstone.)
His breakdown at the end of the film tugs at the heart of anyone who watched the film. "They drew first blood, not me!"
Just finished the First Blood novel. Rambo is a far less sympathetic character, ultimately making a conscious decision to kill all those people just because he wanted to (save for killing Galt with the razor, which was triggered by his PTSD). The most interesting thing about the book is the internal dialogue, with Rambo constantly questioning himself and realizing what he's doing is for his own edification yet finding ways to rationalize it, and Teasle being thrust into this horrible situation, bungling it and dealing with the consequences mentally and physically.
Troutman is a cold and almost sadistic representation of the government using and abandoning soldiers. He watches with mild amusement as the killing machine he trained goes to work, then finally kills Rambo after all the damage has been done and doesn't seem to give a shit about any of it.
Something that bothers me is that Rambo clearly dies at the end of this novel, but Morrell miraculously resurrects him for the second novel which never would have (or should have) been written without the success of the film franchise.
awesome
Anyone else love Jerry Goldsmith's haunting main theme? That mournful horn solo building up. Straight up chills.
The mission is over...
NOTHING IS OVER !!!!!!!!!!!!
thank you!
+Enrique Valverde NOTHING!!!!!!!!
+john kelly "YOU JUST DON'T TURN IT OFF!!!!!!"
+Brother Malachai IT WASN'T MY WAR! YOU ASKED ME I DIDN'T ASK YOU!
First Blood is one of my favorite movies. A lot of people look at it as a testament to action movies and I do,too. I also feel that the movie is pretty heart-wrenching in what goes on with Rambo. I have yet to actually read the book but I've heard great things about it. Great job on the video!
It's worth noting that Kirk Douglas was originally cast as Col. Trautman, but he left the movie just a few days before production began because of creative differences. Douglas was adamant that Rambo should die at Trautman's hand at the end of the film. He thought it would be more artistic. But the producers would not change the script, because they felt that if the movie was successful, there could be potential for a sequel or two ... or five! So, Douglas quit the movie. The producers had the scramble to find a new actor to play Trautman, and veteran actor Richard Crenna was hired the day before shooting started, and he learned his lines on the plane on his way to the film set! There are First Blood posters out there with Kirk Douglas on them!
If the test audience didn’t think the ending was depressing we wouldn’t have gotten the Rambo franchise, crazy.
the breakdown scene at the end gets me every time, i feel that. and ive always thought shows a lot more range than most people are willing to give Stallone credit for.
Why did they make the changes? The first biggest change (killing) was because we still haven't hit the point of acceptance to show a mentally disturbed man as a protagonist killing civilians and cops. Second, as CineFix said, it was too depressing.
I like both the book and movie, each had their own charm. I think Rambo is the best thing Stallone has ever brought to life
TheSilentStorm OG Rocky is pretty great too.
no not at all. The point of the story is to make people feel bad for the character if he is killing people no one would think he is redeemable. Would you want to help the character from the book who literally was just gunning everyone down. I've read the book and I completely think the message is non existent in the book. I've never seen someone give a good reason why the killing should be in the movie its just edgy fucks who most likely would kill someone in real life.
one of the differences i thought the book did wonderfully was where he injured himself (just like in the film) but this actually is what messes with him for the rest of the story and gives him a fever. I thought it was interesting how originally he had planned to actually escape but kept staying for personal reasons until he was injured and then it was pain and difficulty of movement that was more of a factor in restricting his actions instead of just pure revenge.
Either way, was really surprised by the book, and it really does make watching the movie better imo like no other movie. For once one of these big hollywood stories really does have some sick stuff behind it.
His name was Rambo, and he was just some nothing kid for all anybody knew.
@@V_For_Vigilante it means he seems insignificant but he's truly a fucking war machine.The novel absolutely destoys the movie,a true work of art.
The book sounds fascinating. It definitely tells a different, darker story.
This is the hero of my childhood! Thank god my grandpa has such a great taste in movies and passed it to me.
I love First Blood movie. I'm really glad that Rambo didn't die. I'd like to see him happy, loved and surrounded by friends. He deserves it.
One of the rare occasions where the movie turned out to be better than the book, IMHO.
Gábor Vajda Agreed. Both Rambo and Teasle in the book are extremely unlikable IMO and it was hard to like either of them.
Gábor Vajda Book and movie are just different, for me both are good.
Gábor Vajda jaws is the same imo
Blade Runner was better than the book.
I agree with you on “Jaws”
Here are my theories about the changes that were made to the film:
1. For 1982, a movie depicting a lot of civilians and police officers being murdered, in addition to Rambo being shot in the head, would be too gruesome and controversial.
2. The biggest reason for the film being so different from the book was because If the film was true to the book, then the audience would have had the bad image of Vietnam Vets embedded in their minds. I think the changes in the film were necessary to keep the image of military veterans in a more positive light.
MAYBE in the near future, they could reboot "First Blood" (starring a new actor) and make it more true to the book it was based on. I would see the film if they did that.
***** yeah, that was all definitely part of the reason for sure.
I volunteer as a replacement actor for Rambo, but they'll have to wait a few years and ignore my Aussie accent.
i have another theory. it's called Rambo 2, 3, 4
They already did remake that version, "The Hunted" with Benicio Del Toro as the "Murderous Rambo" and Tommy Lee Jones as a "Granola Eating Trautman."
FUCK YOU NO MORE REBOOTS ASSHOLE!
Fun fact: in the book version, Rambo is fresh out of Vietnam when the story picks up. And I mean less than a year being home from war. But in the movie, it he had been home from war for 10 years
5:33, that impression has me on the floor man.
I think Cinefix should do the differences between Forrest Gump the Novel and Forrest Gump the movie.
Definitely! Gump was a jerk in the book.
@@southpaw2k1 A lot of movie characters in books were. Movies tend to make them more likeable.
This video brought something else to light to me.
Test audiences.
TEST AUDIENCES?!
It's like game testers. You hire people to see what they think of your movie and what you could improve.
rambo is essentialy a film about a veteran having a severe PTSD attack
I would like to see a "What's the Difference" episode with "The Hunt for Red October". I am reading the book right now, there are
huge differences, would be interesting to hear your take on it.
I remember getting the book in the early 1970's. I read the book that very first night. I could not stop reading it.
5:05 Captain Kirk is equivalent to a Navy Captain, which is the same rank as an Army Colonel. An Army Captain is a Navy Lieutenant, like Uhura or Sulu.
This was a great video. I've actually never seen the film version of First Blood but I've read the book twice and I have to say this video made me want to watch the film and compare them for myself.
marblee totally worth the watch, it's a great movie
Watch the sequels, too. But don't see them as sequels to the original, they feel slightly disconnected from the first.
BIMMOM you missed out....
WHAT THE FUCK GET ON NETFLIX AND WATCH IT ALREADY!
Wait netflix removed it (fuck)
Please do "Die Hard versus "Nothing Lasts Forever", the book from which it was adapted. The plot is basically the same, but the book is more morally ambiguous. It would be perfect for you to do.
5:25, "The Bastard Turning On Your Own Kind!" 😂😂😂 I Love It!
The fact he "Could've" killed everyone but didn't leans more heavy to his skill. Im not saying it's easy to kill efficiently from a distance, but to move in close enough to not kill them but only teach a lesson, repeatedly.
I love it
This was awesome. Definitely make more of these.
Tyler Guerrero YAY!
Awesome video! Looking forward to this series. PS it would be awesome if you guys did a Shining episode.
MrMLGuel Thanks!
Please make more. Highly entertaining.
Maxx Simmons will do!
I am legend and the book.
Literally every single thing is completely different. The only thing the movie used was the main protaginists name. And the name of the movie. Thats it. Period
I just finished reading the book about 2 weeks ago! I thought it was an absolutely great read! 10 out of 10!
I;m excited for this series I've always been a fan of analyzing the differences between movies and their source material be it novel, comic book, tpb, or other.
MrDankstar YAY!
I've never heard of the "Vietnam ved syndrome".. I HAVE heard of "shellshock", and later "post traumatic stress disorder".
I read the book when I found out that Rambo was based on a novel (back when they were working on the 4th one - yeah, I didn't use to pay attention to credits). It was a great read. It actually diminished the movie a bit for me, but after re-watching it, I think each one has its pros and cons when you compare them.
The Novel was Great, but I like the film better, since we feel more symphatetic towards rambo's character, and made us understand more about how PTSD affects people..
I have just gotten to purchase the book just recently with the intention of reading it soon, and I am really excited to read it and learn just how different it really is from the movie. The movie is a favorite of mine in the Rambo series.
I had no idea that Rambo was based on a book.
The book seems to be more of an indictment of how they treated war heroes when they returned than about cheering for the underdog like hte movie is. In the book Rambo is nuts and goes on a killing spree. There's no underdog in that. It's just depressing. But is highlights how vets returning from the war sometimes had issues resulting from it which needed to be addressed first before they could reintegrate into society.
There does some to be a little bit of both in each other. Even in the movie you can get the impression Rambo is messed up and needing help. And in the book there's the sense the authorities are falling short. Esepcially the Teasal is given much more attention in the book. He's not just a bad guy on the hunt. Much more depth.
Personally I think this has more to do withg the venue. Books have always been more deep than movies, IMHO. Movies are more visual and cliche. There're just some things you can't communicate effectively in a movie. To be fair, I suppose the same thing happens with books. Maybe there're things in movies which're harder to get across in books. And frankly I'm biased. I always prefer books. I don't watch a lot of movies.
If you remember the book character is truly, truly tragic. He's not just another vet coming home. He's not only suffering from PTSD, he hears voices, he has substance abuse problems. He mentions he had repeatedly tried to go back into the Army after coming home. And is rejected. I enjoyed the movie but the book is much more honest and realistic. It also tells Teasles past in much greater detail. Making for the idea that some men come home, some men are brought home(KIA) and some come back but never make home. Peace!
The movie is better than the book.
Did you read the book?
+obiwanfisher537 Either that, or he has no taste.
+berwwtje He would have a different taste. Not better, not worse than yours.
obiwanfisher537 No shit Sherlock. But we're not robots. Humans express their opinion.
+berwwtje You said he wouldnt have taste then.
im proud of having rambo first blood being my first exposure to the rambo series
Very well done comparison! Bravo! I read the book twice in the 80's & the film is one of my favorites.
The novel Rambo seems to have no redeeming qualities. He just indiscriminately kills people, including civilians. What was the point of the guy writing the book? That Vietnam war vets are crazy murders to be dealt with harshly or something?
The movie version of a guy shook to his core by his war experience, and then reacting, even violently overreacting, due to provocation and thinking he needed to defend himself as if he were still in war; and showing him having to deal mental health issues, is a much more useful and insightful portrayal.
Agreed.
The novel Rambo is supposed to be more pitiable than sympathetic, like a crazed fighting dog that has to be put down even though it's not the dog's fault. In a way, Teasle is actually the more sympathetic character because his motives are understandable and his backstory relatable.
Rambo symbolizes what the Vietnam war did to the USA. He is My Lai, Kent state, the police charges, the shit thrown at returning veterans, Nixon boicotting the peace conference so he could win the election, The killings of MLK and Bob Kennedy. All that NOT wrapped in candy paper for ease of mind. There is no compassion in him because there is none in war.
In the novel Rambo is the victim as much as in the movie. The big difference is that in the movie Rambo is a big cuddly action hero with emotions. Book Rambo on the other hand is a dangerous man, who've been through a lot, who was made a weapon to serve his country and then discarded once he was of no use. Book Rambo is by far more realistic and tragic character. And that few people can find sympathy for him in these comments shows just how little we changed since those times.
If you actually read the book it make's sense why he kills indiscriminately. It shows how a lot of vets were coming back addicted to combat while exaggerated yes but people always talk about vets with PTSD and fail to realize some get addicted to combat. A part of the book "Dispatches" is all real stories and touches on a couple of them. Oliver Stone and Dale Dye also talk about it on Platoon commentary saying people get Nam vets twisted thinking they all did drugs because of what they saw when a lot of them were just trying to catch the rush of guerrilla warfare.
4:18 That's funny because Stallone went through a bat-cave in _Cliffhanger_.
I just finished the book and the literary Rambo outdoes Michael Myers from Halloween several times over. He comes across as a slasher villain, in that he kills A LOT!
The book was INCREDIBLE. I remember a printed handwritten note on the very first page of the paperback that said, "We envy you, the reader, for getting to read this for the first time.. - The Publisher."
And they were right.
Pretty good movie, too. Loved the Frank Stallone sung theme song... 😁
The films ending is probably one of the best war film dialogues in cinema history.
To answer the question in the description box "Did you watch the movie/read the book/neither/both?", I first got introduced to Rambo via the 'First Blood' movie.
Also, I noticed as a kid where it stated "Based on the novel by David Morrell" in the credits.
Honestly, I liked the movie more than the novel. Both are superb though.
Funny how the movies changed over the sequels. He went from killing no one (intentionally) in First Blood and by Last Blood, he's killed more people then Freddy, Jason, and Michael Myers combined. Yeah, he's a serial killer.
The book is SO, SO much violent then the movie. I love it.
Honestly, i had no idea this was based on a book, I first saw the movie when I was little and then when I started looking it up, then realized it was based on a book.