Obsessed With Film today welcomes new feature columnist Kate Weir to the team. Each week she will look at issues related to an upcoming movie. Comments, as always, would be greatfully received.

Redemption Carries a Pungi Stick.

Why ‘Rambo’ is reborn in the wake of real terror.

‘I continue to make my films based on social realism.’ the articulate and sensitive Sylvester Stallone says of his self-penned resurrection of cinema’s prodigal war-machine, as, in one of the many teaser trailers, Drowning Pool’s ‘Let the Bodies Hit the Floor’ storms onto a montage of explosions, exotic dancers and guns…lots of guns. Stallone is hardly Vittorio De Sica or Ken Loach’s American counterpart but you can’t deny, the plight of the Burmese-Karen people has never been quite so exciting or to put it bluntly, so fucking cool. Rambo has had a troubled return to the screen, twelve years in the pipeline and a new template of worthy, introspective war and action films turning ‘muscle’ stars such as Stallone into remnants of an extinct genre. However with ‘Rocky Balboa’ well received, and the desperate need for escapism whilst the war on terror trudges miserably on, ‘Rambo’ has suddenly become relevant again. After Stallone’s ostracism as ‘box office poison’ for several years, one wonders, how is it, that a mumbling, psychopathic killer is so successful where realistic, well-researched war dramas are failing?

It’s easy to draw comparisons between the political circumstances of ‘First Blood’ and the current War on Terror. The first film was made amid controversy about the state of repatriated P.O.W’s from Vietnam. Suicide cases were common and combat stress disorder and psychoses were apparent in many veterans; the government’s role in the bloodshed was questionable and people were disillusioned. ‘Rambo’ was torn between style and substance, the theme of a disturbed young man rebelling against the government that turned him into a killing-machine assumes an anti-American agenda, however, it’s execution which glorifies guns and combat alongside its portrayal of the Vietnamese as the savage ‘other’ leans towards the American right wing, which caused Gus Haslet (co-writer of ‘Full Metal Jacket’) to dub the film ‘Triumph of the Wills’ for American Nazis. However perhaps this is why Stallone’s phone started ringing again. ‘Rambo IV’ marks a return to the Manichean, all-American saviour previously re-introduced via ‘Superman’ and ‘Spiderman’ where the red, white and blue is fighting for credibility, to re-affirm the identity of the American people and reassert ideological authority. Moving the conflict to Thailand where Rambo rescues American missionaries (who predictably fall into the hands of the ‘evil’ other) is a smart move in portraying America as a victim in a conflict it didn’t cause and providing Rambo with the pathos of a ‘last man standing’ nobility, even whilst tearing out the throats of Vietnamese rapists (An embarrassingly old-fashioned scene accommodating the notion of savages violating our women).

The success of the new ‘Rambo’ relies on nostalgia as a hot commodity. Not only does the film remind us of a time when the fighting centred in Asia and across Eastern Europe (an idea which has made the Bourne movies successful) rather than reducing New York to rubble, but twenty-five years is long enough to acquire a new audience and grab the attention of Generation X-ers who loved the film as a child. Indie film ‘Son of Rambow’ s festival success has shown that the male fantasy of donning a bullet belt is a bankable idea. ‘Rambo’ has also aged into a naive kitsch product, left long enough to gather clichés, and with almost charming usage of actual stunts and explosions (as opposed to a slew of sub-par CGI), Rambo has entered into gloriously post-modern mythology. The self-assured trailer opener ‘You know his name…’ shows that Rambo has entered Michael Myers territory, a legendary, super-human being with a long leash for poetic license. We accept the violence because it is cartoonish; Rambo walks around like a computer character, with more lives than a kitten with a four-leaf clover. God bless Stallone for pledging the plight of the Burmese people whilst in the same breath joking ‘I worked very hard to make this the most violent film ever’ when an interviewee mistakenly said it was ‘one of’ the most violent films made.

Films dealing directly with the War on Terror have applied the Stalinist adage “One death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic.” with sledgehammer force to a pre-judged, ‘all are accountable’ audience. To give a few examples, ‘Rendition’ focuses on the plight of a falsely accused American immigrant and a young Muslim girl tragically implicated in a suicide attack, ‘In the Valley of Elah’ examines the grief of a man whose son is murdered in suspicious circumstances after serving in Iraq and ‘Lions for Lambs’ follows two young, idealistic students, killed after a covert mission (instigated by corrupt politician Tom Cruise) goes wrong. Recurrent archetypes include the innocent and spiritual foreigner, the disillusioned journalist / cop / student who generates pathos like an emotional lightning rod, the ‘Meryl Streep’ © ice queen and the ‘Average Joe’ who bitch-slaps authority with his irrepressible wholesomeness whilst empathizing with a large audience demographic; all characters brimming with earnestness, yet contrived and sloppily drawn. Plots play out in tense board rooms, characters flounder bewildered and useless in the clutches of governmental power, the Middle East is entirely defined by the potential-terrorist and non-terrorist dichotomy, the scenes of violence are painfully similar to those shown on the news and these films become a long political lecture where good intentions are lost in the overly wrought ‘message’. These films bask in hope of awards, with Oscar baiting performances and experimental narratives condemning them as dull and manipulative. Surely Meryl Streep’s mantlepiece is full by now.

On the premise that the war on terror won’t be won by well-intentioned films, Rambo succeeds in offering its audience pure escapism. There is no pretension in its unapologetic brutality, no hint of a midget, Scientologist seeking ‘A Few Good Men’ style glory. Even those who care deeply about the plight of the Iraqi’s are becoming fed-up of a world where death, destruction, disillusionment with authority and bombing fears are part of daily life. ‘Rambo’, offers us explosions, bloodlust, humour and pure adrenaline. He offers us heroics with no fiddly shades of grey, adhering to the mantra, if it’s bad, shoot it in the most spectacular way possible, preferably with a nifty one liner such as ‘Live for nothing, die for something.’ Rambo’s ‘fuck yeah’ conviction won’t appeal to everyone, the film still seems borderline racist, misogynistic and sympathies are somewhat misplaced. But Stallone can rest easy, with the hype surrounding the film and an audience with a good sense of irony all longing for some serious payback; Rambo will be a huge hit. A fact that the man himself is cunningly aware of, stating, ‘If you don’t give the audience some sort of emotional payback in a film like this, you know what it’ll be? It’ll be considered an artistic triumph and a box office bomb.’ Not a noble sentiment, but a true one, which Hollywood can learn from before churning out another smug war film.