Expendables trailer!

Fair enough. Apparently this isn't a real trailer, just a piece of promotional material thrown together, so with that in mind it makes sense why there's tons of action in it and little story. Maybe when a real trailer comes out that will change, then again it might not. Too early to tell at this point.

Well, most of those film I listed had more to
offer than just action. The Expandables doesnt seem to have anything to offer beyond action.

Hm, that's a good list. I have to be honest, with that list, I'm not really sure why you're not digging this, but to each his own.

Sure I can

Lethal Weapon, Point Break, 48 Hrs., Speed, Die Hard, True Lies, Face/Off, Runaway Train, Beverly Hills Cop, Red Heat, The Rock, Air Force One, Broken Arrow, First Blood, The Negociator, Ronin, The Fugitive, Apocalypto, Leon, Casino Royale, Bourne Trilogy, more ...

There are also those that contain action but that I wouldnt categorize as action:

French Connection, Heat, Collateral, Terminator 2, Predator, Man On Fire, Hot Fuzz, Robocop, Usual Suspects, Minority Report, Black Hawk Down, The Matrix, Kill Bill, Aliens, A couple of superhero flicks, more ...

And I wont go Asian on you ...

Can you give an example of what an "action film done right" is, in your opinion?

I enjoy an action flick when its done right. Doesnt seem to be the case here.

The East V.S. West element was obvious but not everything else. You keep zig zagging all over the place, dodging points and side stepping the issue. The point is there is more to these films than "oh some dude goes and boxes." That is the bottom line. You don't like them. I love them. We're obviously not going to see eye to eye so we may as well drop the subject because no matter how many ways you try to run it down, I will counter with examples that you will dismiss simply because you don't like the franchise. The fact is that these various themes, ideas, and elements are there. The series is rich with symbolism and metaphors, and there are many layers to the six different stories in which this saga is told. That's the way it is, like it or not. Period. That's the end of it. You can despise it, run it down and call it every name in the book, but no amount of debate will change the fact that those things are present.

Dude! Rocky IV was so not subtle, that even Forrest Gump understood what it was about. And it wasnt deep or anything. It was rather clumsy, and laughable. You think people didnt see what Stallone was doing ? They did. And nobody made a big deal out of it cause its not as profound as you seem to think it is. You try to explain to me what happens in Rocky IV but I understood it when I was fucking 7. Give me a break and get over it. All you do is prove that you are not the intelligent guy you think you are. All that symbolism is shallow and obvious. Give up already. Its getting pathetic.

The films are shallow and obvious to PEOPLE who are shallow. You want another example? Take Rocky IV. Again, you're looking at the somewhat dated thematic material or maybe a few cheesy spots, say the montage with "No Easy Way Out," for example, but you're not seeing the big picture. At the time Rocky IV was made, the fear, anger and hatred brewing between the people of the United States and the Soviet Union was at the boiling point (during the Cold War). Ivan Drago's literally impossible strength was a deliberate decision because the character embodied the fear and the symbol of this kind of abominable enemy people were afraid of getting close to had their ever have been a conflict. Another thing Stallone brilliantly touched on was the fact that people, through propagated bullshit administered by our wonderful governments, are manipulated and pitted against one another but when all of that is stripped away and it's human being against human being, everything changes. These themes were woven into a simply structured, but solid story with plenty of character development and played a pivotal part in direction Rocky's life was about to take. Of course now you'll reply with: "duhhhhh....that wasn't in it..." This is the bottom line: You don't like the movies. I get that and frankly I couldn't give a shit what you do or don't like. That isn't the point. The point is that you are trying to downplay the significance of these films and are ignoring their relevance. You seem to think I expect you to sit down, thoroughly examine each of the films and just agree with me on every single issue. No, I absolutely do not feel that way, but there's a huge difference between not liking a movie and chastising it for reasons that are false. I have heard the first Rocky mentioned many times among the films you mentioned as well as Lawrence Of Arabia and all the other great classics. Rocky Balboa was a fantastic finale to the series and critics (the people whose words you hang onto so tightly) felt the same way. Of course I'm sure to you it's about "some old guy boxing." What matters is how a film affects the people who connect with it, not what critics think. Their opinions are irrelevant.

As far as Rambo goes, I don't know about you but I certainly wasn't entertained watching that little kid have his skull crushed by the boot of that Burmese soldier or that baby thrown into the fire, various people shot, stabbed, etc. I personally was disturbed by it and found it heartbreaking. That is exactly what one should feel while watching that scene, but I'm not going to go in circles here about that. I'm not obsessed at all with Stallone. I am a long time fan and an very enthusiastic about a lot of his work and think he's very underrated because nobody seems familiar with any of his work beyond Rocky or Rambo and even then they aren't even that familiar with those. But regardless it boils down to opinions. Whenever it shifts into lies, exaggerations, or generalizations, that's when I choose to end the silence and argue about it. Unlike most people, I'm not going to simply shut up and not say anything whenever something or someone I care about is being unfairly criticized for invalid reasons. It isn't a personal thing; it's not like I'm sitting here all pissed off or anything, but I'm certainly going to say what I have to say whenever other people have their say.

Wow again! I didnt say you were wrong just because, I didnt say I could get all critics and philosophers on my side. I said EVEN if I did, because I was implying that you are a stubborn ass. Not that I was trying to convince you of the opposite, but you keep coming back, like those films were fucking masterpieces that no one understood but you. When we hear about great movies, we hear The Godfather, Citizen Kane, Night of the Hunter, Apocalypse Now, and Im only stating the American ones and a few. Those really are more than just entertainment, there is a reflection behind those films, they tell you something. Weirdly enough, I have never heard of Rocky III being a profound film. I dont care that you enjoy them, they got entertainment value thats for sure, but you telling me they are more than just meet the eye is fucking stupid. Those films are shallow, and obvious. You take that surface and swallow it and believe its depth. Your analysis or Rocky can suit the first film, but then it became a cash cow. You are a fan. Just like those little girls listening to emo music and taking the lyrics for granted.

Rambo. I never complain about the amount of gore. I know what is going on over there and thats the problem cause the film glorified that with a scene that looked like a fucking videogame. Im not talking about Stallone shooting the guy in the face, no Im just talking about the scene in the village, with all the villagers being killed. The music, the editing, its all wrong, it tries to make this horrible thing entertaining. And I guess it works, cause most people love that film for its gore and over-the-top violence. Not the message that never goes through. You are alone man. You like movies that a lot of people like, but not for the right reasons. Thats because you are so obsessed with Stallone, I bet you'd buy his underwear on eBay if they were for sale.

LOL! What a truly profound and thought provoking argument. I'm wrong because...well just because I am apparently and you could get all the critics and philosophers on your side to argue against me. Great response that really has a lot to do with what was said. You don't like the movies. I get that and frankly I couldn't give a shit, but the fact of the matter is there is a lot more than meets the eye that you are trying to cover up and say doesn't exist and you are wrong about that. That particular topic isn't open for debate.

Wow! You are definitely one of the funniest person in the world. Not only you are ridiculous but you are convinced you are right. You dont realize that all you say is bullshit, you think explaining yourself proves a point, but its impossible to prove a point that exists only in your head. Wow, just wow. Id write a book about the opposite with the best critics and philosophers concurring with me, and you'd still say I dont know what Im talking about. It is useless to argue with you.

You three simply proved further you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. This is not a question of whether you "like" his films, it's a question of being able to back up your words with factual evidence.

I'm sorry but the description of those random scenes in a few of the Rocky films made me laugh. Exactly what do those things have to do with the movies? Can you even tell me what the films are about? Of course not, because you look at the screen and see "boxing." The uses of metaphor and symbolism go over most people's heads for some reason. Nobody seems to understand that Rocky is an ideology placed inside the body of a boxer--an existentialist operating on a mythological platform rooted in reality. The meaning of the series is profound and each installment has enormous significance. I normally don't even bother going into this with people but since you three initiated this entire debate to begin with, I might as well. It may have slipped passed you, but boxing has absolutely nothing to do with the Rocky films. It's a pay off. Nothing more. It's not what any of these movies are about. The first one symbolizes the fight each human being has with life, death being the unbeatable enemy, the one we all know we cannot defeat. It symbolizes the trials and tribulations we are dealt and how our characters are tested by the choices we made when dealing with them and raises the question of whether or not we can be standing when the metaphoric bell rings at the end of our lives. That is merely the surface of the meaning of the first film. I could go into far more detail on not only that, but each of the sequels.

Once again (I have a feeling I'm going to have to repeat myself many more times by the time this discussion is over), my taste in films is all over the place. it isn't limited to Rocky or Rambo, but I have the utmost respect and admiration for Sylvester Stallone. I grow incredibly tired of the staggering ignorance when it comes to people's perception of him. He has made an enormous amount of great films. The Lords of Flatbush, Capone, F.I.S.T, Paradise Alley, Nighthawks, Lock Up, Copland--those are all dramatic films aside from the Rocky series that he has done and they are all great. He's made a few bad films, sure. Who the hell hasn't? I would challenge you to name one actor who has been around that long that hasn't made some bad films. Everyone has. I especially love how people think that Stallone IS Rocky in terms of his mannerisms, etc. Sylvester Stallone, the actor and human being, speaks with absolute clarity and with great diction, is extremely intelligent and sophisticated, and is nothing like any of the fictional characters he has portrayed externally.

I couldn't give a damn what anyone has a degree in. That's about as idiotic as people with medical degrees telling people they can't question the epidemic of anti-depressant prescriptions with no legitimate testing to back the prescriptions up simply because they don't have a medical degree. A piece of paper is what you have, Skellington. That's it. I have taken a lot of film classes as well as one's delving into the process of film making, two years of acting classes, I have made 5 short films all of which have gotten recognition at various independent film festivals, so while we're boasting here, don't make the mistaken of thinking you're the only one who has experience or knowledge in this field.

As far as the last Rambo goes, I think it's great, but it's not even close to being one of my all time favorites (it's not in my top 10 or anything), but I'm tired of the whining about the amount of gore in it and the fact that nobody seems to even understand why it was made. Does it have the philosophical or social significance of the Rocky franchise? No, it doesn't, but it created an enormous amount of awareness about the civil war that's been raging in Burma for over 60 years. Rambo wasn't a one man army. He essentially took the viewer through the depths of hell and them brought them back. There's obviously not much point in debating with you people though because you don't seem to get anything.

Stop embarrassing yourself. Most guys on this site dig the idea of this film, they think it'll be entertaining, but none of them goes as far a pretending its going to be a masterpiece with meaning. They dont think the plot is strong, or that the acting is solid. They see it as a film that'll give them a good time. If anyone thinks this can actually be considered 'good' for real, maybe they should consider getting a dictionary or just see more films. You are obviously the one who knows nothing about movies. Its a fact, I know I know more than you. As a matter of fact, I fucking teach filmmaking, as a complementary class in a college. I have a fucking degree. I usually dont need to brag, but I need this time to show you, that I guess I have a little idea what Im talking about, and you dont.

haha... balboa you sure are a forgiving soul. for every good stallone performance i'll give you 20 that were horrible. infact, here's his good ones: Rocky, First Blood, Cop Land... the end. change your avatar. its embarrassing at this point. Its obvious you arent a film fan... just a stallone fan.

and please keep these hilarious gems coming:

"your constant comments about the last Rambo film shows just how ignorant you are to its significance and meaning."

PRICELESS! thanks again.

I have seen all Rocky movies. First one was good, not great, didnt age well. Hulk Hogan is in the third one, funny scene. The fourth one when he runs in the snow and fall, just like he was Jesus with his cross: priceless. Rocky V, fighting in the street with Tommy Gun: ridiculous. I think you have no idea what a good movie is.

Also, I see you think Rambo had some profound meanings. It would have meanings, if it hadnt been done in such a ludicrous way. I think Skellington judges the film for what it is, and not for what it could have been/tried to be. You are obviously the kind of guy who believe he's smarter than he actually is. I think Hunglowman summarized that with his comment.

Its funny how everyone has no idea what they are talking about according to you. Take a look in the mirror. You should start watching REAL films.

But please. Dont change. I love a sporadic laugh.

Okay, here it goes:

AntoineDoinel: You picked two of Stallone's films/franchises out of the rest of my favorite films. There are many more, extending far beyond Stallone's filmography that I love. The entire Rocky franchise is great--you actually have to watch it to see that. The vast majority of people have no clue what any of the Rocky movies are even about. You're one of them. Quit spouting off cliches ("the first Rocky is the only good one"). Give me a break. The day you actually comprehend so much as one of those movies is the day Hollywood has an ounce of integrity).

Skellington: you're hardly worth responding to, but your constant comments about the last Rambo film shows just how ignorant you are to its significance and meaning. The entire point of the story went completely over your head and that's obvious each time you mention it. All you know how to do is bash every single thing that is posted without having the slightest idea what you're talking about.

Hunglowman, your words have about as much relevance as a fucking 8-track player. I love how you take certain words and take them out of context. Yes Sylvester Stallone and Mickey Rourke have both delivered profoundly powerful performances in some of their films. It is a fact. Not something that can or will be debated. Period.

Balboa6:
You seem obesessed yourself a little...with Stallone. Your favorite movies are "Rocky (the whole series), First Blood (the whole Rambo serie)"
Talk about credibility. Only the first Rocky and maybe the first Rambo are worth anything. You are a funny dude.

Stallone is the cook. Why cant I compare it to another of his turkeys ?

"looks phenomenal" - made me do a spit-take,
"strong story" made me laugh out loud,
"excellent performances" made me piss myself.

Thanks man... you are a satirical genius. you should write for the Onion or some shit.

there were 50 lines in this?

It has nothing to do with being a man. It had to do with loving real films.

Wrong again. I have seen it. You know its not sane to find meaning in a film with none. Rambo wasnt profound. It was bloody and the crisis depicted was absolutely ludicrous. It glorified violence, and turned the massacre, when the villagers are killed, into an entertaining videogame. That was wrong. YOU didnt understand.

AntoineDoinel, you didn't watch the last Rambo, nor would you have even understood why it was made or what crisis was represented in the film. Your ignorance is truly staggering.

Rambo had the quality of a straight-to-dvd flick. It was shit.

no, just gay

not if its a porno

August