Movie Review: What Rambo Means
In his modern installment of the Rambo series, Sylvester Stallone brings a new twist on a familiar story. John Rambo is caught up in a struggle between both an easily identifiable enemy and himself. The Burmese military proves easy to vanquish while the battle with his own morals seem far more formidable. His prior experiences have led him to believe that war will always cause trouble and that trying to eradicate it is futile. When he observes the efforts of the American missionaries, Rambo eventually realizes that one should never give in and always continue the fight. At any rate, Sylvester Stallone’s movie clearly attempts to convey the futility of war early on, while later the merits of fighting to end war are shown along with its brutality.
Because of his excessive experience in war, John Rambo has settled down by the final movie as an outcast that wants nothing to do with what he perceives to be an ineffectual attempt at ending suffering. When the American missionaries attempted to persuade Rambo to take them into Burma, he stubbornly refused and tried to distance himself as far away from his newfound trouble as possible. Sarah then tried to get Rambo to believe in their cause to which he replied by saying, “You're not changing anything.” (Rambo). No matter how much he was pushed, he would not fight for something that he believed pointless. Nevertheless, he eventually gave in and agreed to take the missionaries into Burma. Soon they faced the danger that Rambo had known would confront them—a murdering of several Burmese soldiers that Sarah responded to by saying, “I know you think what you did was right, but taking a life is never right” (Rambo). Even the missionaries believed th...
... middle of paper ...
...mbo portrays war as brutal and aimless at times, during others it plaudits war because one should never surrender. Rambo’s early reluctance to take the missionaries edified his belief that he was finished fighting for others. The later victory over the Burmese military illustrated the benefits of living, “for nothing,” or dying, “for something” (Rambo). And finally, the massacre of the people in the very village the missionaries were trying to save shows the negative effects that war can have in the long run. Although Rambo fights a very specific type of warfare in a very specific setting, what is true for this movie is true for all wars; death is a cost that one may pay to fight for what one may believe in.
Works Cited
Rambo. Dir. Sylvester Stallone. Perf. Sylvester Stallone, Julie Benz, Matthew Marsden, and
Graham McTavish. Lionsgate, 2008. Film.
Laws exist to protect life and property; however, they are only as effective as the forces that uphold them. War is a void that exists beyond the grasps of any law enforcing agency and It exemplifies humankind's most desperate situation. It is an ethical wilderness exempt from civilized practices. In all respects, war is a primitive extension of man. Caputo describes the ethical wilderness of Vietnam as a place "lacking restraints, sanctioned to kill, confronted by a hostile country and a relentless enemy, we sank into a brutish state." Without boundaries, there is only a biological moral c...
During Dahl's travels he comes across some very interesting people with unique personalities. Dahl meets these two helpful, warm-hearted warriors that understand war very well. One of those is Mdisho a young 19-year old boy in Dar es Salaam And the other Named David Coke in Greece. Both of these men understand war but think about it very differently about it.
Prideaux, T. "Take Aim, Fire at the Agonies of War." Life 20 Dec. 1963: 115-118. Rabe, David. "Admiring the Unpredictable Mr. Kubrick." New York Times 21 June 1987: H34+
Conflict is constant. It is everywhere. It exists within one’s own mind, different desires fighting for dominance. It exists outside in nature, different animals fighting for the limited resources available, and it exists in human society, in the courts. It can occur subtly, making small changes that do not register consciously, and it can occur directly and violently, the use of pure strength, whether physical, social, economic, or academic, to assert dominance and achieve one’s goals; this is the use of force. Yet, with the use of force, the user of force is destined to be one day felled by it. “He who lives by the sword will die by the sword.”
The word “War” sends shivers through many people because of the effect war has on individual groups or people, minorities, soldiers and the society.
Russian Prime Minister Joseph Stalin once said, “A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic.” The impersonalization of war and death that he shares is an realistic characterization of war; originally intending to improve the lives of people, yet inevitably leading to the destruction of human life. Author Kurt Vonnegut endorses this view in his novel Slaughterhouse-Five; he shows that war can never be justified as long as innocent life is lost. Throughout Slaughterhouse-Five, Vonnegut explores the theme of free will in order to illustrate the absurdity of war. Vonnegut conveys this through setting, characters, structure, and style.
John F. Kennedy once famously said, “Mankind must put an end to war before war puts an end to mankind.” It has been said a few decades ago but the theme of war is relevant at all times. One might share Kennedy’s point of view, when another one not. The most obvious example of different views and approaches on how to deal with conflicts are of the Western and Eastern civilizations. The Western is focused on physical aggressiveness and getting things done through power and coercion, while the Eastern approach is more philosophical, rational, and strategic. We see such method of approach in Sun Tzu’s military treatise, “The Art of War.” Even though he wrote a manual on how to defeat an enemy, Sun Tzu emphasized that a large portion of success is based on the army’s moral duty, which is cultivated by incentives, leaders’ examples, and the ability to listen to their soldiers.
“I have consistently preached that nonviolence demands that the means we use must be as pure as the ends we seek. I have tried to make clear that it is wrong to use immoral means to attain moral ends. But now I must affirm that it is just as wrong, or perhaps even more so, to use moral means to preserve immoral ends.”
In Marjane Satrapi’s Persepolis and in Ishmael Beah’s A Long Way Gone, both authors commentate on the romanticism of violence that is often associated with war. Because of this, the authors are able to dispel misconceptions surrounding war. Furthermore, the memoirs allow the authors reflect upon their own experiences of war during their childhoods, as well as examine how cultural shifts perpetuated by both war and the increased influence of western culture that took place within their cultures shaped who they became. Through their memoirs, the authors portray the reality of war and violence through cultural experiences.
Clint Eastwood in many scenes throughout the movie allowed the viewer to see how different the realities of war and images of war can be.
First, war is universal due to its violent nature, violence in its application knows no bounds, and it is the common factor that identifies the war and without it the war is nothing more than a diplomatic effort to reach the end. However, wars blow out only when the diplomacy fails. Violence is the war engine. Although the application of violence evolved through time and its severity varies according to communities, cultures, and the means and methods used. Demonstrating the violence through the application of force to subjugate the enemy is the central idea of war. “War is a clash between major interests,
War is the means to many ends. The ends of ruthless dictators, of land disputes, and lives – each play its part in the reasoning for war. War is controllable. It can be avoided; however, once it begins, the bat...
When the war breaks out, this tranquil little town seems like the last place on earth that could produce a team of vicious, violent soldiers. Soon we see Jim thrown into a completely contrasting `world', full of violence and fighting, and the strong dissimilarity between his hometown and this new war-stricken country is emphasised. The fact that the original setting is so diversely opposite to that if the war setting, the harsh reality of the horror of war is demonstrated.
War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning, written by the talented author Chris Hedges, gives us provoking thoughts that are somewhat painful to read but at the same time are quite personal confessions. Chris Hedges, a talented journalist to say the least, brings nearly 15 years of being a foreign correspondent to this book and subjectively concludes how all of his world experiences tie together. Throughout his book, he unifies themes present in all wars he experienced first hand. The most important themes I was able to draw from this book were, war skews reality, dominates culture, seduces society with its heroic attributes, distorts memory, and supports a cause, and allures us by a constant battle between death and love.
The two films I have decided to compare and contrast is Letters from Iwo Jima (2006) and The Deer Hunter (1978). Letters from Iwo Jima is focused on the battle between Japan and the United States for the island of Iwo Jima during World War 2 where the island was invaded by American marines. Meanwhile, the Deer Hunter took place during the Vietnam War. This essay compares and contrasts the two films on how they represent the social and political attitudes of the characters towards war. Despite a common belief of sense of duty, some soldiers question the demand for them to fight. This analysis sheds light on the cultural, social and political views of these characters from different countries.