Solemplex To me, this movie is perfection.

HottWwjdIam There is just so much movie here. For some it may be too much. But in the same secretly sarcastic way most telemarketers say the phrase, the title of this one is particularly apt.

Mabel Munoz Just intense enough to provide a much-needed diversion, just lightweight enough to make you forget about it soon after it’s over. It’s not exactly “good,” per se, but it does what it sets out to do in terms of putting us on edge, which makes it … successful?

Jemima It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

Coventry Yours truly is a prototypic male specimen, meaning that I like: cold beers, beautiful women and 80s action flicks starring Sylvester Stallone! Perhaps together with the equally extreme "Cobra", "Rambo III" represents Sly's peak in terms of grotesque and excessively violent cinema, and therefore I'm simply loving it! "First Blood" was a very good film overall, "Rambo II" was a logical and almost textbook sequel, but "Rambo III" is just a completely derailed and over-the-top feast of firepower and explosions! No wonder it was once even included in the Guinness Book of World Records for contemporary being the most violent film ever made, since this film features a body count of literally hundreds of people and single-handedly gives a whole new meaning to terms like "Cannon Fodder" or "Collateral Damage". No matter how hard John Rambo tries to leave his military past behind, it always catches up with him. Once again, he initially refuses to be part of a top-secret mission, and yet once again he's mentally forced go in alone afterwards? when he learns that his friend and mentor Trautman is held captive by evil Russians. Although admittedly nobody could be blamed at the time of its release, "Rambo III" is quite ironic to watch nowadays. In 1988, during the last waves of the Cold War, the Russians were still the preferred choice as enemies, and in this particular case Rambo even allies with Afghan rebels against them. It's rather funny how the script depicts the Afghans as pitiable but courageous people who have been forced to fight wars ever since their existence, notably because the US invaded Afghanistan themselves two decades later! These days, you won't often encounter an American film that is dedicated to the "gallant people of Afghanistan" anymore.

connorbbalboa Last time we saw John Rambo (Sylvester Stallone), he had freed American P.O.W.s from a Viet Cong prison camp and shot down a whole regiment of the Soviet army with hardly any battle scars. Here, he's doing the same thing, except now he's rescuing his former superior, Colonel Trautman (Richard Crenna), and he's in Afghanistan. How did this happen? Well, after watching Rambo in a stick-fight in Thailand, Trautman and an agent played by Kurtwood Smith (Clarence Boddicker from Robocop) follow him to a Buddhist monastery with the hopes that he'll join Trautman on a mission to give Afghan rebels Stinger missiles to fight the Soviets. Rambo refuses, not wanting to give up a life of peace, and Trautman goes in without him and gets captured. Hearing this, Rambo just decides to go in and get him back without a shred of doubt.This is easily the most pointless entry in the Rambo series for a multitude of reasons. First off, the film plays up the idea that Rambo needs to "come full circle" and accept that he is a combat soldier at heart. Trautman tells him all he did was "chip away the rough edges." Whatever happened to "God didn't make Rambo. I made him?" Is Trautman a liar? Throughout the film, Rambo defends the Afghans from the Soviets and by the end...just goes back home and doesn't seem to have changed one bit. We don't get any indication that he has "come full circle," so that's just a bunch of BS.Also, I'm really getting sick of Trautman. For the past couple of movies, he's been telling everyone how good Rambo is at what he does. In the first film, he does so to warn Teasle and the state police about how dangerous he could be when they hunt him. In the second, he does it to tell Murdock how good he is for the mission, and to warn him not to mess with Rambo when Murdock reveals his true intentions. Here, it's just too much. Even the scene where he tries to get Rambo to come with him on the mission is frustrating. It sounds like he's just trying to come up with excuses to get Rambo fighting again. He might as well be one of those action-obsessed kids fat on popcorn who loves these kinds of films. Stallone also seems pretty bored except during the action scenes.Once again, Rambo shows almost no indication that he's a traumatized war veteran except in the stick-fight where he seems he might let his anger get the best of him. Shame it was just that one scene, but at least somebody working on the film remembered that aspect of Rambo's character. His being in Afghanistan however, is completely out of place for what his character is about. The essence of Rambo's character is tightly-knitted with the Vietnam War and the poor treatment of American soldiers who fought in that war. If Rambo's in Afghanistan, nothing can be done to bring that point across. Basically, this film just comes off as an excuse for Rambo to go off somewhere and shoot more Communists. The fact that Trautman has a line comparing the Soviet-Afghan War to Vietnam doesn't help matters.Some additional problems are that once again, the Communist villains are one-dimensional and they think that endlessly torturing their prisoners will make them more menacing. It doesn't work that way, guys. Sorry. Also, there's an annoying kid living with the Afghan rebels who's a soldier (I can hear the political outcries already), who always wants to fight with Rambo and does nothing to help, and yet, Rambo eventually gives him his good luck charm (see the previous movie to learn about that little subplot). He's more like one of those annoying kids from sci-fi B-movies who are only there to make things harder for the main protagonists. He almost gets himself and Rambo killed for that matter.The cinematography is still great and the action is still fun (even if you know that the film's going to do nothing to serve character and story in a movie like this, enjoying the action means you get something out of it), but those positives alone can't make a movie like this great. By now, the subtext, commentary, and seriousness of First Blood (first in this series) is non-existent and Rambo 3 is just sub-par action shoot 'em up with nothing to stick around for. Quite a fall from greatness, I must say.

FlashCallahan John Rambo's former Vietnam Colonel, Samuel Trautman, has been assigned to lead a mission to help the Mujahedeen rebels who are fighting the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.When the mission goes belly up and Trautman is kidnapped and tortured by Russian Colonel Zaysen, Rambo launches a rescue effort and allies himself with the Mujahedeen rebels and gets their help in trying to rescue Trautman.......The third Rambo film was a notorious flop at the time of its release, and for a short while, was the most expensive film ever made. It's not a bad film by any means. Silly, but certainly not bad.The real reason I believe as to why the film failed, was because audiences were becoming a little tired of the muscle bound one man armies against the world. After all, Die Hard showed that an action star can be an everyday, vulnerable person, as did Lethal Weapon.So the days of the greased up, muscular soldier with the magical gun that hold infinite bullets, were numbered.Schwarzenegger had the right idea, and branched out into other genres (but still kept his trademark puns), and it appeared that Stallone was always one step behind him (his foray into comedy, Judge Dredd etc). So Rambo III was the start of a downward spiral in Stallone's career (box office wise) that would last for five years.So Rambo III is pretty much the same as part II, but this time everything is bigger, from Stallones muscles, the knife, and the set pieces. The makers must have thought that this was a license to print money, hence it being the most expensive film produced at the time.There is a lot of humour, Schwarzenegger type one liners that are scattered across the script, but it falls flat, not just by Stallone's delivery, but for the fact that the makers have now turned a tortured character into a comic book character.Still, there's action aplenty, the film looks beautiful, and Stallone's hair is beyond wonderful.

OllieSuave-007 Sylvester Stallone returns once again to one of his most iconic roles, playing Vietnam Veteran John Rambo, who this time goes to Afghanistan amidst the Soviet Invasion to rescue his Vietnam commander officer, Col. Trautman (Richard Crenna), from being held hostage by the evil Colonel Zaysen (Marc de Jonge).Stallone as Rambo continues to prove he is a force to be reckoned with, wiping away enemy combatants left and right as he displays his very formidable set of fighting and survival skills. It was satisfying seeing him deal with the arrogant and sinister Marc de Jonge and his merciless army, especially when you see the Afghan citizens in peril. Him teaming up with the Afghan rebels and the determined Afghan boy served as a good plot element to the story.Filmed in a fast pace with plenty of action and tension, it is one of Stallone's most intense performances, showing him the will to fight for good and to protect those he trusts and the innocent that are in peril. Despite some of the cheesy acting, it's a very good action sequel for some edge-of-your-seat excitement.Grade B