First Blood / Rambo: First Blood Part II / Rambo III 4K UHDs (1982-1988)

[OutOfBoose]

II is a good action film, but it's drama is just terrible. III is pretty much a high-budget remake of Born American (total shit film by Renny Harlin).

[KcMsterpce]

I love this:

You Not Expendable - aka, Rambo The Musical - YouTube

(I also love "Conan: The Musical". But I think the other ones aren't that great.)

[Opips3]

AARRRRR!!

My friend buddy's picture.

[bootsy]

Gonna be so broke by the end of this year. No Christmas gifts. Sorry.

[Archivy]

Awesome news, but Lionsgate has a spotty track record, so I'll temper my enthusiasm until reviews start rolling in. On the plus side, since this is Lionsgate it might get Dolby Vision.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by DJR662

IIRC it cuts some of the violence and that is never a good thing with me.

Pffft. It's not about censoring the movie though, it's about removing some of the most OTT (and poorly CG'd, for that matter) moments of violence and putting the story before the gore. I've said this before but I'll trade a few bits of blood and guts to restore some heart and soul, and that's exactly what the extended cut does. I never really got into the theatrical cut, it seemed like it was an exploitation movie, gore for gore's sake, but the extended cut is a more balanced version (whilst still retaining people being turned into a fine red mist by those .50 cals, should you like that sort of thing) and I love it for that.

It's also worth mentioning that it was re-edited by Stallone's own doing. As Cliff tells it, Sly didn't want to call it a 'Director's Cut' as he thought that would somehow invalidate his work on the theatrical which was the best cut as he saw it at the time. But the extended really is the better version of the movie, albeit not the better cut for rabid gorehounds.

[ROSS.T.G.]

Yeah I dunno. It’s 50/50 they botch them. I really hope they don’t but it’s LG.

[DJR662]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Pffft. It's not about censoring the movie though, it's about removing some of the most OTT (and poorly CG'd, for that matter) moments of violence and putting the story before the gore. I've said this before but I'll trade a few bits of blood and guts to restore some heart and soul, and that's exactly what the extended cut does. I never really got into the theatrical cut, it seemed like it was an exploitation movie, gore for gore's sake, but the extended cut is a more balanced version (whilst still retaining people being turned into a fine red mist by those .50 cals, should you like that sort of thing) and I love it for that.

It's also worth mentioning that it was re-edited by Stallone's own doing. As Cliff tells it, Sly didn't want to call it a 'Director's Cut' as he thought that would somehow invalidate his work on the theatrical which was the best cut as he saw it at the time. But the extended really is the better version of the movie, albeit not the better cut for rabid gorehounds.

I understand all of that but the missing violent parts were filmed and used first, IMO there's absolutely no need to tone it down afterwards. And like you said yourself, it was the best cut as he saw it at the time so I think he should have left it at that. To me it always came across as if he had regrets, as if he thought he went a bit too far with a couple of things. But those violent bits are part of the story, it really shows in an unpleasant way just how mean these people really are.

I've had my fair share of censorship issues (especially with horror and anime) during the 80s and 90s. I'm so glad once DVD really got going, unrated and uncut stuff became the norm for home video. Last thing I want now is directors themselves removing violent stuff afterwards for whatever reason. I can't imagine Antoine Fuqua saying "you know what, let me edit some violence out of Olympus Has Fallen and put back a couple of story extensions".

And I might have been a gorehound in the 80s/90s but not a rabid one.

[gates70]

Hell yeah!!!

[LoSouL]

Originally Posted by DJR662

I haven't seen the first three in ages, not sure if these would still appeal to me now. Fourth movie is the only one I own on Blu-ray, but would love to double dip for that alone. I hope it will be the theatrical version and not the extended cut.

The first is still a legit, for real movie about stuff. The second and third were just "guy movie" stuff, not on the same level.

[LoSouL]

Originally Posted by Opips3

AARRRRR!!

My friend buddy's picture.

[mysticwaterfall]

I'm all for this to replace my blus as long as Lionsgate doesn't screw it up. First Blood Part II is one of my favorite movies of all time. I know it's not as deep as the first one, but it's one of the first R rated movies I ever saw as a kid, so it definetly has a soft spot for me.

[mulscul]

I hope the rambos are treated like the john wick transfers and not expendables/3:10 to Yuma transfers

[cmay13]

Literally just watched first blood for the first time a loooonnggg time last week. Now let's get that Rocky collection in UHD glory later this year to go along with the creed sequel.

[meremortal]

Surprised it took even this long given the quick transition to dvd and blu.

[StrayButler91]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Pffft. It's not about censoring the movie though, it's about removing some of the most OTT (and poorly CG'd, for that matter) moments of violence and putting the story before the gore. I've said this before but I'll trade a few bits of blood and guts to restore some heart and soul, and that's exactly what the extended cut does. I never really got into the theatrical cut, it seemed like it was an exploitation movie, gore for gore's sake, but the extended cut is a more balanced version (whilst still retaining people being turned into a fine red mist by those .50 cals, should you like that sort of thing) and I love it for that.

It's also worth mentioning that it was re-edited by Stallone's own doing. As Cliff tells it, Sly didn't want to call it a 'Director's Cut' as he thought that would somehow invalidate his work on the theatrical which was the best cut as he saw it at the time. But the extended really is the better version of the movie, albeit not the better cut for rabid gorehounds.

This. The extended version is the way to go.

I remember in the commentary, Sly also said that it’s very rare for somebody to look at an edit one year later and be entirely happy with it. And that’s something I relate to, as a filmmaker

[Bates_Motel]

I wonder if they will get all new scans or if they will in some way be ports/upscales of the far superior Region B remasters that blow the US releases out of the water. I'm curious to see how they look compared to the German box set. I'm assuming since Lionsgate distributes StudioCanal, they will use those masters.

[Rec2020]

Originally Posted by LoSouL

Ah hell yeah. First Blood is one of the GOATs. I like the 2008 one too.

Rambo 2008 was amazing. I wasn't expecting much from it at the time, but it was a glorious action flick.

[KcMsterpce]

I like the director's cut for that scene when he burns his knife along with the boat.

However, the weakest link for the entire movie is the missionaries. I also think the new scene where Sarah once again tries to implore Rambo's assistance to get to Burma is redundant. Also, I think it's badly written, and Julie Benz (while she's a fine actress, especially as a Dexter and Angel fan) delivers her lines with zero conviction. It just falls flat, and she says nothing that she didn't already say to him the first time she requested his help.

I like when he's forging a new knife, pounding out the pain of his past while building a new tool for violence. A raw, "honest" tool built by his own hands.

I wish that extra scene with Sarah was excised, and the rest of the director's cut stayed in. Regardless, I love Rambo (2008).

[FilmFreakosaurus]

The first one for sure! I pray it's a fresh 4-6k scan of the OCN's and not some crappy pinout. No f'n DNR either!!!

Dolby Atmos and Vision!!!