WI A Different First Blood?

What I'm proposing is probably near-sacrilege to some Sly Stallone aficionados, but I'll do it anyway. What if someone else was cast as John Rambo for the first film? :eek: People like Kris Kristofferson, John Travolta, and even Dustin Hoffman were up for the part but objected to the violence either because of past war experience or on principle. Al Pacino was willing, but even his interpretation would have been very different.

For a more detailed outline, see the following:
If Sylvester Stallone not cast as John Rambo
  • Replaced with __ __ (with stipulation that Rambo never directly kills anyone, as in OTL) UNLESS
    • If Al Pacino, he insists on playing Rambo as more manic
    • Raul Julia replaces him as Tony Montana in Scarface (Pacino doesn't want a similar role ITTL)
  • Gene Hackman cast as Sheriff Teasle and Lee Marvin as Col. Trautman
  • Rambo commits suicide at the end of the film, as he does in the novel
What do you all think? How might the (American) modern action movie look without a long-running franchise like Rambo? Who else could pull the part off the best in your opinion, and why?
 
The difference between Stallone and anyone else is that Stallone lends to his films becoming action films. He did that with Rambo, and well as Rocky. Those film series started off as those higher brow 70s dramas, and evolved into comic books when the 80s came around. Rambo was intended to be one of those 70s films where you follow the character all the way down. It's like "Dog Day Afternoon" or "Straw Dogs". It was that, except at the last minute change, which was to have Rambo survive. And the reason for that was because it was believed they could make a franchise. The other casting choices are not action stars so they don't lend to that.

On the topic of culture, Rambo was just part of a trend beyond itself, which was taking films and making them into basically live action comic books. That's where action movies period come from. You may start off with a serious drama film, but it will get more campy. Watch Rocky I and tell me you could see a robot in that series just a few years down the road. That trend will exist with as much likelihood.
 

Stolengood

Banned
Behold:

081805firstbloodkd.jpg
 
Here's a prospect: we get another actor, allowing Rambo to die. From that, we could get a sequel in the form of a prequel, following John Rambo on how he became what he was in "First Blood". That sequel, rather than having a comic book action movie tone would have one more in line with those serious 70s dramas, as I said, resembling possibly films like "The Deer Hunter" or "Platoon".

You have his life before the military, his military career, and his return home to work with, and you can make a somewhere along the line of his life before "First Blood". Such would also allow for a proper exploration of the plight of the Vietnam war veteran. Rambo was not a good role model, so to speak, by the time you got to the sequels. He was essentially the Hulk rather than an actual man, and the films were not concerned with the plight of veterans so much as punching Communists in the face. They also had the tendency to evoke and reinforce BS myths like the crazy veteran, the stab-in-the-back myth, the getting spit on and being called baby killer by Americans myth, etc, all of which were prevalent during the 80s and still today to all too large a degree. Very Right wing myths which play it as if Vietnam vets were against the world and the anti-war movement was wicked, where in reality Vietnam vets were largely the ones against the war and the VVAW was one of the largest protest organizations, the anti-war movement was largely sympathetic to GIs and the spitting thing is a myth in as much as it was not a common thing or even occasional thing, and the war was lost simply on it's own merits. The Rambo series reinforced all those myths.

One of the worst things it propped up, though, was the POW/MIA myth, where there was the notion that the Vietnamese still had American POWs in the (then) present, and that the United States government was ignoring it and covering it up. That myth got to be huge during the 1980s, when it reached the point where a majority of Americans believed it, and Rambo II played right into it and reinforced it and spread it further.

What a more serious Rambo series would have the chance to do is actually do something for the veterans of the Vietnam war and America in the aftermath of the Vietnam war. It could explore those difficult times, and shine a light on actual realities and struggles of America and of the Vietnam war and of the soldiers who went to the Vietnam war in the form of the Rambo character and his story. Instead, it turned Rambo into an action star, spread and reinforced myths of the Reagan era, all the while paying lip service to meaning something. I really have no problem with the Rambo series, though I know it may sound like that. But it's an action series which became one of those live action comic books in the 80s, and not what it could have been. And it did have all those BS Vietnam myths. With a critical eye, those features have to be brought up.
 
Last edited:
Casting somebody who can bring more nuance to the character would help avoid him being turned into a cartoon.

What about Robert Duvall? (Too old to look like a vet?) Chris Walken? (This would be around the time of "Dogs of War' IIRC.) De Niro (at risk of butterflying "Raging Bull":eek:)? William Hurt (at risk of butterflying "Altered States")? Or, going to a less-well-known player, Charles Haid (better known from "HSB")?
 
I wonder if not having Rambo and its sequels would have somehow halted the progression we saw OTL in the action movies, with heroes/superheroes that can brute-force their way into problems. Iirc, Rambo was the first character to lay waste single-handedly to enemy fortresses in a way that was more in tune with the power-fantasies than the gunslingers/swordsmen, who required finesse and stealth, too.

Otoh, we might be losing the A-team, too :(
 
Well, I wouldn't worry about losing The A-Team or Die Hard in TTL. As Emperor Norton pointed out, action films themselves would probably still be made--Die Hard was going to be a Frank Sinatra star vehicle at first; someone would still probably make a Vietnam-veteran(s)-on-the-run show, serious or comedic; and heck, George Lucas would still probably produce a film like Raiders of the Lost Ark a few years after First Blood. The difference is merely what kind of hero will appear.

Also, anyone have any other casting ideas for Rambo? phx1138, I think Walken and Hurt would work the best, and Robert Duvall would work better as one of the supporting characters IMO. Looks good!
 
TheImagineer said:
phx1138, I think Walken and Hurt would work the best
TY.:)

IMO, Hurt is the most interesting of those, but Haid is the most credible. He was a big guy, judging by "HSB", & Hurt & Walken left me thinking they were too small: more intense, tho.
 

I really like your analysis of how an alternate First Blood series (or at least one sequel) and its effect could have gone. I'd also like to hope that it could have helped pop culture come to terms with what the Vietnam War meant.

TY.:)

IMO, Hurt is the most interesting of those, but Haid is the most credible. He was a big guy, judging by "HSB", & Hurt & Walken left me thinking they were too small: more intense, tho.

How big or physically imposing does Rambo need to be? Just curious.
 
I wonder if not having Rambo and its sequels would have somehow halted the progression we saw OTL in the action movies, with heroes/superheroes that can brute-force their way into problems. Iirc, Rambo was the first character to lay waste single-handedly to enemy fortresses in a way that was more in tune with the power-fantasies than the gunslingers/swordsmen, who required finesse and stealth, too.

Otoh, we might be losing the A-team, too :(

I just checked IMDB. Rambo and Commando came out the same year. I think Commando was more about what you say than Rambo
 
TheImagineer said:
How big or physically imposing does Rambo need to be? Just curious.
Not a lot, but I'll give Sly that much, he looked good as Rambo. I think you do want a certain amount of physical presence, & Hurt always leaves me feeling there's a sensitive nice guy there, but not a big, dangerous one.

Haid had that imposing presence. Walken did it on sheer crazy.:p
 
Well, I wouldn't worry about losing The A-Team or Die Hard in TTL. As Emperor Norton pointed out, action films themselves would probably still be made--Die Hard was going to be a Frank Sinatra star vehicle at first; someone would still probably make a Vietnam-veteran(s)-on-the-run show, serious or comedic; and heck, George Lucas would still probably produce a film like Raiders of the Lost Ark a few years after First Blood. The difference is merely what kind of hero will appear.
A couple of them had already been done. There was Good Guys Wear Black in 1978 and The Exterminator in 1980, although neither quite hit the same notes. The former was more in line with "the government is an evil conspiracy machine" and the latter was more a Death Wish type vigillante film.

Also, Kotcheff did Uncommon Valor in 1983. That was really the first of the POW/MIA films. But it was Chuck Norris in Missing in Action who really did the fantasy/cartoon violence MIA rescue before First Blood II.


First Blood was less cartoonesquely violent than the sequels. (What had more influance on the cartoonish action films was The A-Team.)

And a note to clarify Mattep47's comment First Blood was 1982.

So, to me, the real question is what happens to Uncommon Valor and Missing in Action. An interesting possibility would be Norris playing Col. Rhodes. He was available (Lone Wolf McQuade was out in April, 1983, and filming for Uncommon Valor started in late summer 1983). A chop-sockied up Uncommon Valor might appeal to Kotcheff after a more serious/darker First Blood.
 
And a note to clarify Mattep47's comment First Blood was 1982.

So, to me, the real question is what happens to Uncommon Valor and Missing in Action. An interesting possibility would be Norris playing Col. Rhodes. He was available (Lone Wolf McQuade was out in April, 1983, and filming for Uncommon Valor started in late summer 1983). A chop-sockied up Uncommon Valor might appeal to Kotcheff after a more serious/darker First Blood.

Yes, but Part 2 was the same year as Commando. Rambo was more human in First blood and didnt kill everything like in part 2 when he shot down a helicopter with arrows
 
Yes, but Part 2 was the same year as Commando. Rambo was more human in First blood and didnt kill everything like in part 2 when he shot down a helicopter with arrows

Exactly so. I only pointed that out as your post seemed vague on that.

You want different? Cast Chuck Norris as Rambo.:eek:

:D

Nice idea, but I don't think the timing works. I wouldn't say he's a big enough name before Lone Wolf McQuade, which came out after First Blood. That's one reason I thought Uncommon Valor would work.
 
Osakadave said:
Nice idea, but I don't think the timing works. I wouldn't say he's a big enough name before Lone Wolf McQuade
He was already 5-time national karate champion or something, wasn't he? So shoot it like "Under Siege": let the serious actors do the heavy lifting, & just use him for the action.
 
Top