Jump to content

The Expendables


J.A.A. Purves
 Share

Recommended Posts

3553046588_b04a8d78d6.jpg

Directed by Sylvester Stallone - release date is April 23, 2010.

starring Sylvester Stallone

Jason Statham

Jet Li

Dolph Lundgren

&

Mickey Rourke

with Eric Roberts

Steve Stone Cold Austin

Terry Crews

Randy Couture

Charisma Carpenter

Arnold Schwarzenegger

&

Bruce Willis

Going to be the "guys" movie of 2010.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 83
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

3553046588_b04a8d78d6.jpg

Directed by Sylvester Stallone - release date is April 23, 2010.

starring Sylvester Stallone

Arnold Schwarzenegger

&

Bruce Willis

Going to be the "guys" movie of 2010.

Some of Hollywood's biggest Republicans. Will this be accused of violence porn?

"You know...not EVERY story has to be interesting." -Gibby

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IIRC one of Tarantino's earliest ideas for IB included casting Schwarzenegger and Stallone in the film. Interestingly, I was thinking this might be the film that many fanboys hoped IB would be. But after Rambo IV I'm doubtful.

"A director must live with the fact that his work will be called to judgment by someone who has never seen a film of Murnau's." - François Truffaut

Twitter.
Letterboxd.

Reviews and essays at Three Brothers Film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Anyone else just a bit excited about this film? I can't wait to see THE EXPENDABLES featuring Sly Stallone, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren, Mickey Rourke, Steve Austin, Randy Couture and more! In one film. Crazy. I can almost smell the testosterone!!! Roll on 2010 and... BRING ON THE EXPLOSIONS!!!

 

Some Expendables wallpapers & pictures samples:

 

 

The_Expendables_photo_27.jpg

 

The_Expendables_photo_11.jpg

 

The_Expendables_photo_7.jpg

 

The_Expendables_photo_3.jpg

 

Expendables trailers & videos

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjoi1BewlsI

( Trailer )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OM3lp7Tgo5k

( Trailer 2 )

( Stallone Working out )

 

I collected all Expendables medias ( Pics & Vids ) i can found in this site :

expendables_banner.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Here's an embeddable version:

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

This isn't the trailer that the studio made, but it arguably should have been. Warning: PG-13 language ahead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMDC76D9l94

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Am I the only old guy who chose to see this over Scott Pilgrim?

Overall, this was fun but not great. The cast alone is what drew me. I grew up on 80's action before I grew up and became a little more well rounded in my movie tastes. A healthy meal is what you should have most of the time, but there's nothing wrong with the occasional cheeseburger. The Expendables was promising to be the ultimate cheeseburger with everything on it. Close, but not quite. This was supposed to be an old school throw back but unfortunately Stallone was compelled to still use shaky cam and bad CGI blood and knives through the chest in a couple of shots.

I'm not an MMA or wrestling fan so Dolph Lungren was the really the only member I was curious to see on screen. I haven't seen anything of his since Punisher. He's basically playing the psycho loose cannon of the group. His story line at the end pushes the film into complete absurdity, in case there was any doubt.

Mikey Rourke shows up, apparently during breaks from Iron Man 2 judging by the long hair with light blue streaks. He's great though. He has a monologue infront of a mirror which is basically just a thin motivation for the team to go back and get the bad guys. That being said, the scene worked for me. Rourke totally sells it. His performance here actually moved me unlike IM2 where he basically looks tough and puts on an accent. He seems to be the only actor here who was allowed to (or was capable) of improvising and I think Stallone used him wisely. Watching Rourke give Jason Statham a hard time about his perfectly shaped head was priceless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Fun" is a relative term, but anyhoo, I completely agree that Rourke owns every scene he's in -- and he is much more interesting here than he was in Iron Man 2.

Actually, Rourke is something of an odd man out here, since he's never really been an action star (even the one movie that capitalized on his experiences in the ring, The Wrestler, was a drama rather than an action movie); but he seems to fit here anyway because it just so happens that he's as big and muscular now as many of his Expendables co-stars are. (FWIW, the first time I remember noticing how bulky Rourke had become was when I saw him ten years ago in the remake of Get Carter -- which, like The Expendables, starred Stallone.)

Oh, and the bit where Bruce Willis makes the film's one-and-only attempt to foreground the homoerotic subtext of these ultra-macho action movies? AWK-WARD. It should have been funny, but Stallone and Schwarzenegger don't seem to have a clue what to do or say in response, there.

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Verrry interesting to see how the conservative movie sites are responding to this. John Nolte @ Big Hollywood cheers the film for having heroes who follow a "moral code", etc., while his former colleague Jason Apuzzo @ Libertas complains that the film is an exercise in narcissism that ditches patriotism in favour of saving hot Latina women.

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Verrry interesting to see how the conservative movie sites are responding to this. John Nolte @ Big Hollywood cheers the film for having heroes who follow a "moral code", etc., while his former colleague Jason Apuzzo @ Libertas complains that the film is an exercise in narcissism that ditches patriotism in favour of saving hot Latina women.

...does there have to be a choice?

“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.” — Flannery O'Connor

Writing at the new Decent Films | Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Verrry interesting to see how the conservative movie sites are responding to this. John Nolte @ Big Hollywood cheers the film for having heroes who follow a "moral code", etc., while his former colleague Jason Apuzzo @ Libertas complains that the film is an exercise in narcissism that ditches patriotism in favour of saving hot Latina women.

Interesting stuff. Not sure why Nolte feels the need to trash Matt Damon in an article about a cheesy 80's throwback movie, but whatever. Of the two, Apuzzo's take is probably more accurate. That being said, no one should go to The Expendables looking for a serious examination of war and politics.I just chalk all that up to the conventions of the genre. Stallone and Statham even spy on the third world bad guys by pretending to be bird watchers. Just like Christopher Walken in The Dogs of War. Which also featured a ridiculously powerful gun which blows everything up real good at the end. Saving the damsel in distress, reluctant heroes, double crosses, etc. are to be expected.

BTW, from reading the thread on Scott Pilgrim, apparently it's getting the same criticism for having a female who needs to be rescued. And the fans are defending it by pointing out the conventions of video games and anime. Mario has to rescue the princess, etc. To clarify my earlier post, I have nothing against that film. I liked Shawn of the Dead and Hot Fuzz, so I'll probably see SP v. The World at some point. It's just that with both films opening in theaters on the same day, it's hard not to see it as a clear choice. Manliness v. geekiness. Rocky/Rambo/John Spartan v. the go to awkward skinny white kid from Juno. 30ish - 6o-ish year old men on a mission to save innocent people by engaging in actual combat v. a 20-ish guy with relationship problems engaged in fantasy combat. The Expendables just represented the more grown up choice for me.

What did not work for me here was

the hint that the 60-ish Stallone/ Barney could have had a relationship with the hot young Latina woman. His decision to go back and save her seemed like a refreshingly platonic fatherly motivation until Statham's unfunny line "Oh, well. She's not your type.".

That particular genre convention needs to be retired. ;)

Edited by Backrow Baptist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, with $35 million in the till, this film had the best opening weekend of any Sylvester Stallone movie ever; his previous best was the $33.4 million that Spy Kids 3D: Game Over opened to in 2003 -- and in THAT film he was a supporting character, indeed he was the bad guy, so if you want to limit your reference point to his leading-man roles, then his previous best opening was the $20.2 million that Rambo: First Blood Part II made way, way back in 1985.

As for Jason Statham, this is not only his best opening weekend ever, it is just about as much as most of his films make in North America during their entire theatrical runs; his previous record (not counting a bit part that he apparently had in Collateral) was the $19.5 million that The Italian Job opened to in 2003.

For Jet Li, The Expendables represents his SECOND-best North American opening, after the $40.5 million earned by The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor during its first weekend in 2008; Li's previous second-best, until now, had been the $34 million earned by Lethal Weapon 4 in its first weekend back in 1998.

I won't bother getting into any of the other co-stars, since they aren't as significant to the movie as these three are.

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enjoyed it obviously. If you're a guy who liked Die Hard, Lethal Weapon, Rambo, et al. back in the 80s, they made this one just for you. These guys are all like old friends. They've never really been interested in making their action films Oscar worthy. They just turned out a genre that seems to be dying out these days. And I've got to love them for it.

Say whatever you want about Scott Pilgrim being all incredibly innovative and shizzle, there's a reason Expendables kicked his ass last weekend.

Adding Mickey Rourke to this one was genius by the way. He actually did make some action films back in the 80s and 90s, but they were all pretty horrible. But he's by far the best character in Expendables.

If, like Stallone has hinted, they make a sequel giving Schwarzennegger and Willis larger roles next time, they should add Clint Eastwood and they'd have it pretty close to perfection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As others have said, Mickey Rourke was the best part of this movie. I loved his scenes. Also, the one scene in the church with Stallone, Schwarzenegger and Willis reached a level of almost Zen-like absurdity.

I didn't like Jason Statham, though. For one thing, his first film was in 1998, so he hardly fits in the same era as these other guys. I don't have a soft spot in my heart for his movies like I do for Rambo, Predator, Die Hard, etc. And for another, as an actor, he makes even people like Stallone and Dolph Lundgren seem Shakespearean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(With apologies.)

This is not a movie. It is a test of humanity. If you are entertained by this, there is (probably) something wrong with you.

Verrry interesting to see how the conservative movie sites are responding to this. John Nolte @ Big Hollywood cheers the film for having heroes who follow a "moral code", etc., while his former colleague Jason Apuzzo @ Libertas complains that the film is an exercise in narcissism that ditches patriotism in favour of saving hot Latina women.

Apuzzo gets credit for having eyeballs and a brain. Never, ever, ever listen to anything Nolte says again. Ever.

“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.” — Flannery O'Connor

Writing at the new Decent Films | Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(With apologies.)

This is not a movie. It is a test of humanity. If you are entertained by this, there is (probably) something wrong with you.

You're officially out of the macho-he-man club.

"It's a dangerous business going out your front door." -- J.R.R. Tolkien
"I want to believe in art-induced epiphanies." -- Josie
"I would never be dismissive of pop entertainment; it's much too serious a matter for that." -- NBooth

"If apologetics could prove God, I would lose all faith in Him." -- Josie

"What if--just what if--the very act of storytelling is itself redemptive? What if gathering up the scraps and fragments of a disordered life and binding them between the pages of a book in all of their fragmentary disorder is itself a gambit against that disorder?" -- NBooth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're officially out of the macho-he-man club.

I'll take my walking pages as a badge of honor. Make me sit with Alan Alda and watch Oprah if I must. So be it.

Even the television commercials make my head hurt. Wouldn't go if you paid me. Well, unless you paid me enough.

OK. I haven't seen it yet (won't until DVD - as is this case these days). But, I gotta play devil's advocate for a second here. Granted, The Expendables and the films it honors aren't gonna make it on our Top 100 list. Mostly, they're not all that artistic, and certainly not faith-based. But...

  1. They are entertaining.
  2. Do they fit into certain old-testament ideas of "manliness"?

As a film critic, how much do you value pure entertainment?

I'm pretty sure Samson would fit right into this group of machismo.

"It's a dangerous business going out your front door." -- J.R.R. Tolkien
"I want to believe in art-induced epiphanies." -- Josie
"I would never be dismissive of pop entertainment; it's much too serious a matter for that." -- NBooth

"If apologetics could prove God, I would lose all faith in Him." -- Josie

"What if--just what if--the very act of storytelling is itself redemptive? What if gathering up the scraps and fragments of a disordered life and binding them between the pages of a book in all of their fragmentary disorder is itself a gambit against that disorder?" -- NBooth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darryl A. Armstrong wrote:

: I'm pretty sure Samson would fit right into this group of machismo.

Yeah, but when Samson ditched patriotism in favour of a hot Latina babe (or Philistine babe, as the case may be), it wasn't presented as a positive thing!

Come to think of it, this film is really all about the buddy-buddy stuff, and I'm not sure Samson actually HAD any buddies. WOULD he have fit into this "group", or indeed into ANY "group"? I wonder.

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darryl A. Armstrong wrote:

: I'm pretty sure Samson would fit right into this group of machismo.

Yeah, but when Samson ditched patriotism in favour of a hot Latina babe (or Philistine babe, as the case may be), it wasn't presented as a positive thing!

Come to think of it, this film is really all about the buddy-buddy stuff, and I'm not sure Samson actually HAD any buddies. WOULD he have fit into this "group", or indeed into ANY "group"? I wonder.

Again, I can't speak to the film's specifics, but positive or not, doesn't the story of Samson play right into the archetype of this sort of film's hero? What with the lion killing and army slaying and temple destroying and all? Or maybe it should be, don't these stories fit into the Samson archetype?

"It's a dangerous business going out your front door." -- J.R.R. Tolkien
"I want to believe in art-induced epiphanies." -- Josie
"I would never be dismissive of pop entertainment; it's much too serious a matter for that." -- NBooth

"If apologetics could prove God, I would lose all faith in Him." -- Josie

"What if--just what if--the very act of storytelling is itself redemptive? What if gathering up the scraps and fragments of a disordered life and binding them between the pages of a book in all of their fragmentary disorder is itself a gambit against that disorder?" -- NBooth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Samson narrative is a bit complicated. The Book of Judges, a book about the decay of Israel, presents an arc of diminishing returns as far as the Judges are concerned. Samson comes at the end of that arc; he's the worst of the Judges. While he still manages to save Israel, he's little more than a drunken brawler with excessive strength. Nothing too admirable about the guy, aside from what God manages to do through him anyway. It's not meant as a triumphant heroic narrative outside of the broader picture of God saving Israel. In most respects, Samson is to be viewed negatively, not heroically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...