Talk:Rambo: Last Blood

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 3 October 2018[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: uncontroversial move. czar 14:52, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled Rambo fifth film → Rambo V – Many sources are referring to the film as Rambo 5, such as here, here, here, and here. Stallone also refers to the film as Rambo 5. I haven't come across a single source that refers to the film as Untitled Rambo fifth film. In keeping up with the titles of previous films, such as Rambo: First Blood Part II and Rambo III, I suggest the article be titled as Rambo V. Armegon (talk) 23:14, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree for the given reasons. Besides, the current title is grammatically incorrect; it should be "Untitled fifth Rambo film." David O. Johnson (talk) 01:00, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, though the official teaser poster Stallone released has the film titled as Rambo V.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 09:53, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Agree should be changed from "untitled" however even officialslystallone social media accounts refer to it as Rambo 5 (not Rambo V) so not even getting consensus yet from the star. MoviePhan (talk) 16:43, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes but the studio is officially marketing the film as Rambo V Armegon (talk) 20:01, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 30 May 2019[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: page already moved by Anthony Appleyard per WP:SNOW following a request [1] at WP:RMTR. Procedural close by PC78 (talk) 13:44, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Rambo V: Last Blood → Rambo: Last Blood – This is the official title given in the teaser trailer posted by Liongate. Yoshiman6464 ♫🥚 15:14, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per nom. Title on the poster and on the Lionsgate website is "Rambo: Last Blood". As far as I can tell, "Rambo V" is only used informally. PC78 (talk) 15:46, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Rambo V was the working title, which changed to Rambo V: Last Blood. Official title is Rambo: Last Blood per trailer, listing on Lionsgate webpage, and official poster.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 15:59, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support No V or 5 or Fifth on the poster. 202.81.249.98 (talk) 16:32, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment the teaser poster from months ago had "Rambo V" on it; the new trailer drops the "V" -- 70.51.201.106 (talk) 03:23, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per others. This is a borderline uncontroversial move; the name used throughout the article has already been changed to this anyway. Geolodus (talk) 17:02, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per others. We should change it to Rambo: Last Blood since it's an official title now, unless they changed the title name again. BattleshipMan (talk) 17:15, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. If the Rambo: Last Blood title is officially confirmed by the trailer, poster and website, why are you guys still disgussing this? Just rename the article and that's it! – 92.26.99.111 (talk) 17:53, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Rreagan007 (talk) 18:13, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • SUPPORT: The trailer is out. The official final title has been confirmed. Armegon (talk) 19:37, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The page has now been moved, so shouldn't this discussion be closed? Geolodus (talk) 09:02, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Last film[edit]

This could be the last Rambo film. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:151F:861D:28B7:3E89:9F67:C6B2 (talk) 03:28, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Perhaps, but Stallone merely hinted that he may return if this one does well.ChewNaChunkx (talk) 09:27, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe will be last... some in 2020 comes First Blood remake Still hope for Rambo VI here some news https://www.joblo.com/movie-news/sylvester-stallone-teases-the-possibility-of-the-return-of-rambo --2A00:4802:2800:0:0:0:0:D5B (talk) 15:18, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative titles in Lead[edit]

It's best if I bring this up before an edit war ensues. I SUPPORT having the alternative titles in the lead. It's natural, of course, that I favor my edit but I am not without reason...

1. it's consistent with the other Rambo film articles that had listed their alternative titles in the lead i.e. First Blood and Rambo
2. The Rambo films have inconsistent titles i.e. third film is titled Rambo III but the fourth film is simply titled Rambo, etc. The alternative titles will help readers identify this installment as the fifth film.
3. Despite the official final title from the studio, various reliable sources are referring to the film as either Rambo V or Rambo V: Last Blood. I'm not saying we should change the article title again but at least acknowledge the alternative titles in the lead. Thoughts? Armegon (talk) 09:49, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi we do not need of title Rambo V: Last Blood I think only maybe also known as Rambo V not and Rambo V: Last Blood it becomes a lot of accumulation. Rambo (also known as Rambo IV[5] and John Rambo) Rambo IV and John Rambo was working titles John Rambo use just in Extended Cut version on screen as John Rambo--2A00:4802:2800:0:0:0:0:95 (talk) 10:02, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
we have to decide which one to be Rambo V or Rambo V: Last Blood with 2 alternate titles is very for me and are symmetrical with original title Rambo: Last Blood just one title add V before Last Blood and second add V and not add Last Blood maybe Rambo V is perfect for alternate title --2A00:4802:2800:0:0:0:0:95 (talk) 12:00, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@2A00:4802:2800:0:0:0:0:95: The alternate titles in the opening sentence are supported with citations to reliable sources, so they shouldn't be changed nor removed in any way. You've gone incognito (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:11, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
this is just in net media is not true alternate titles is just symmetrical title variations so net say also know and Last Blood we can make a bunch of useless titles this not make sence for me....--2A00:4802:2800:0:0:0:0:95 (talk) 12:24, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Calling these false is your opinion; in this site, we only include what has been verified as facts. Will you please indent your replies with the colon (:). You've gone incognito (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:41, 2 August 2019 (UTC) In net media not all is true.. --2A00:4802:2800:0:0:0:0:95 (talk) 12:43, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No disrespect but I am having difficulty understanding the anonymous IP's grammar but from what I understand, he seems to favor one title from the other. Like You've gone incognito says, both titles are supported by verified sources, see WP:RELY, it states Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published sources, making sure that all majority and significant minority views that have appeared in those sources are covered. Armegon (talk) 21:17, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Only true alternate title is Rambo V for USA and not have Rambo V: Last Blodo this title is just for in net media and outside the United States https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1206885/releaseinfo?ref_=tt_ov_inf--2A00:4802:2800:0:0:0:0:255B (talk) 21:43, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Based on the source you yourself provided, Norway and Hungary are releasing the film as Rambo V: Last Blood. That makes it an official alternative title by default, notable of being mentioned in the lead. Armegon (talk) 22:56, 4 August 2019 (UTC) You right but titles from outside the United States do not count for alternate titles. The film is American only for USA titles are right so Rambo V and Rambo V: Last Blood was working titles for movie and just this --2A00:4802:2800:0:0:0:0:35B (talk) 12:49, 6 August 2019 (UTC) NO NEED titles released as Rambo V or Rambo V: Last Blood outside North America one original title have for USA AND this is Rambo: Last Blood never released in USA with second title[reply]

Story by...[edit]

Stallone is not for Story in film https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000230/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1#writer --2A00:4802:2800:0:0:0:0:D5B (talk) 09:56, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:RS/IMDB, where it says that the IMDb website cannot be used as a source to support content. You've gone incognito (talk ⋅ contribs) 09:49, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Stallone is given credit for the story in the new poster with the credits billing block. Check here Armegon (talk) 10:34, 7 August 2019 (UTC) True Stallone is in Story by thanks i was no see poster names[reply]

Morrell's thoughts in the lede[edit]

Would it be undue to briefly add his reaction in the lede? I just think it's worth noting in proportion to the negative reviews from critics. You've gone incognito (talk ⋅ contribs) 11:26, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SUPPORT: One could argue that Morrell's comments qualify as part of the "tiny minorities should not be included at all" section, but since he is the creator of the character, and franchise, to an extent, a brief mention of his thoughts would be beneficial for readers who are too lazy to scroll down and find the full comments. Armegon (talk) 15:53, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've boldly added a shortened version of the comment in the lede. If an editor disagrees and reverts, I shall redirect him/her to this discussion to build a consensus. You've gone incognito (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:06, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rambo: Last Blood Audiences Like The Movie Much More Than Critics[edit]

Please add this information to the article:

CinemaBlend.com: Rambo: Last Blood Audiences Like The Movie Much More Than Critics

September 23, 2019

https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2480775/rambo-last-blood-audiences-like-the-movie-much-more-than-critics

Rambo: Last Blood audiences like the movie much more than critics. When the reviews for the latest, and possibly last film, in Sylvester Stallone’s second-most iconic franchise started dropping, I made the perhaps obvious prediction that the audience and critical divide on the film would be stark. Well, Rambo: Last Blood hit theaters over the weekend and that prediction appears to have been correct.

Rambo: Last Blood has been fairly universally derided among professional critics and the fifth film in the Rambo franchise currently sits at an exceedingly rotten 27% on Rotten Tomatoes based on 100 critical reviews. The audience score, however, tells a very different tale. With 2,405 verified audience ratings, Rambo: Last Blood enjoys a very fresh 85%. That 58% swing indicates that the opinions of critics and audiences are extremely far apart on this film.

Due to the contentiousness and controversy that often surrounds Rotten Tomatoes audience scores, the site changed its policy to make sure that those leaving reviews have actually seen the movie and aren’t just voting based on an agenda. IMDb and Metacritic do not have the same requirements, but their metrics also indicate that audiences quite enjoyed Rambo’s latest rampage.

IMDb users have given Last Blood a 7.0 out of 10, based on 8,184 ratings. And on Metacritic, where the Metascore is 29 indicating generally unfavorable reviews, the user score is an 8.5 out of 10. People rating Last Blood on sites like these may be rating the film highly because they have a strong opinion about it and perhaps are doing so in response to the critical sentiment, but it still seems that audiences like this movie much more than critics.


That bears out with the film’s CinemaScore as well. One of the more scientific gauges of how general audiences feel about a movie, the CinemaScore for Rambo: Last Blood is a solid, although not glowing, “B.” That’s the same score received by Crawl, Stuber and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, and is above films like Hustlers and Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark.

So why the disparity among critics and audiences? This is just conjecture, but I think it comes down to how a movie is judged, and whereas may critics may be judging Rambo: Last Blood on its merits as a film, audiences are judging whether or not it gives them what they want from a Rambo movie. Critics took issue with the gory, ultra-violence some called torture porn, but that’s exactly what audiences expected.

The critics lamented that Last Blood didn’t feel like a Rambo movie and didn’t live up to the legacy of the character established in First Blood, but the franchise hasn’t really been that in a long time. The Rambo franchise became popular more for a badass Sly Stallone killing bad guys than a character study about the effects of war.

People don’t necessarily want to think about the xenophobic implications of the film cited in the reviews, nor did they expect high art when they walked into the theater. They just wanted action. Audiences know what they signed up for with Rambo: Last Blood; people love movies about old dudes killing bad guys, and this movie delivered that. Those looking for intellectual stimulation and emotional nuance could go see Ad Astra.

So although First Blood author David Morell hated Rambo: Last Blood, he and the critics seem to be in the minority. That audience sentiment still didn’t help it conquer the box office though as Downton Abbey dominated.

You can judge for yourself because Rambo: Last Blood is now in theaters. Check out our 2019 Release Schedule to keep track of all the movies people will be arguing over in the months ahead.

Serijvip (talk) 01:41, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It would be undue information to include these in the article, which already reports on audience ratings from CinemaScore and PostTrak - reliable sources to back these up. Readers can easily get the idea that the audience scores from these sites, such as the IMDb, trump those of the critics who gave the movie negative reviews; no need to elaborate further on it. Besides, I'm a little skeptical of the reliability of Cinemablend (for some reason). You've gone incognito (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:22, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The article in the current form does not directly indicate that the audience generally likes the movie - this information belongs into the first paragraph and not hidden somewhere. It's an essential fact and mentioned in most cinematic sites. In the current form, the article is fake news, which only reinforces the criticism of the critics that reject the film and basically ignores the public's approval. 2A0A:A541:1AE4:0:605F:157D:FDF6:4BF (talk) 23:32, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed this article stresses the low approval rating of the movie citing ratings of critic on rotten tomatoes. It fails to include the very well received ratings from the audience which is RIGHT THERE next to the critics approval ratings. This is narrative, not fact reporting. 104.165.250.15 (talk) 21:50, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:FILMAUDIENCE makes it clear never to use audience/user reviews or ratings since they are prone to vote stacking and demographic skew i.e. review bombing or the opposite effect. Armegon (talk) 12:16, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Depiction of Mexico/Mexicans[edit]

There are two unsubstantiated claims that I'd like to address: one is how Mexico (in its entirety) is described as 'crime infested.' I do not believe there is any evidence of this in the film. The scenes in Mexico take place in one unnamed city in the country, and while the plot does involve criminal activity by cartel members, it hardly warrants the city, much less the entire country being labeled as crime infested. Secondly, there is a claim that the film portrays Mexicans (or 'Hispanics and Latinos') as criminals. There are very few characters in this film to begin with and the only ones involved in crime are the cartel members and two characters working with the cartel. As the movie is partially set in Mexico and based on real-life criminal organizations there, I do not believe the portrayal of these characters is meant to show Mexicans in a negative light. Additionally, none of the three main Mexican characters (Carmen, Gabriela and Maria,) are criminals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.175.57.235 (talk) 06:22, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@104.175.57.235: The compound adjective "crime infested" is just written in Wikipedia's own voice, but it's appropriately cited to reliable sources and is actually substantiated in the following sentences. Most critics have condemned the movie because they believe it's sending a message that Mexico is a country besieged with crime (xenophobia), with its use of the cartel as a plot device, and of Mexican and Latino cartel members as rapists and murderers (racial stereotyping). Case in point, these reviews (which you really need to read for this discussion's sake): [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. The setting may be in a Mexican city, but neither the movie nor the reviews specifies which city is it; they only say Mexico, and that's what should be written in the article so as to avoid original research. I'm fully aware that not every Mexicans in the movie is bad, which is why it's written "most Hispanics and Latinos" (a word which you deleted along with other reliably sourced content) in the article. You've gone incognito (talk ⋅ contribs) 08:08, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Runtimes[edit]

@TropicAces: Nothing was violated as far as the infobox policy was concerned. The runtimes reportedly came from the movie's theatrical versions, which vary only by its opening sequence; see the relevant section in the article. Thus we should be able to include these in the infobox (separated with the en dash, that is). As far as I know, Lionsgate has never called it "director's cut", "unrated cut" or the like, in which case it doesn't belong in the infobox. You've gone incognito (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:11, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

According to Template: Infobox film, “Restrict the entry to the runtime for the primary release; this will usually be the format the film premiered on, so for films that have had a theatrical release insert the runtime of the original theatrical version. Runtimes can vary due to regional censorship, alternative cuts (such as a director's cut or an unrated version) and different technical specifications across release formats, but do not include any additional runtimes without consensus”. Also, the only confirmation the scene is even included in a foreign release is a Reddit thread and claim by Bloody Disgusting, which all due respect to them is not Variety or Deadline; just seems like we may be reaching here (because even in THR’s own review of the film, they cite the opening scene as Rambo taking medication). But again, could be just me here. TropicAces (talk) 21:02, 3 October 2019 (UTC)tropicAces[reply]
@TropicAces: Actually, Bloody Disgusting is vetted as a reliable source by WP:FILM/R, and the 101-minute runtime has been recorded in a handful of reviews as well: JoBlo.com, Sydney Morning Herald, Slant, New York Post. Variety and Deadline Hollywood are not the only sources that can be used to back up runtimes, you know. So, the 101-minute version is technically a primary release since it premiered at the same time as the 89-minute version. You've gone incognito (talk ⋅ contribs) 07:37, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@You've gone incognito: ok I think I found a way to satisfy us both. I think what was bothering me was that it was listed as a range, like a disputed Budget, but we have the two actual times and their territories. So literally put that. Think wording works, too. Sorry for fighting you on this, honestly not sure why it was a hill I seemed willing to die on. Cheers! TropicAces (talk) 03:00, 5 October 2019 (UTC)tropicAces[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 9 October 2019[edit]

Although liberals think this is a racist movie towards Mexico, the fact is, it simply is not. This movie simply gives you a first hand view of the things that actually go on in this country. Liberals just like to paint sunshine and rainbows and do not want you to know how the world really is. 24.101.44.236 (talk) 03:49, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Your edit request has been rejected on the grounds that it's anecdotal and accuses people who espouse views that differ from yours of having a liberal bias. Any content added in Wikipedia must be backed by reliable sources. You've gone incognito (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:14, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE[edit]

Add P&A Cost in the lead?[edit]

Support: The determination of a film's box office success or failure is measured against how much it grossed against its expenses. This recently published article affirms that a film needs to gross double its budget to cover production budget and P&A costs. We have a source that confirms the film's P&A cost. So I see no reason why it shouldn't be included in the lead since P&A costs are taken into account with the production budget to determine a film's success/failure. Armegon (talk) 03:56, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Serijvip and TropicAces: would you care to chime in? Armegon (talk) 20:05, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
yeah I see no reason to not include it. Plenty of other pages (like A Wrinkle in Time or Ghostbusters) list “...grossed X against a combined production and marketing budget of X”. So as long as it’s clarified it’s the combined cost, and not just production, it’s informative. TropicAces (talk) 21:11, 23 May 2020 (UTC)tropicAces[reply]
There seem to be no source for a combined budget. This source confirms the budgets for the production and P&A but it doesn't combine the two figures. I wrote it this way to avoid combining one source with another, per WP:SYN. Armegon (talk) 21:38, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I tweaked your phrasing and added it back to the lede. TropicAces (talk) 04:05, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you kindly! Armegon (talk) 05:41, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tunnels[edit]

With this edit, Armegon (talk · contribs) removed the entirety of the content on Rambo's homemade underground tunnels. The user's rationale was "Where's the notability here? These sources comment on the tunnels, not the film itself". Below is what was removed from the article:

Darren Mooney of The Escapist wrote, "Rambo has adopted the methodology of the Viet Cong by building elaborate tunnels under his family farm."[1] Zak Wojnar of Screen Rant stated that "Rambo's tunnels are much larger and more sanitary than those of Củ Chi, but the imagery is comparable", adding that they are "where he holds his demons, where he channels his negative energy, and where he keeps his past close, but contained."[2] As for the final act of the film, Wojnar stated that "his 'PTSD Tunnels' play a key role in his revenge", writing: "Using the same guerilla tactics that were likely used on him and his friends fifty years ago, Rambo emerges from his tunnels like a Vietnamese fighter popping out of a spider hole, shoots several targets, and then disappears underground before they even know what hit them."[2]

— Rambo: Last Blood (revision of 19:52, 30 June 2020 UTC)

References

  1. ^ Mooney, Darren (September 30, 2019). "Rambo Brought the Vietnam War (and Its Scars) Home". The Escapist. Archived from the original on April 10, 2020. Retrieved June 30, 2020.
  2. ^ a b Wojnar, Zak (September 29, 2019). "Wait, Why Did Rambo Build The Tunnels In Last Blood?". Screen Rant. Archived from the original on September 30, 2019. Retrieved June 30, 2020.

I think this content should be included in the article. Perhaps it can be trimmed down, though. According to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Film, "Individual critics can also be referenced to detail various aspects of the film." As mentioned earlier in the article, David Morrell, who created the Rambo character, said: "It assumes the audience is familiar with Rambo's background, whereas anyone under 40 will wonder what on Earth is going on with those tunnels." Rambo's tunnels were analyzed in detail, especially in Zak Wojnar's Screen Rant article titled "Wait, Why Did Rambo Build The Tunnels In Last Blood?". Thus, I think it is one of the notable, important aspects of the film and should be included in the article. 153.174.64.84 (talk) 08:50, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps we can include this under an "Analysis" subsection because that is what the commentators are discussing: the whys and hows of the tunnels, not the quality of the film itself. I would also recommend revising the non-quoted parts into something a bit more cohesive for readers. In its current form, the edit just eases into the commentators without properly establishing the subject. Morrell's comments are not the introduction. His argument is centered around the quality of the film. The mention of the tunnels is brief and an example of the film's poor writing rather than an introduction to the subject. Armegon (talk) 01:25, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like there is no opposition to including this content in the article, right? If so, I will put it under an "Analysis" subsection after seven days from now. Just in case anyone feels the need to change/tweak/re-organize, please feel free to do so. 153.165.83.241 (talk) 17:42, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That would be fine. I can tweak it a little after it's reinstated. Armegon (talk) 18:35, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the late reply. With this edit, I added the content under an "Analysis" subsection. 153.224.4.69 (talk) 08:22, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Streaming versions differ by country[edit]

The statement that "The international version, titled Rambo: Last Blood Extended Cut, was released on Prime Video in May 2020" is inaccurate. I'd like to see clarification that the international version was not released worldwide on Prime Video. Users of Prime Video outside the US could rent or buy the movie thinking they are getting the extended cut but they will not. Amazon.co.uk (UK) lists two versions (basically the same cut at different resolutions) whereas Amazon.com (US) lists the additional version titled "Rambo: Last Blood (Extended Cut)".

My edit clarifying this were undone citing WP:OR but this is not a fact that is going to have sources in the form of news articles or official announcements. There are many articles talking about the extended cut but they are all from US based publications and it's understandable that they don't check all countries that Prime Video is available in. The lack of such sources is not reason for the page to contain inaccurate and misleading information.

Tomihawk (talk) 15:31, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This issue is pretty cut and dry. The source doesn't specify which country hosted the extended cut on Prime, so the edit doesn't reflect it either. Adding more than what the source confirms violates WP:SYN, it states "do not combine different parts of one source to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by the source." If a source can be provided that confirms Prime's debut of the extended cut was limited to the U.S. only, then clarification would be warranted. Armegon (talk) 00:00, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Plot in the extended cut version[edit]

What about the plot scenes from the extended cut version of it, including the extended beginning scene? BattleshipMan (talk) 23:05, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary to include them per WP:FILMPLOT: "plot summary is an overview of the film's main events, so avoid minutiae like dialogue, scene-by-scene breakdowns, individual jokes, and technical detail." Armegon (talk) 02:53, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RACISM ETC.[edit]

May we discuss the relevance for the below as well as a possible separate section? The discussion of the cartels and their effect on real people, in my opinion is neither racist nor something to be relegated to simple accusations. this is facile. and the portrayals were accurate. enough with TRUTH being equated to RACIST. it's ridiculous at this point. please see below- Rambo: Last Blood was theatrically released on September 20, 2019, to negative reviews, with criticisms aimed at the script, graphic violence, and accusations of racist and xenophobic attitudes toward Mexico, though Stallone received some praise for his return in the lead role. The film grossed $91.5 million worldwide against a production budget of $50 million and print and advertisement costs of $30 million. 67.250.47.100 (talk) 19:37, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rambo:_Last_Blood&oldid=1209959471"