• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Novel: First Blood aka Rambo, what a difference!

Pilgrimzero

Member
Been reading the original Rambo novel aka First Blood. Very tonally different.

Rambo is not sympatric at all like in the film. Where as the Sheriff and his men are.

Yeah the Sheriff arrested him for being a long haired vagrant but gave him 3 chances to leave town and Rambo just acted like an asshole.

And when Rambo does finally decide to fight back, its without mercy. In the film 2 men die by indirect action on Rambo's part. In the book he's shooting people in the face, gutting men, and just being the monster in a monster movie. Think Predator before that film existed. It very much plays up that he's the best guerilla fighter the military produced vs a bunch of cops and weekend warriors. The Sheriff isnt blame or guilt free and both men have egos. Difference is Rambo is a murder machine or as he sees it "a warrior" and always choices fighting.. but htats what the military made him.

And when Trautman shows up, he's only in awe at how well his "boy" is doing. There is no sympathy for either sides plight. He's very objective.

I'm almost done with it and I know the ending is different, it would have to be because again Rambo is not the hero of this book like the film, he's the monster.

MY only nitpicks are that Rambo falls into "luck" to often. He luckily finds a man willing to give him weapons, even after he admits to killing a cop. The mans motivations aside the fact that Rambo happens upon him at all... Also stuff like, the gun just happens to be modified to help for use at night. A handgun he gets later is also specially modified to be more deadly. The long abandoned mine he hides in still has tools in it... for reasons. Etc.

Over all I've very much enjoyed it, and i think the writer got across his "bringing the war home" and "unstable abused at home Vet" point across fairly clearly. Though again, Rambo and all the others are much different characters.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
I'm not a book reader but always fond it weird how film makers change things up so much vs. the original source.

I can understand some of the stuff you posted like film makers not wanting people shot in the face because it gets too gory, but sometimes you read about book/movie comparisons and it's a headscratcher why change? It'll be stuff like:

Book character names: Steve and Mary
Movie character names: Todd and Linda

Book character job: He worked in a bank
Movie character job: He worked at an ad agency

Book plot: Steve's brother is the secret killer
Movie plot: Steve's cousin is the secret killer
 

Pilgrimzero

Member
I'm not a book reader but always fond it weird how film makers change things up so much vs. the original source.

I can understand some of the stuff you posted like film makers not wanting people shot in the face because it gets too gory, but sometimes you read about book/movie comparisons and it's a headscratcher why change? It'll be stuff like:

Book character names: Steve and Mary
Movie character names: Todd and Linda

Book character job: He worked in a bank
Movie character job: He worked at an ad agency

Book plot: Steve's brother is the secret killer
Movie plot: Steve's cousin is the secret killer

There is actually a preface by the author that basically says "It was too anti Vietnam war" etc at that point in time.
 
There is actually a preface by the author that basically says "It was too anti Vietnam war" etc at that point in time.

Wasn't his angle that Vietnam and similar wars to come would just produce nutcases that couldn't re-integrate into society?

I mean I see his point... but it's also gonna go over like a led balloon. And it's also very shortsighted.
 

jason10mm

Gold Member
I think the novel falls prey to thinking that Special Forces training is somehow turning folks into savage murder machines when the reality is quite to opposite versus a line infantry soldier in WW1 or WW2 for example. Rambo should have just been hard to find, difficult to corner, and able to recruit the local population to his side due to his specific selection and training, not just assassinating anyone in his path at will. Contrast this to a PTSD'd Marine storming islands in the Pacific, far more likely to just snap and kill folks IMHO (although both scenarios are pretty unlikely outside of significant pre-existing mental health issues).

I'd actually be down for a First Blood remake. I think there is enough in that concept that most americans now are not very familiar with. I'm sure they would have Rambo be non-white and police racism be a major theme, but I'd prefer they limit that and focus more on the differences between the Sherriff Teasel's Korean war experience and Rambo's Vietnam reception. Not sure if it would translate to GW1 and Afghanistan or something like that though. The treatment of Vietnam vets was really a black mark on American culture at the time.
 

Pilgrimzero

Member
He talks about it here. I wonder if the original cut still exists.



I just got to the owl scene. Rambo kills it out of hunger and doesnt talk or anything. Sounds like they wanted to make it more of an action film. Which again the book isnt really that Any action is one sided and quick. Rambo mostly sniping people from afar or if he sneaks up on them because they are to close the knife is out and its over.
 

jason10mm

Gold Member
He talks about it here. I wonder if the original cut still exists.


Sly referencing a Greek Chorus....damn. His body of work so rarely reflects on his intellect because he is smart enough (sometimes) to stick to the core and trim all the fat.

Then there is The Specialist :p
 

Pilgrimzero

Member
well they filmed a different ending



I havent read it yet but from what i undersand thats kind of how the book ending goes except Trautman straight up puts him down. Ive heard they changef teh films original ending to what we got because the films RAmbo is symapethic and they wanted a happier ending.
 

poppabk

Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
Go read Jaws!
In the book Hooper (Dreyfus) is the hometown boy and Brody is the out of towner who doesn't fit in.
There are some other little differences like they don't blow up the shark, and Hooper has Ellen Brody take off her panties in the bathroom of a restaurant and then she tells him her fantasy of being raped by a well hung black man, and then Hooper takes her to a hotel when he fucks her like a maniac and she finds his eyes bugging out of his head while he pile drives her off putting. You know, little differences.
 
Last edited:

JimmyRustler

Gold Member
You should read Cameron's screenplay for Part 2. Now that would have been a bloody entertaining flick. What a shame that Stallone butchered the script.
 

Pilgrimzero

Member
Having finished the book, wow yeah, I'd love to see a remake (apparently Tarantino wants do one). I don't think people would like seeing such a classic 80s hero like Rambo turned into a real terrorist though. In the film he only really shoots up the sheriff station and blows up a gas station? , in the book he's doing a lot more to the town.

Crazy how the Sheriff is like the hero of the book. Rambo and the Sheriff are very much immovable object vs unstoppable force.

And Trautman just don't give a fuck. He's pro-Rambo but knows his duty is to help the civvies. And there is zero shits when he puts Rambo down like a dog.... which the way its written is "there is no body" and just Trautman's vague word that he killed Rambo. Hence, I suppose, how they bring him back in the sequel novel (if its even mentioned).
 

BLAUcopter

Gold Member
rambo GIF
 

Tschumi

Member
I love First Blood, the movie... Along with the Goonies and similar films it really got me into the Pacific Northwest as an environment (too bad it's turning to savannah now lol) but every time i re-watch it it gets more and more cheesy, like its sequels.. funny, that.. i prefer the film's take, it sounds like
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom