Who to Kick in the Ca-REAR?!?!?!

IMDB is always full of mistakes. The lead actor in Shade, Stuart Townshed isn't even listed until you click on more to find out the rest of the cast. Stallone's role is important, but he is a supporting character. Nonethless, he's quite good in it. Again, I'd say he had three good films in the early 80's, Escape to Victory, Nighthawks and First Blood. Rocky III was a fun movie, if I had to choose I wouldn't put it in the Rocky film series, but not a bad film and Stallone still performs well in it.

Rhinestone, complete crap. Rocky IV, horrible, lost what the original film was about. Rambo II, I don't hate it, I don't like it, I'd rather it hadn't been made, but on a rainy day, it's a good way to waste a couple of hours. Cobra, crap, but I'll say  handled better, could've been like Mad Max or Escape to New York, but that clearly that didn't happen. Over the Top, what was he thinking. Rambo III, bleh. Lock Up, not good. Tango and Cash I felt was good satire on the action genre, but to each his own. Rocky V, nice attempt at bringing some of the qualities from the original, but an overall failure, although not quite that bad. Oscar, meh. Stop or My Mom Will Shoot!, bad, but not as bad as the rep goes. Cliffhanger, solid action film, Demolition Man, fun satire, not just on the action genre, but on the world as well. The Specialist, a guilty pleasure at best. Assassins, average, could have been a lot better with a good re-write on the original script. Daylight, average. Cop Land, a great, great film, especially if you've seen the director's cut.

That's my take on Stallone's career post 70's, pre-2000's. I feel there are only 6 horrible films of his that are unwatchable, and only really three films were his acting was awful. The rest are either mediocre or very good.

Fanboys suck.

They also tend to undermine what they're trying to achieve.

You're trying to convince us that Stallone has made some good films, possibly to dissuade us from putting Stallone on the nomination ballot coming out later this month, and probably to dish out to us what you perceive we've been dishing out on Stallone, in other words, revenge for Stallone.  Tell me if I'm wrong on any of those three points.

You didn't ask, but I'll give you three ways you undermine yourself:

1) You use blanket condemnation, saying we all think the same thing.  Some of us find Stallone films amusing but otherwise lacking, others of us hate Stallone films, and some will never forgive Rocky for winning an Academy Award.  There's even more diversity than that around here.  You talk to us as if we're infected with groupthink.  Failure to acknowledge the different points of view in an audience will surely lead to them dismissing you and anything you have to say.  You've just characterized yourself as unthinking noise.

2) You use too many words to convey your point.  This is because you're passionate about Stallone films.  When people are that passionate about films, music, etc., it angers them when other people say their film, music, etc., stinks, and it hurts even more when it's a recognized organization. 

3) You defend the indefensible.  When I watched Duck, You Sucker (a.k.a. A Fistful of Dynamite) last year, I saw a scene where Mexican soldiers lined up hundreds of citizens in ditches and, as the camera panned by, they fired upon the citizens and mowed them down, one ditch after another, reminiscent of Nazi Germany.  The effect devastated me.  On the other hand, I watched the scene as the peasants were mowed down by machine gunfire in Rambo, and my reaction was that it was a lousy scene.  Both scenes are full of violence, but one was done well while the other was done badly.  You don't just film a massacre and expect that to be good enough.  In the case of what Stallone wanted to do, he should have made the audience empathize with the people, even want to help the people, and then feel helpless as they watch them get mowed down.  The bad direction behind that scene is indefensible.

Now, to clear things up about where I stand, I feel Stallone made one great film, Rocky, and he made two good films, Rocky II and Rocky Balboa.  Cliffhanger was fun, but wasn't great.  Cobra was at best a dopey, macho B movie.  The worst Stallone film I've seen is The Specialist, although I have yet to see Judge Dredd, Over the Top, Stop or My Mom Will Shoot and Rhinestone.  I don't know about the others, but I'll eventually see Rhinestone just to hear how badly Stallone sings.

And fanboys suck.

Oh, oh, oh, no great diversity?

Go over those three pages you just typed, and a couple before it and tell me. . . .

Who said Stallone made at least one great movie? 

Who said Stallone does make good movies?

Who said they liked Rocky Balboa?

Who said they didn't like Rocky Balboa, but it didn't deserve to be razzed?

Who said they didn't feel Rambo was that bad?

And who defends Stallone?  Bet you can't name even one poster on here who defends Stallone. 

What?  You didn't notice these opinions being expressed?  They're right there, all this diversity of opinion.

Oh, of course you didn't.  Because you condemn us with a blanket condemnation.  It's easier for you to broadbrush us with your untrue opinion than to see the different positions that have been expressed.

And did I say Stallone is a hack?  Did I say Stallone is talentless?  Did I say Stallone is joke?

I do say Stallone can do a hell of a lot better than Rambo.

And yes, I voted for Rambo, because it sucked, especially in comparison to the good movies I've seen Sylvester Stallone make, including Rocky Balboa.  I don't have to see all of Stallone's movies to make that vote.  I don't even have to see many of Stallone's movies to make that vote.  All I have to do is take the Stallone movies that I've already seen and compare Rambo to them. 

Are you saying Rambo is every bit as good as a movie as Rocky?  Rocky II?  Rocky Balboa?  Even Cliffhanger?!  I don't feel so.  I wish it was, but it's just not up to his past standards.

As for what Stallone thinks about Rambo, haven't you read Mayhem5185's post above?  It's full of Stallone's thoughts about Rambo.  Let me quote a few lines you skipped over:

Describing Myanmar's rulers as "Satan's disciples,” Stallone expressed particular anger about their refusal to accept international aid in the wake of the recent cyclone that killed at least 34,000 people — with many more missing — and left up to 2 million survivors in desperate straits.

The movie's emotionally jarring prologue is a montage of real footage of violence — including a fleeting glimpse of Japanese journalist Kenji Nagai being gunned down as he tried to cover the suppression of a street demonstration in Yangon last year.

To be clear, Yangon is in Myanmar.

Now, why did you write "And Rambo was not a film to be taken from the point of view of Burmese people" when he said himself he was thinking about what was going on in Myanmar?  That was right here on this page on this thread in this forum where you spend three pages going back and forth with Saturnwatcher.  Not only that, you're a Stallone fan.  Did you hear him say that?

And why are you defending Stallone?  Stallone can defend himself.  I've heard many times, and I'd love to confirm it, that when someone mentions the Razzies to him, he laughs.  That shows he has a sense of humor and he knows how to deal with us. 

You, on the other hand, ignore what everybody says to you and set up straw men in place of what's being said so you can pretend you're winning the argument.

Don't say you don't do that.  You just did it with me.

Cvcjr, I think you overlooked a very good Stallone film, Copland. Of course it could be argued it's not "his" film, given it had some other notables starring in it.

As for blanket condemnation of Sly, I've said before, and will repeat, that I actually was entertained, if not overwhelmed, by several of his films. I'm not offended that Rocky won an oscar, I think it deserved it. I liked Rambo. Most of Sly's films I consider the equivalent of cinematic junk food; not very filling, only really good in small quantities, but not truly horrible stuff, with the exceptions of crap like Stop or My Mom Will Shoot and Over the Top.

Uwe's still my boy to take the lifetime achievement award, at least the one I'm rooting for.

I guess I'm going to have to watch Copland.  However, that's apparently going to be just one more great Stallone movie that makes me scratch my head and wonder why in the world he put out Rambo when he's capable of so much better??

And if Razziesucks is still out there, notice the last three posters, the ones just above this post here?  They're not saying Stallone sucks.  They're not hating on Stallone.  They're all stepping up for Stallone to one extent or another.  And all of them are regulars here on this forum.  And you created a straw man and said they were otherwise.  Stop trying to make things simple on yourself and pay attention to what other people are actually saying, will you?

And in case you haven't bothered reading this particular thread from start to finish and seen the back-and-forth Saturnwatcher and I have had, I'm rooting for Uwe Boll to get the lifetime achievement award this time, too.  Stallone has made a few good movies, but I can't imagine even his reportedly worst movie Rhinestone reaching the depths of Uwe Boll's best film Postal.  Boll over Stallone, all the way.

Can you see the diversity yet?