Secondhand Reviews: "The Expendables"

60

By JBunce

The Expendables

Rated R for extensive violence.  

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Boys and girls, you're probably too young to remember, so you'll just have to take my word for it... at one time Sylvester Stallone was a guy who had a real passion for film-making and really had a burning need to tell the stories he wrote, about the characters he created. It didn't last long, true, but movies like the earliest "Rocky" films had as much personal passion as any of them. But he went into a decades-long tailspin shortly after, giving us years of schlock before waking up briefly in the late 90's in movies like "Copland", where he actually co-starred with Deniro and Harvey Keitel and did himself proud. We actually thought Stallone the passionate film-maker might be back. But after more "Rocku" and "Rambo" flicks, we now have him directing, co-writing and starring in "The Expendables". So much for THAT idea.

This is the sweet, family-oriented story of a boy and his dog... oops, wrong movie. Actually, the Expendables are a group of ultra-macho mercenaries who have just been hired for a dangerous mission in a South American country ruled by a vicious drug lord and his army. Beyond that, what is really important to know about this movie? Well, a lot of stuff blows up. And also, a lot of stuff explodes. And did I mention it blows up?

Inevitably, when I make negative comments about the lack of characterization or humor or any number of other things, some people will remind me that there are people who only go to the movies to see a simple escapist story and don't want to be bothered with any of that stuff. That's a perfectly legitimate point, so before anything else, let me say that if all you want out of a movie is to see a lot of explosions and vehicle chases and stunts, and don't care about writing, acting and such, you'll probably thoroughly enjoy "The Expendables". It's actually a very good example of the kind of movie it is. It's just that I was hoping there might be a little more to it than that. Even back in the 80's, this sort of film seemed tired and worn-out to me, and now that Stallone has chosen to act like he thinks it's still the era when he was in his commercial prime and all you needed for a goof movie was blood & guts, it seems weaker than ever. Robert Rodriguez can give us a violent action spectacle and still never lose site of personal film-making. That seems to be beyond either Stallone's skills & capabilities, or his interests.

The sense of humor that Rodriguez brings to his movies would have made SUCH a difference here. This movie is SO overly serious that you'd think the fate of the world hung on each decision, including what kind of juice to have at breakfast. (No, wait, I forgot: they're manly men, they don't drink juice). The movie almost seems to have been shot on sheets of pure testosterone instead of film: these characters  couldn't be more macho if they tried. And as usual, when an action movie character really amps up the macho, that does away with any need for subleties of emotion... I mean, real men don't cry, or laugh, or any of the wussy emotional stuff, right? And of course, who needs women when you're a real man? So the closest thing to a substantial female role is for a woman who spends most of her screen time being tortured, and helps provide a motivation for our macho heroes to get really violent. And "Buffy The Vampire Slayer" & "Angel" fans will be REALLY disappointed to see Charisma Carpenter (Cordelia Chase) listed in the credits and then find out she has only one really short scene as the fickle girlfriend of Jason Statham. 

The last thing an 80's action movie needs is good acting, but here and there, at least, Stallone slips up and lets us have some. Mickey Rourke is clearly having fun (which the audience can sense) with the character of a former Expendable who's now a tattoo artist, and of all people, Dolph Lundgren is quite effective as the rogue member of the group who enjoys killing just a little bit TOO much. But for the most part, what we have here is a continual parade of snarls and mumbling in place of performances. And folks, I know that a person who's TRAINED on a gun is MORE dangerous than someone who isn't an expert, but still, anyone CAN be dangerous with one, expert or not. On the other hand, martial arts NEEDS real skill. That's why a good martial arts fight can get my blood pumping in something surprisingly close to real "guy" fashion. But practically every "fight" scene here just features characters unloading their weapons. COME ON, PEOPLE... Jet Li, one of the world's great martial artists, is in this film and he mostly just shoots people, with only one martial arts scene? That scene is great... it could go on a Jet Li career highlights reel as he squares off against Lundgren... but it's just ONE SCENE. This is a perfect example of what I wrote about in the hub "When Hong Kong Goes hollywood": Li's recent Chinese films have been among the best he's ever made, but in the west he's still doing stuff like this.

But of course, fans of the classic 80's action heroes won't care that Jason Statham and Eric Roberts won't exactly be adding this to any "best of my career" reels. They won't care that Stallone looks so overly botoxed he's almost like "Texas Chainsaw Massacre"'s Leatherface, and talks as if his tounge has been botoxed, too. They basically won't care about anything but the action. And yes, I have to admit, a lot of it is done well. But it was done so much BETTER in "Machete".  There's a brief moment... another of those "just one scene" bits... featuring Stallone together with two of the biggest action icons of all, Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger. Bruce and Arnold have SO much more personality and a sense of fun about them that you can't help but think that if they were to actually co-star in a film like this... even at their ages... they could have wound up with a movie that actually achieves what Stallone was attempting here but missed by a mile. If they ever do make that movie, I'll definitely be in line for it. But I won't be in line for any sequel to "The Expendables".

Stevennix2001 profile image

Stevennix2001 14 months ago

Pretty good review. To be honest, it's a lot better than most critics made it out to be, but it's not as great as fans make it out to be either. Having said all that though, it seems like this film reminded me a lot of an old high school reunion. You know where a bunch of old farts get together and brag about the days they thought they were cool. Then they try to reenact their old glory days, by doing some stunt that reminds them of their youth? Well, "The Expendables" felt like that to me. Seeing a bunch of old guys trying to relieve their glory days was just sad. lol. oh well. it's a shame you won't see the sequel to this, as I know bruce willis already said he's coming back as the main villain in the next film. don't know if arnold will come back, but i know everyone else is signed on to. anyways, thanks for the great read again, as i'll be sure to rate your hub up!

JBunce Hub Author 14 months ago

But if it could have starred Willis and Arnold, that's another story...

Submit a Comment
Members and Guests

Sign in or sign up and post using a hubpages account.



    • No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked
    • Comments are not for promoting your Hubs or other sites

    Please wait working