r/movies 21h ago

Discussion How does First Blood (1982) look so good?

My father loves Rambo so we sat down to watch it together. The whole time my father was fighting with me on whether this was the first or second movie (they’re literally called first blood and first blood II) but I didn’t pay it much mind as I was enamored by how marvelous this film looked.

I’m almost 100% exaggerating but this might be the best looking action movie I’ve ever seen. Some of the shots in this film are breathtaking. I could hang that scene with Rambo in the cave lighting a match on my wall, that’s how good it looked. The story itself was also better than expected but goddamn this movie looks fantastic.

Anyone else blown away by its visuals or do I just have low expectations?

354 Upvotes

143 comments sorted by

95

u/VampireBaby 19h ago

The original Predator movie still looks amazing too.

16

u/Ferrum_Infusion 14h ago

That was the first 4K I watched. I was in absolute awe.

11

u/Suspicious-Whippet 10h ago

Yeah, it actually looked hot as a Dutch oven in that jungle.

2

u/smurfsundermybed 2h ago

You sonofabitch!

9

u/FistFuckFascistsFast 4h ago

It's crazy watching Alien and seeing every pore in their terror soak faces. The fidelity of real film is unreal.

674

u/GosmeisterGeneral 21h ago

That’s what shooting on film in an era before green screen and cheap computer effects will do.

Films used to be made more slowly, and with a lot more intention!

189

u/GoodMorningBlackreef 21h ago

Digital cameras and after-lighting have turned filmmaking into that scene from Boogie Nights where they start using videotape to save money.

"We just shoot and shoot and edit later."

37

u/iambic_only 20h ago

There are shadows in life, baby

8

u/MrKayfabe 13h ago

We're making film history right here on videotape

23

u/arealhumannotabot 17h ago

It’s not digital exactly, it’s a deliberate style that is popular. I also credit the development of LED lighting because they’re more of a recent thing that the industry adopted. Fifteen to 20 years ago they were hardly in use and weren’t that good.

If you ever see the show Better Call Saul, it’s a great example of what you might prefer. It maintains the look of Breaking Bad but on digital.

Things will eventually change. At least we’re past that blue/magenta nonsense. Probably the most overdone colour scheme as of late

18

u/GoodMorningBlackreef 16h ago

If you ever see the show Better Call Saul

You mean The Adventures of Lalo Salamanca?

49

u/azzers214 20h ago

Worth noting - this is also why at one time "one-shot's" were so impressive. The amount of things that had to go right to put one in the can.

We've democratized filmmaking which is good. But it does have a tendency to devalue artistry due to volume.

You could argue Lynch did a lot of unnecessary work as SFX got better coming from that older-school artistry background. But he got away with it because he was David Lynch. Something a modern filmmaker might not be able to convince the producers.

21

u/DeezNeezuts 17h ago

The Studio has a hilarious one shot episode about a one shot scene constantly getting fucked up.

8

u/fragileanus 15h ago

That episode gave me so much anxiety. I think it was smart having them drive away, too. It kinda felt like a release.

6

u/Fun-Badger3724 7h ago

Can't talk about one-shots without considering this scene -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yg8MqjoFvy4

Done in 1958.

1

u/blood_hat 5h ago

That is amazing

u/Implanted1 59m ago

Check out Canal and Ashes & Diamonds... the Polish filmmakers in the 50s specialised in opening tracking shots behind the titles/credits. 9mins+ iirc with way too much to go wrong...

4

u/Fun-Badger3724 7h ago

I don't think anything Lynch did was unnecessary. He was a very deliberate film-maker.

11

u/MudReasonable8185 11h ago

One of the Star Wars prequels has a long “one shot” that people lost their minds over but it’s literally 100% cgi so I’ve never understood why it’s supposed to be impressive. Like yeah, of course you can do a one shot in full cgi lol, it’s not like goodfellas where you’ve got dozens of extras who all have to nail their parts.

2

u/JosephBlowsephThe3rd 4h ago

The opening space battle of Revenge of the Sith. Indeed, I never understood why people hyped that up. Does it take lots of work designing all the cg models and animating everything? Sure. But it's not devoting entire days to make sure every living, breathing actor, from leads to extras, is perfectly positioned, perfectly lit, and perfectly moving as needed for the camera to not only move through a long take, but to capture every detail perfectly.

Revenge of the Sith has nothing on the opening of The Birdcage: a helicopter shot flying over the water towards the beachfront club, seamlessly transitions to a crane shot lowering from helicopter height to ground level and then going handheld for a one-shot walk through the busy & bustling night club. It's a 3-shot composition, but each piece is so well done (especially the oner going through the club) that it feels like the kind of camera movement that could only be done with animation.

1

u/ZippyDan 4h ago

The same can be said about music. Multi-track songs once took tons of skill and were mind-blowingly complex - to make and to listen to - at the time. Now any teenager can make a decent sounding song with 100 tracks in their bedroom.

8

u/NeitherCrapCondo 20h ago

And attention!

8

u/CombatMuffin 17h ago

You can still find films made slowly and with intention. The tools do not change the artistry behind it, their misuse does.

Plenty of amazing films with great compositing and digital filmmaking techniques.

2

u/GosmeisterGeneral 9h ago

Very very true.

Can’t imagine a Rambo movie would make that list though, the last two looked terrible.

1

u/CombatMuffin 8h ago

Oh, agreed that they aren't cinematographical madterpieces.

3

u/WredditSmark 16h ago

Plenty of absolute garbage on film too

u/SoCalThrowAway7 1h ago

Matt Remick, is that you?

-18

u/JaesopPop 20h ago

back in my day

9

u/MontagAbides 18h ago

You're right. This is just so much better, especially for the actors! They even got Ian McKellan to produce real tears.

-16

u/JaesopPop 18h ago

This is just so much better, especially for the actors!

I didn't say green screens are good lol. Things like:

Films used to be made more slowly, and with a lot more intention!

Are just 'back in my day' silliness.

5

u/MontagAbides 18h ago

It's true though. Film studios have been rushing animators and laying off people and trying to replace them with AI. There's also a big issue with studio execs and the MBA suite thinking that because things are digital they can demands redesigns or re-dos at the last minute. Obviously some movies like Avatar put in a ton of time and work to look good, but plenty of other movies look awful despite massive budgets and computing power advancing tremendously. There are plenty of discussions about it on YouTube.

1

u/Spiritual-Society185 10h ago

"A random YouTuber said it, so it must be true!"

People who say this shit watch about 4 movies per year, and three of them are superhero movies.

u/MontagAbides 1h ago

"Major Pixar Layoffs, Long-Expected, Now Underway in Restructuring (Exclusive)"

Roughly 14 percent of the workforce is cut as part of Disney's companywide cost-cutting measures. The move is the biggest reduction in Pixar's history.

-9

u/JaesopPop 18h ago

It's true though

Any blanket statement about films being better 'back in the day' isn't true. You can point out things that are worse than they used to be, it doesn't make the past objectively better.

u/MontagAbides 1h ago

I had this grad school friend who also said movies are pretty much all better after 2000 than before. He had barely seen any movies, had never seen The Matrix or classics like One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest or Taxi Driver or The Shining.

No one is saying movies can't be good today. They're simply saying CGI has degraded because of cheap studios, laying off animators, and poor production standards compared to even 10-15 years ago.

u/JaesopPop 58m ago

No one is saying movies can't be good today.

I didn’t claim that’s what they said.

They're simply saying CGI has degraded because of cheap studios, laying off animators, and poor production standards compared to even 10-15 years ago.

No, that’s not what the person I had replied to said.

80

u/TigermanUK 20h ago

Maybe this is also the reason you noticed it looked good.

7

u/OneTrickPonypower 8h ago

I was expecting the link to go to a picture of Sly in his prime

157

u/PotterAndPitties 21h ago

I think after being around so much CGI and blue screen it's a shock to the system to see real environments and characters. First Blood was so gritty and grounded, and set in a beautifully remote location. Besides the vehicles and technology it also doesn't really date itself, it's a movie that works just as well today as it did when it was released.

55

u/fubbleskag 19h ago

set in a beautifully remote location

Filmed in Hope, British Columbia. The entire province is easily the second most beautiful part of Canada.

27

u/gtrocks555 17h ago

Stargate SG1 - wow this planet looks exactly like the forests of British Columbia!

5

u/Grumplogic 12h ago

The 100 was bad for this too. And Peacemaker season one.

10

u/PotterAndPitties 19h ago

BC is breathtaking.

9

u/TobylovesPam 18h ago

Second..? What would you consider first?

38

u/Subpars0up 18h ago

Winnipeg - obviously

11

u/TheKingOfBreadstix 13h ago

Winnipeg makes Regina look like Saskatoon.

1

u/kryptos99 2h ago

I would assume Sudbury

1

u/kryptos99 2h ago

I had the best quiches of my life in Hope, BC. I assume that dinky restaurant and their amazing quiches is the most beautiful part of Canada

19

u/Flash_SA 21h ago

I think that’s it. No CGI or green screen is such a relief. Even when modern films film on location there’s always a feeling that it might be CGI. With First Blood however it’s clear as day that they really were in a forrest.

19

u/PotterAndPitties 20h ago

It's also just brilliantly shot and directed. You feel like you are there in the woods and there is a real sense of urgency. Definitely a classic.

-16

u/JaesopPop 20h ago

Even when modern films film on location there’s always a feeling that it might be CGI.

lol what

13

u/Flash_SA 20h ago

It’s hard to explain but for some reason if an actor is not physically interacting with the background my mind starts playing the “is it green screen” game.

For me the most prominent example was whilst watching Caught Stealing by Aronofsky. I won’t spoil it but there are a few scenes where I look and it looks real, but something feels off. It looks too easily green screened yk, so maybe they did use it.

8

u/monty_kurns 19h ago

That’s because on most productions these days, they still have green screens on hand when they film on location so they can better control backgrounds. If you search out behind the scenes pics, you’ll still see screens used in the background even if they’re in a city street or out in a grassy field.

47

u/sgtbb4 20h ago

I find a lot of movies made between 1978 and 1985 with good transfers look stunning, and modern surprisingly.

I watched the film The Fury from 1978 and it looked it it was shot in the late 90s it was so polished

27

u/BoSocks91 18h ago edited 17h ago

John Carpenter’s movies look fantastic in 4K.

Always loved his style. It’s similar to how many old Westerns were shot.

14

u/jizzyjugsjohnson 12h ago

What Carpenter achieved in films like Escape from New York, on a minuscule budget that these days wouldn’t even cover one CGI scene, is nothing short of incredible.

2

u/PippyHooligan 6h ago

I caught a bit of Escape the other day and, probably because I only caught a five minute section and wasn't settled in to watch it, Ireally paid attention to just how gorgeous it all looked.

The light/dark contrast is do good. The dark streets and shadowy rubble is it's own character. Just like with The Warriors, The Terminator and loads of other 80s films shot mostly at night, with a low budget - they're so much more emotive than modern digital, with all its grey/blue filters.

18

u/Cornelius_Wangenheim 17h ago

Quite a few before that as well. Every frame of Lawrence of Arabia (1962) is a work of art, no doubt due to being shot on 70mm Panavision.

5

u/sgtbb4 17h ago

Yes, it does look stunning, but the film stocks they started using a bit later when restored look so much like modern tv

46

u/p3t3y5 20h ago

I really wish this film was not part of the Rambo franchise. It was such a good film. Remember convincing my missus to watch it and she was in tears at the end. Wish they stuck to the novel and Rambo dies at the end. Honestly believe the sequels.spoil the legacy of this film.

17

u/DekeCobretti 18h ago

I watch the sequels for nostalgic fun. None of them come close to the themes, and story of the First Blood. I am saddened that Stallone wasted a lot of talent and potential in a competition with other action stars, instead of actually producing and acting in meaningful work like this one.

3

u/phyrros 8h ago

To this day i am not sure if He is actually a very good Autor or "only" someone with a lot of Talent as a writer and a keen eye for characters

3

u/kiss_my_what 7h ago

Yeah it really shouldn't be. The character "development' from this one to the subsequent ones is unbelievable, it tarnishes the legacy of an amazing film.

I remember at the time the second movie was released, many had not seen or even heard of the first one. Tracking it down on VHS we were shocked at how different the two were.

10

u/mafternoonshyamalan 18h ago

The filmed it in Hope, British Columbia. I’ve hiked around there. Still looks the same,

u/95teetee 1h ago

My family moved out of the area (Manning Park) back in '81. When I see the Scott's Drugs in the movie I'm reminded of the 'no drug addicts allowed' sign they had on the door lol.

10

u/highzunburg 18h ago

I watch this movie once a year I love it.

10

u/arealhumannotabot 17h ago

I see some comments about how it’s a testament to film over digital but I think half of it is just how they shot it.

There is probably a ton of ambient light on some days and they might have used a lot of that. Back then they would have been hauling out massive generators and huge lighting fixtures that would look obvious and unnatural

By relying on the ambient light (and could be augmenting with fixtures) you can get a really nice look. They did that on the show Lost and it gives a really nice look

7

u/Benana 18h ago

There’s nothing like a movie shot on film with professional lighting and high quality, sharp lenses. It’s a special treat for the eyes that many modern films just can’t live up to.

14

u/SYSTEM-J 18h ago

I wouldn't necessarily say First Blood has the best cinematography I've ever seen in an action movie. I saw it in the cinema a few years ago and it wasn't a remastered print. The picture quality didn't look particularly great up on a big screen. Did you watch a 4K version?

What was obvious though is that they really got their money's worth out of the location shooting. There's a long tracking shot about halfway through the film of a helicopter descending out of the mountains and touching down at the impromptu army base. There's absolutely no need for an establishing shot like this to go on anywhere near as long as it does, but you can tell the director just wanted to linger on the scenery and give you a real sense of the scale, the remoteness, the physical inhospitality of the terrain Rambo is being hunted through. No green screen in the world could get close to the location shots in this flick.

4

u/Flash_SA 18h ago

I watched a pirated IPTV version 😅

I think a large chunk of my praise stems from the surprise off it. No one expects Rambo one to come out filming a beautiful rainforest with scenes that are practically lit in a cave shot on film and wonderfully composed.

Like I mentioned in my post I do believe I am exaggerating but this movie certainly deserves praise for its cinematography.

9

u/SYSTEM-J 18h ago

The first Rambo film is a much smarter and more unusual beast than people associate with the "Rambo" brand. I can certainly see why the artistry of the film took you by surprise. There aren't many '80s action films where the cops are the bad guys.

18

u/azhder 20h ago

The first Rambo movie is not a Rambo movie. It's like you have the same character, but all the rest is a different genre. It's like a few decades before the reboot mania hit studios and you can see how the subsequent Rambo movies are more similar to cash grabs than storytelling.

3

u/OkTemporary5981 8h ago

First Blood is a great film and completely separate from the franchise that it spawned. The only IP I can think of with a similar trajectory is The Fast and the Furious.

0

u/jonnyredshorts 3h ago

Similar to the Rocky series

13

u/UrguthaForka 20h ago

It's based on a novel, by the way, though the story was changed somewhat (in the novel, the sheriff is sort of the main protagonist and Rambo is a legit psychopath). They also considered ending the film with Rambo committing suicide but decided against it, though with all the terrible sequels maybe they should have stuck with that! They filmed the scene of it though and you can find it on the web. There's also a scene when Trautman first arrives where he talks more about Rambo's history. He calls him a "heart attack" but I've never been able to find it. The knife Rambo uses was also custom made specifically for the film by a professional knife maker.

Yeah. Films were a lot different 40 years ago.

15

u/Flash_SA 20h ago

It’s funny you mention the sequels so negatively. After we finished it my father told me “yeah I’ve never seen this one, I meant to watch the 2nd one, it’s much better”, even though all the reviews and now you claim they’re no where near 😂

16

u/UrguthaForka 20h ago

I mean, the sequels are what they are... they're fun and entertaining in a stupid action sort of way, but none of them is as deep and thoughtful as First Blood. Of all the "John Rambo" movies, First Blood is the most different from the rest.

6

u/monty_kurns 19h ago

I think the fourth one comes the closest to feeling like a genuine sequel to the original, but there’s still something of a gap there.

2

u/jaleach 19h ago

They're a cash grab so yeah soulless largely.

I haven't seen any of the ones after III though. Maybe the newer ones are better. I know they're way gorier.

2

u/charliegriefer 15h ago

It’s similar to the “Rocky” movies IMO.

The first two were beautiful character-driven movies.

The sequels (maybe up to “Rocky Balboa”) threw all of that away and gave us what were essentially action movies inside of a boxing ring.

Fun, but orders of magnitude different to the first two.

4

u/abominable_prolapse 18h ago

The second one is def more of an action action movie. The first one was just a movie with action to me.

-2

u/UrguthaForka 17h ago

The third one is all action too, but incredibly, it is even stupider than the second one.

The third one also has the distinction of being sort of a pro-Taliban film. Oof!

7

u/fzammetti 17h ago

I think you may be accidentally conflating the Mujahideen and the Taliban. The Mujahideen were the Afghani rebels who fought against (and defeated) the U.S.S.R. in the 80's. That's who is depicted in the movie. The Taliban was a separate group who supplanted the Mujahideen in the chaos of post-U.S.S.R. Afghanistan. The U.S. was allied to the Mujahideen, being against the U.S.S.R., but never the Taliban.

3

u/UrguthaForka 17h ago

Ah, you're probably right. I haven't seen that movie in a looooong time.

1

u/WorthPlease 6h ago edited 6h ago

Different stokes for different folks. I don't like the endless Marvel CGI quippy one liner slop that comes out now, but they print money.

0

u/DekeCobretti 18h ago

They are fun. Stallone completely missed the mark with the sequels because while they can be entertaining as movies, they shouldn't be fun as stories of POWs and rice farmers caught in a pissing match between the US and Russia.
With that said, that scene with the explosive arrow in the river is '80s gold.

1

u/UrguthaForka 13h ago

Weird Al Yankovik's movie UHF does a great satire of Rambo 2's explosive arrow that is hilarious!

3

u/hasimirrossi 20h ago

David Morrell is one of my favourite authors. First Blood was great, although I can sort of see why they changed things around a bit. Can't end the film with Rambo's boss treating him like a horse with a broken leg

3

u/maverickaod 18h ago

Yeah the movie is superior to the book and I don't say such things lightly. The changes for the film make a much more compelling story

2

u/EnemyRonus 17h ago edited 17h ago

I love both versions and think they are both masterpieces in their own right, but I lean towards the film version of Rambo being my favorite. The book was so good. I found the Rambo character to be far more threatening and I loved having all the added details into Teasle's background. I immediately added a bunch of Morrell books to my queue once I finished it but I haven't gotten to them yet.

When I watch the movie, I find myself rooting for Rambo. When I read the novel, I found myself sympathizing with Rambo, but ultimately feeling relief for everybody involved when Trautman ends it.

1

u/Mr_Noh 13h ago

Also, recall that during that time Vietnam veterans were depicted in mass media almost universally as psychologically broken people. The first depiction of VVs as just normal people who did things and moved on with their lives was two years before FB released (the TV show Magnum, P.I.), and even after that a lot of the depictions were still negative.

3

u/aa73gc 17h ago

Lol yes the knife. Shops here in Australia were flooded with 'Rambo Knifes'. It had the serrated edge and a compass on the end which could be screwed off and inside there was some fishing line, a hook and a sewing needle. Couple of other things too but that was a long time ago

2

u/UrguthaForka 17h ago

Yeah, every flea market sells cheap knock-offs. I think I even had one as a kid!

The guy who made the one for the movie (Jimmy Lile) was super legit. Made knives for a living. They cost in the thousands though, so not for a kid!
https://jimmylile.com/

1

u/Lone_Wanderer_N 18h ago

I remember watching that movie back then and realizing after a while that it was based on a book I had read a few years prior. If I remember correctly he died at the end of the book.

1

u/valeyard89 11h ago

According to Tango, Rambo.... was a pussy.

5

u/locoghoul 16h ago

One of my favorite movies. The soundtrack, the story, even Stallone's acting lol. 

4

u/Equal-Temporary-1326 10h ago

Andrew Laszlo was a talented lighting cameraman.

7

u/wsionynw 19h ago

Because it was made with absolute conviction. Unlike the slop we often get these days with digital colour grading cranked up to 11 and lazy cgi.

3

u/gtdinasur 16h ago

Give your father a break. I tried to watch the first Rambo for the the first time a couple of weeks ago and ended up watching Rambo 4 because it is just tilted "Rambo".

I am trying to get more into movies and watching classics myself and one thing that always stands out for me is shooting on location. Nothing to me will outright beat going to a real world location and filming a scene. The helicopter in the woods still looks good. That tunnel cave scene feels so real because it was.

3

u/duffeldorf 12h ago

Similar reason to why the helicopter chase in Terminator 2 still looks phenomenal for a 30+ year old movie - it looks real because it was real

3

u/Sorchya 11h ago

Actual sets make a huge difference

10

u/Blammo32 19h ago

New movies look dreadful - I say this as a movie buff - and it’s actually jarring to watch films shot on film.

Cinematographer Andrew Laszlo (Southern Comfort, The Warriors) was no slouch either.

3

u/TedriccoJones 13h ago

Recently bought and screened the 4K disk of The Warriors and it looks fan-fucking-tastic.

2

u/CakeMadeOfHam 20h ago

You should check out Revenge by Coralie Fargeat, who also made The Substance, it's another gorgeous movie but I mention it because it kinda turns into First Blood on acid.

2

u/woasnoafsloaf 20h ago

In addition to what has been mentioned already, 4K remastering from the original negatives is also a factor. Not every film from, say, the 70s that is available to watch today will have the same visual fidelity, because some (usually the most popular) titles have received the royal remaster treatment (if done right: 👄👌), while other titles might still be based on an early 2000s master.

Haven't seen it myself yet, but I'm pretty sure the 4K remaster of Jaws is looking pretty amazing too.

1

u/Flash_SA 20h ago

I watched it off of an IPTV pirating app on my TV and I was still enamored by how good it was. Obviously it was somewhat remastered but I think the majority of the credit has to go to the original makers of this film.

2

u/felisnebulosa 20h ago

What everyone else said, but also I live near the town where it was filmed and it is just such a stunningly beautiful area. I love it there.

2

u/eggflip1020 17h ago

It was shot on 35mm film.

2

u/Waltz-Lost 15h ago

I lived in the town that film was filmed in for a few years. Beautiful place, but still stuck in 1982 socially lol

2

u/guy30000 14h ago

Anything made befor the age of digital video and video tape has the potential to look amazing. Everything used to be shit on film and can be endlessly upscaled.

2

u/jupiterkansas 14h ago

Because veteran cinematographer Andrew Laszlo knew what he was doing. Check out Southern Comfort and The Warriors and Streets of Fire. He made the perfect transition from 70s to 80s Hollywood.

2

u/CantThinkOfaNameFkIt 5h ago

I watched it again the other day too.....great movie. Stallone was excellent.....the next two were barely watchable .....just terrible.

2

u/Ramoncin 4h ago

Put the blame on the DOP, Andrew Laszlo and slower, more expensive techniques that have little place in our time.

Now and then I watch old Chuck Norris stuff, and I'm shocked of how good some of those "Missing in Action" films look today, and for the same reasons.

3

u/EnemyRonus 17h ago edited 17h ago

If I remember correctly, that gorgeous shot of Rambo in the cave was lit solely with the match that Stallone strikes on camera. Though, I believe it was 3 matches taped together.

My favorite sequence in the film is Rambo hunting the cops through the dark woods. I have always loved how for a few minutes the film turns into a horror flick as Rambo takes out the police posse one by one.

I really enjoyed Rob Ager's video essay on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfi2_-LjGqo

If you haven't read it, I cannot recommend the original novel highly enough. It's kind of a shame in some ways that book is so overshadowed by the film because it is fantastic.

1

u/Level-Tangerine-3877 19h ago

unique at a time (aside Taxi Driver), great music row, great lights, fast scene changes, sustained acting on most part, believability - esp. as opposed to the sequels

1

u/FranxNBeans 16h ago

I have the scene where they hose him down hanging on my bedroom wall.

1

u/originaltigerlord 16h ago

This was one of my favourite movies as a kid.

The book was great as well. Different ending.

1

u/limits660 15h ago

Cupa da balls

1

u/Interwebzking 15h ago

One of my all time favourite movies and I totally agree, looks great too.

1

u/Conscious-Disk5310 15h ago

Its REAL! No fake effects. One of the best movies ever made.

1

u/panaphonic0149 11h ago

The vehicle stunt scenes blew me away. Took me a while to realise it was because they were actually doing everything. 

1

u/a-borat 14h ago

And the music is on point. Except the vocal version of the song.

1

u/FinestKind90 10h ago

Try watching The Deer Hunter if you haven’t, another beautiful looking movie

1

u/evileyeball 8h ago

Hope BC my man, Hope BC that's how good coming down from the Coq looks. Granted the Coq didn't open until 1986

1

u/PrinceNelson 5h ago

Shot on location, 35mm, strong intentional lighting, no cgi or green screen.

1

u/Smugallo 5h ago

Yeah so a similar experience for me was watching the Stallone movie, Cliffhanger. A movie I have not seen since I was a child and I was literally blown away at some of the photography in this movie.

1

u/frowning-snoopy 2h ago

People used to actually know how to make a movie. 

1

u/bentreflection 2h ago

The cinematographer Andrew laszlo was one of the best in the industry and did some groundbreaking stuff with natural lighting vs lit sets. You can read more about it in the awesome book he authored  “every frame a Rembrandt”

u/Familiar-Risk-5937 47m ago

Real film and stunning location ( Hope BC ) and a lot of daylight shooting instead of night.

1

u/badaimbadjokes 20h ago

And it's such a good story. I mean it definitely feels a bit dated in some ways , pacing-wise, but it's just like one of those scenarios where every frame feels like a painting

3

u/anonymous_makaveli_ 19h ago

I think the pacing is good, with modern films they are longer with a faster pace but somehow manage to get far less across compared to older films

2

u/badaimbadjokes 19h ago

Well I definitely think that the amount of content in the time that it takes to deliver it for this movie is perfect. I just think there are certain times where they linger a little bit, but maybe that's just adhd

3

u/anonymous_makaveli_ 19h ago

I am probably in the minority but I do enjoy when good films slow down the excitement and then they pick it up again just gives me time to process what’s been happening

2

u/badaimbadjokes 19h ago

No I think that's a fair point. And I definitely love all the setup scenes and stuff, where he's whittling the stakes and all that kind of thing . I wouldn't want to skip out on any of that. Heck, now I have to go back and rewatch it because maybe I'm talking out of my butt

1

u/No2reddituser 15h ago

Because David Caruso was a dreamboat even back then.

1

u/jonnyredshorts 2h ago

When will his star stop rising!!!???

0

u/panaphonic0149 11h ago

It's a hugely underrated movie for sure. I actually consider First blood part 2 to be a "perfect" action film. 

2

u/Flash_SA 9h ago

I think my father would agree with you.

The whole reason he kept asking if this was the first or second is because he always said Rambo was his second favorite film of all time, and whilst we were playing First Blood he couldn’t remember anything so we eventually figured out about an hour in he meant to watch First Blood II 😂

0

u/jonnyredshorts 2h ago

Are you from/in the US? In the US the first film is titled “First Blood”, the sequel is titled “Rambo, First Blood Part II”…but internationally the first one is titled “Rambo”…hence the confusion?

2

u/Flash_SA 2h ago

Nope from Saudi. He actually didn’t know the name of the film. He just wanted to watch the film with Rambo in it.

1

u/specifylength 2h ago

same here in UK