When he directs the movie himself it's usually much, much better. Look at Rambo 4 contra Rambo 3. Rocky IV versus Rocky 5. The first Expendables vs the 2 sequels. Instead we have these weak directors doing the directing.
A few exceptions have been Cliffhanger, Demolition Man, the first Rocky etc.
I agree!
shareDid Sly say it's almost impossible to direct a big action movie and star in it too? I remember that coming up during the press for the Expendables flicks.
shareRocky 4 was much better than Rocky 5.
Also, most people think that Expendables 2 was the best Expendables movie.
First of all Rocky 4 sucked a fat one however I do agree that the other films he has directed have at least been fun (aside from Staying Alive).
shareHow dare you say that Rocky 4 sucked?! That movie singlehandedly ended communism ya know. :P
shareRocky 4 did suck, no story, horrible acting and the music was cringeworthy and OMG that stupid speech Stallone gave at the end. I'm not going to say Rocky 5 was any kind of masterpiece or anything but it was at least better than Rocky 4.
share>>and the music was cringeworthy
The music was amazing. One of the things that made Rocky IV such a good film.
That was some of the worst music I have ever heard, nowhere near as good as Eye of the Tiger or Measures of a Man.
Also you should never be allowed to make a Rocky film without Bill Conti, there are some things you just don't mess with.
You think the tracks "Training Montage" and "War" was some of the worst music you've ever heard? that the song "No Easy Way Out" and "Burning Heart" was terrible? I just want to get this on record.
Yes both of those songs were terrible. But the worst thing about Rocky IV is it just had no story, no heart and no reason to give a sh!t and that stupid speech at the end was definitely one of the worst moments of Stallone's career, just as bad as his speech at the end of Rambo: First Blood Part II (although that film was still miles better than Rocky IV).
Rocky IV was a bad movie plain and simple.
Well, agree to disagree then. I agree that First Blood Part II was good.
share"Rocky 4 was much better than Rocky 5"
No, it wasn't.
Yes it was.
shareRocky IV = Not even a movie but more like the longest music video with some random and unnecessary flashbacks. The fight is amazing and highly entertaining, but... that's about it. They could had made a short film with it and it would had been JUST fine.
Rocky V = Has many flaws, I concede. However, at least we have a story, some good acting, some character development and, the thing that made the first Rocky great, drama.
I can understand how for most people Rocky IV might seem better because it is, indeed, more entertaining. But objectively, Rocky IV is an horrible propaganda while Rocky V, without being perfect, is at least a movie with some plot.
Exactly, Rocky V at least had a story and we at least had a meaningful, defined relationship between Rocky and his son. Rocky IV was nothing more than a music video and training montage compilation just without the amazing music that typically makes the training montages so awesome, so in the end it just comes across as awkward.
Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to say Rocky V is a good movie, but it's miles better than Rocky IV.
Thank you.
I personally love Rocky V, and I even enjoy some things about Rocky IV.
However, I don't try to convince people that Rocky V is a great movie, but I love it.
The original Rocky says, "Hold my beer...."
share"Rocky IV versus Rocky 5. "
Really??? This is the comparison you came up with? My god...
If you don't like Rocky IV then you are in the minority. You think the lame Rocky V is better, even Sly says this film was horrible. Really, you have substandard taste.
share"even Sly says this film was horrible."
This argument is overused and usually the people who write or direct a movie have a hard time to have an objective view on the final result. I'm not claiming that Rocky V is a misunderstood ultimate masterpiece here, I'm just saying that the writer's/director's opinion should not be considered as a reviling factor.
Listen, Rocky V is so bad it doesn't fit at all with the 4 preceeding movies in the series. Say what you will about the other films, they all have their strengths. Rocky 1 is a clear masterpiece. A great film that changed Hollywood in many ways. A film about an underdog that made it against all odds (a draw, but still a win). The sequel, although not as impactful as the first film, is very good and delivers on the emotion, the action and the humour. It's a good sequel.
3 and 4 is more action oriented, more 80's and they are both fine films. They can't be compared to 1 & 2 because they have a different style to them. Mr. T in Rocky III is amazing, the fights are remarkable, the music is superb. They all give the audience an energy boost that few other movies are able to do. The same thing with IV. Never before or since have a movie been this unyielding in entertaining an audience. using the music, the editing, the power of the story to really pull of an insanely emotional thrill ride that is so much fun to watch. What sly did with this film is an art. It's easy to ignore it and say that "is is just one long music video", but the level of quality entertainment he achieved with this film, is not easy, and I haven't seen any other film do it as successfully as Rocky IV does it.
Your favorite movie, Rocky V, has none of these elements. It has no passion, it looks ugly, it feels cheap, the music is HORRIBLE (rap music???), it has no fire to it and it is just an out and out embarrasment. Even the scenes with Mickey returning is a joke (Sly looks too old and so does Burgess Meredith). Also, the fight at the end of Rocky IV - with Rocky up against Drago - has real power. It's a power that Rocky V lacks. "Go for it"? Nah, don't go for it.
Why do you have it so close to the heart? I disagree with you and won't change my opinion and just because you write a long ass text doesn't mean that you are convincing to me.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
I wish Sly directed it too, only so we could hope for a better cut down the road like we got with Rambo 2008....
shareI'm pretty sure he had plenty of say in how the film was made.
He's written the screenplay.
Though he doesn't have producer credit which I thought was a bit odd - and most of the production team seems to be russian.
But this article implies that Stallone was very heavily involved in the whole film-making process -
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/20/entertainment/rambo-last-blood-executive-producers/index.html
Co-writing the screenplay is not the same as directing it. He's had a lot of say in many films he's acted in, but it's a big difference when he's doing the directing himself. Having said that, Rambo II was a co-writing job and that turned out pretty good, but it's been claimed that Sly directed Part II himself.
shareread the article - it seems as if he was heavily involved in directing here as well -
The truth is, I suspect he has the ultimate veto in every aspect of the film to a point that all peeps working on the production of this film are at his control. Director or editor does something he doesn't like, all he has to do is whisper and the thing gets changed or else the editor/director is out of the picture.
The point I'm trying to make is, when it comes to Rambo and Rocky franchises, Sly is the king. If this was another type of film - a sci-fi of some sort, something he has no experience in, I suspect the director and/or producers would have a bigger say. Rambo/Rocky/Expendables though? He gets to control as much of the film as he wants to - so if the film is crap, I'd actually blame Sly more than the director he's hired. And as for me, I dislike all of his recent films - the dude should retire or just become a director - I feel the same way about Jackie Chan and Arnold - once they were great, but their recent films are all crap. Very few actors end on a high note - Clint Eastwood is one of the few exceptions, and he seems to be a better director than most (or maybe it was just luck?). Mel Gibson is another exception -
If this is true, hopefully we'll get a better cut of the movie on video later like we did with the last movie.
shareI hear what you are saying, and I also believe he had major creative control, but ultimately this film was directed by Adrian Grunberg, not Sly. At least that's my impression. Just because he changed the lighting in a scene (or several scenes), co-wrote the film and took part in the editing etc, doesn't mean that 100% of the film is his. If Sly directed he would have put his name on it. There is a reason the quality increases when he's the sole director. Look at The Expendables films. he directed the only decent one. Simon West directed the vastly inferior sequel, and another guy Sly picked from obscurity directed the third one. As far as I can see, the only film Sly ghost directed with any success was Rambo: First Blood Part II, and he admitted as such to Kurt Russell, who did the same thing to the same director on Tombstone. Rocky V for example, a very bad film -- I highly doubt Sly could have taken creative controll away from John G. Avildsen.
share