Mixed or average reviews - based on 26 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 26
  2. Negative: 7 out of 26
  1. 80
    A straight-ahead exercise in brutality.
  2. 70
    A sort of parody "Apocalypse Now," complete with listless coochie dancers entertaining the Burmese troops, the movie finds its own heart of darkness once Rambo drops the doctors in Burma.
  3. 70
    Moved to take charge by something like chivalry, Rambo hits his stride in the film's second half, meting out justice in an unjust world and ultimately the movie works best when warbling its out-of-tune greatest hits.
  4. Rambo teaches that fighting sucks, good intentions can be futile, and coalitions of the willing are a charade: A man's got to do what a man's got to do.
  5. 63
    The result is the farthest thing from a bland, spineless sequel: It's a brutal, insanely excessive successor to grindhouse pictures of yore.
  6. 63
    In the Rambo canon, where does this one fit? The tone is closer to "First Blood" but the body count is more "Rambo III." No matter how one dices and slices this new Rambo, the first one in 20 years, it will likely please fans of the long-in-the-tooth series.
  7. Reviewed by: Jim Ridley
    Gorier, meaner and uglier than anything Sylvester Stallone has made before, and as such damnably effective in rousing your blood lust, this wind-up groin kicker of a movie seems initially as wary of being pulled back into a dirty job as its reluctant hero.
  8. 60
    The movie does have its own kind of blockheaded poetry.
  9. Reviewed by: Dana Stevens
    Rambo combines an unapologetic return to the grand action-movie tradition of blowing shit up (one explosion is so big, it leaves behind its own miniature mushroom cloud) with a "Saw"-era interest in close-ups of human viscera.
  10. Reviewed by: Brian Lowry
    Stallone (who looks fit but mostly keeps his shirt on) has no intention of bogging the action down, but it's still a notably cheerless exercise, without knowing winks or stabs (pardon the expression) at humor. It is in all respects, rather, a completely workmanlike effort.
  11. 58
    Rambo works best as a pure action movie devoted to delivering the cheapest kicks imaginable--and to a much lesser extent, to bringing attention to human-rights violations and genocide in Asia.
  12. Like a lost recording by the Beatles, Sylvester Stallone's Rambo arrives with its feet planted firmly in the past, a reminder of a time when Stallone, Chuck Norris and other wooden soldiers of the big screen filled multiplexes with the floor-shaking thunder of trivialized war.
  13. It's 90 minutes of flying, dismembered limbs and explosions of blood, but give the man credit. Stallone can do action. If you want action and nothing but, here it is.
  14. Reviewed by: Eric Alt
    Rambo is surprisingly effective as an action movie precisely because the villains seem truly dangerous and the "mission" truly a death wish.
  15. The 61-year-old Stallone would deserve a measure of respect for pulling Rambo off, appalling as it is, but this Fangoria-worthy circus of horrors also features footage of actual Burmese atrocities.
  16. This muttering boatman seems to have lost his old-time heroism. No longer is Rambo killing for a cause, but for kicks. And his portentous blather, even by Rambo standards, becomes unintentionally hilarious.
  17. Reviewed by: Roberto Sadovski
    Rambo could have been a satisfying romp - wherein bad dialogue and cardboard characters can be forgiven - but for the sin of making the main man step to the sidelines in favour of charisma-free fillers. Bad move, Sly...
  18. 40
    The movie is neither cathartic nor entertaining. The action scenes (and there are many of them) feel mechanized and calculated.
  19. 38
    Needlessly violent? No, Rambo is needfully violent. Johnny R. is a man constructed of violence.
  20. Reviewed by: Mark Feeney
    Rambo isn't dull. It is, however, often murkily directed, a real shortcoming in an action movie. In the big rescue-the-prisoners sequence, it's very hard to keep track of who is doing what to whom where.
  21. 30
    There will be blood in the ultraviolent Rambo, a movie that depicts both heinous acts and righteous reckoning with equal degrees of flying body parts and arterial sprays.
  22. 30
    The orgy of violence, as ghastly as in any video game, should go a long way toward erasing whatever goodwill Stallone earned with his sentimental "Rocky Balboa."
  23. Reviewed by: Claudia Puig
    There is a blessed dearth of dialogue, but much of it is unintentionally hilarious.
  24. Can anyone still be rooting for Rocky or Rambo?
  25. With its first-person-shooter perspective and gun-andrun narrative, this one’s for the PlayStation crowd. It’s not a movie. It’s an adrenaline pump and purveyor of raw carnage.
User Score

Universal acclaim- based on 347 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 10 out of 163
  1. May 23, 2011
    One of my favourite movies, it really deserves more than it got. Great story and action, Stallone is really charismatic. An awesome finale to the series. Full Review »
  2. Nov 14, 2013
    I dont consider this as an sequel or even an Rambo movie praticular. And this coming from an guy who grew up with the Rambo series. And having Stallone as one of my all time favorite movie stars. This movie was literally an mess. Some say its better than the previous movies. Just shows how the generation gets dumber over the years. Now gore is standard in action movies? I can watch all the Rambo movies over and over. I couldnt watch this movie even when you paid me. Full Review »
  3. Jul 1, 2013
    What's good about First Blood is that not only is it one of the best action movie of the 80s, it's also an emotional portrayal of the psychological after-effects of the Vietnam War. Rambo tries to re-integrate into society, the challenge that's face by many American veterans, and Stallone was brilliant as Rambo.

    After the success of the first film, it spins bad to mediocre sequels and Rambo is one of them. The war may be fictionalized but at least make it believable like First Blood. There is no new ideas in Rambo, just more mindless violence. A film that values money over imagination, fan boys just eat it up without even realizing that Rambo is not as deep as First Blood. Therefore, it's not as good.

    More violence, killing (236 guys) and gore doesn't make it good or better. The final action sequence is just stupid, it's just Rambo on a machine gun shooting down guys for about 10 minutes. Anyone could have come up with that! This is not the worst Rambo film, Rambo III is, but it does suck. Not seen Rambo: First Blood Part II but who cares, it's not highly cerebral.
    Full Review »