From: (No Email available)

Date: 2006-07-25 12:43:05

Comment:

The above post is correct. It's just a fun movie franchise that's suppose to help get you motivated to work out, or do whatever you do with more inspiration. An underdog movie, be it realistic or unrealistic.

Also, what's up with the guy talking about "dying in the ambulance" for Rocky 5? Huh? That didn't happen.

Here's the breakdown of the Rocky moview, people:

Rocky 1: A truly quality movie because it was so low budget, the actors were unknown, the director was unknown, and everyone was taking a risk. That's what helped it have the magic it did, similar with most art, when it's raw and fresh and the artist is STILL POOR, that's when the art is great. Once Stallone got rich he could NEVER re-capture the essence and feeling of Rocky 1.

Rocky 2 was a cute continuation of Rocky 1, but some of the magic wasn't there since all the actors and director had already been successful with Rocky 1.

Rocky 3 was a cute, cheesy, 80s movie. If you can't get a kick out of watching this movie purely based on the "80s-ness" of it, you're missing the point. You're suppose to laugh at "thunderlips" (what a name) and "clubber lang," and you're suppose to be light hearted about it. Was it a quality movie like the first one? Of course not, but it was nonetheless a fun Rocky sequel with plenty of "80s-ness" to enjoy.

Rocky 4 was when it REALLY started going downhill. If most Rocky fans think Rocky 4 is the best, the reason for this is simple: the people making this judgment are both immature (childish, boyish) and have no understanding of what actually makes a quality film. If Rocky 4 was your favorite Rocky movie, you probably like action packed movies, patriotic movies, stuff like that (not what I would call a mature person or knowledgeable film critique). Who was the guy above talking about thinking outside the box about Rocky 4, and that the cold war was symbolized by these two boxers? Hello? Are you literally retarded? You are correct that the cold war was being symbolized by these two boxers, what's amazing to me is that you think that's actually a smart or worthy concept. Symbolizing the cold war with two boxers, one of which is the beloved Rocky fighting for America, the other of which is this emotionless, inhuman, killing machine (who uses steroids) then what you have is about the most childish, cheesy, ridiculous, absurd representation of the cold war you could possibly have. So that movie is not about thinking outside the box, it's about thinking like an 8 year old and trying to put something as complex as the cold war into simple childish, cartoonish little terms. Rocky 4 was absolutely ridiculous, although I did enjoy the training montague in Russia. (Rocky training montagues help me get inspired to work out.)

Rocky 5 was such an embarrasing joke for anyone who considers himself a Rocky fan, that I need not even comment here. Who thought of the plot for Rocky 5, and why weren't they fired? There was no in the ring boxing match, and there was NO TRAINING montague. WHAT? A Rocky film without a training montague??? Training montagues are what MAKE ROCKY MOVIES!!! You got to give them a break about the plot, I mean, after you fight someone who can KILL ANOTHER BOXER WITH HIS HANDS, where is there to go from there? Who do you fight next?

Rocky 6, since it's taking place 16 years after the last one, actually has the opportunity to have a unique Rocky plot, that is, he's old, has calcium deposits, no speed, so he needs to overcome the odds to fight a tough opponent again. It's a classic Rocky plot. Is it realistic? Obviously not. Rocky 1 wasn't realistic either, yet it RIGHTFULLY won best picture when it came out. Good films are not about being realistic, necesarily. Having said that, I do expect Rocky 6 to be sort of dumb, yet I am a die hard Rocky fan (despite silliness of Rocky 4 and the outright embarrasment of Rocky 5) so I will see it. Im sure they woke up and put a training montague in it, so let's hope that's an inspiring montague!