The Expendables

I hope someday they publish a collector’s edition on an over-played VHS videotape with the special Czech “speed-dubbing" and normal editing. Then and only then can these be considered to be the real McCoy action movies “like out of the eighties". But as it is half way between a pleasant movie playing at being nostalgic and real, unadulterated nostalgia (the church, the church!). But it has three main problems. Too much “Bournesque" editing, too little work with the personality cults of various testosterone legends (this happens only in scenes with Jet vs. Dolph and in the church) and of course the must fundamental problem - no Asia Argento, but instead (no) Charisma. (08/20/2010)

I was absolutely sure that I wouldn't like it, but from time to time one must endure mental torture in order to appreciate even more the movies that are truly worth watching. Half of the members of the cast I categorize as "My Least Favorite Nightmares," and some of them, like Arnold Schwarzenegger, I don't consider actors, but rather stereotypical figures, while others, like Sylvester Stallone, as below-average actors, and it is characteristic that if a quality action actor like Bruce Willis appears in something like this, they just briefly show up on the screen. The Expendables pay homage to violent action films from the 80s with muscle-bound heroes and these sorts of productions didn't make the slightest impression on me even at 15 years old, let alone today. Action productions that I appreciate include titles such as Indiana Jones, Die Hard, or the Bourne series, in general, movies that rely on a quality screenplay and top-notch acting. The Expendables is just as dim-witted as its genre predecessors and the scene of the contract negotiation in a church, which has humor, can't save it. For me, The Expendables is the same as a really strong cigar for a devoted non-smoker. Overall impression: 15%. (11/07/2010)

Stallone is such an experienced hard worker and intelligent person that he basically confirmed what was expected, and he doesn't disappoint in The Expendables. He made exactly what was expected of him, paying homage to classic action movies of the past decade. There is a clear and distinctive directorial style (gore, action), which is a good thing, of course. But on the other hand, considering that the last Rambo was made by the same director, I would have expected a more coherent action. Overall, it is watchable, so mission accomplished. (09/18/2010)

Films of this kind can never excite me, already from their very basic nature – heroes that only rely on their muscles can never be heroes to me (and they aren’t). The Expendables are a celebration of dumb brute force – and a pretty expendable film as far as I’m concerned. Long live modern action films that rely on something other than how long and how often a hero on ‘roids can drop “funny” wisecracks. Back in the 80s, that may have had its charm (which I can feel even today when I watch those old films), but I don’t see any reason to go back to that. PS: The church scene was incredibly artificial and forced, like the rest of the film. PS2: The inferno at the end is pretty cool in the details but utterly confusing as a whole. (08/29/2010)

The script was so stupid and leaky that even 80 of them couldn't carry it. The church scene was great though, no question about it. But afterwards? I'll quote Subjective: “shot, ‘pow’, shot, ‘bang’, shot, ‘smack’, shot, ‘left hook’, shot, ‘right hook’, shot, ‘tie’, shot ‘crane’. By the time I understood where the action was happening, I was already watching it from somewhere else." Most of the time I didn't care who was doing the shooting, or why (because the reasons were either nonexistent or stupid and pathetic), and because the shooting went on for most of the movie... I'll watch the second one, it's supposedly better; but I guess since I was looking forward to it so much, it ended up being very, very disappointing. A weak 2 stars. (05/24/2013)