First Blood: The classic thriller that launched one of the most iconic figures in cinematic history - Rambo.

Product Information

The character of Col. Sam Trautman may be seen as an embodiment of Uncle Sam, the government who trained both men and sent both off to war and now has conflicting emotions about the result that came home. Now. I want to point out something important here, something I think Morrell does here that works and that I think he did not have to do. Teasle is not a bad guy.

After reading this, I decided to rewatch the movie version which I hadn't seen since it came out in the 1980s. Now get it clear," he said. "I don't want a kid who looks like you and doesn't have a job in my town. First thing I know, a bunch of your friends will show up, mooching food, maybe stealing, maybe pushing drugs.” 8% Three things about 'First Blood' surprised me. It's a little over fifty years old but it doesn't feel dated or old-fashioned. It feels more modern than a few 1980s horror classics I've read. It doesn't read like a debut novel. It's written with confidence, it takes a few risks with form and the people in it feel real. It is very different from the movie. I know this shouldn't be much of a surprise - movie adaptations are like that - but the differences are extreme and profound. Almost nothing that pulled me into the book found its way into the movie. On the other hand, I think the ending of the book wasn't its strongest point and wouldn't have satisfied a cinema audience.What? That's not why you're doing this? Admit you wanted all this to happen. You 'asked' for it – so you could show him what you knew, surprise him when he found you were the wrong guy to try and handle. You 'like' this"

I'm not saying Teasle's an angel. But he's a cop who tries to protect his town and he's not someone who is an abusive asshole.The book, as well as the movie, is a warning. Not about the evils of war, but about the evils of man. Be careful who you decide to antagonize, as you might start a war. Now, I do get forced to watch it every time it comes on TV by my fanboy husband but usually I ignore it while I read.

John Skow of Time described the book as " carnography", though he remarked that the technical aspects of it are done well. [6]David’s novelizations for RAMBO (FIRST BLOOD PART II) and RAMBO III are available as e-books. They’re quite different from the films and include revealing introductions. See also David’s RAMBO AND ME: THE STORY BEHIND THE STORY. You're probably familiar with the basic story, although I have to tell you there are quite a few differences between the book and the movie. Rambo finally tells them he was in the army. Because they want to cut his hair and shave him, and they come after him with razors. Rambo doesn't like razors after being tortured in Vietnam. He thinks telling them he was in the army is very weak of himself. He holds himself up to these very high standards of 'masculinity.' Rambo, whose first name is not specified in the novel, was given the first name "John" for the film as a reference to the song " When Johnny Comes Marching Home". [9]

A few difference between the literary Rambo and the cinematic Rambo. This Rambo isn't necessarily a nice man. There isn't really anything heroic about him. After all you don't look at a rifle and think that it's admirable do you? You might admire the skill that went into it's design and manufacturing and you might appreciate it's accuracy, but ultimately it's just a tool. That's how Rambo comes across to me. He's dangerous and very effective, but not heroic.He's no great loss. The cops are assholes and get what they deserve as well. So there are no tears shed for them either. The character in my novel is extremely angry and bitter. The character in the film adaptation is portrayed as a victim. The plot is mostly the same, but the interpretation is different. On some Blu-Ray DVDs of First Blood, I provided a full-length audio commentary about the differences between the novel and the film. Most readers are likely coming to this novel after having seen the Sylvester Stallone “Rambo” movie many years previously. That’s certainly the case for me. While movies are always different from their source material, that is especially true in this case. Yes, we still have the basic former Green Beret fighting solo as an underdog against an army of forces against him. He’s been pushed around and told to get out-of-town even though he’s done nothing wrong other than have long hair and a beard. It’s hard for anybody to be bullied like that. But whereas the movie focused on a single hero character, the novel offers two: Rambo (no first name given in the book) and Wilfred Teasle, the local sheriff. Whether or not either one is a hero is open to debate.

No spoilers here, but the end is veeerrryyy different, and I'm not sure which one I like the most. I feel for Rambo in both scenarios, and I love that end scene monolog he was with his old unit commander in the movie. But in the book...dang...it's just... I've said enough. Now, without warning, they are enemies in a civilian combat that becomes a chase through the woods and mountains and caves above the town. As we follow them, we understand that once a man has been trained as a killer, perhaps he is changed forever.