You really should separate your points and paragraphs. It makes it hard to read what you're trying to say when it's all in one line. Anyway;
Rambo is suppose to be the sympathetic character of the film, and honestly, I think that works better. It wouldn't of worked well in film in both characters had the same amount of sympathy, and it wouldn't of been told well either. In the film it was easy to get that Rambo is traumatized by the war, but what exactly can be done make tell Teasels story?
Although in the book, you are suppose to be sympathetic for both of them, and neither of them are really the good or bad guys. Both characters had equally strong reasons for doing what they did, but neither are stronger then the other, and neither them are realty better than the other. It's always back in the fourth in the book. Sometimes I feel for Rambo, then I might feel for Teasel.
I do like the book. Don't get me wrong on that, but reading it hasn't changed my opinion on the films. David Morrell actually novelized Rambo: First Blood Part 2 and Rambo III.
EgonSpengler86;160960
I guess I'm not going to get anybody to agree with me. I know there are several people on here who like every one of the Rambo sequels.
I will agree, that what works in book, doesn't always work in film. Besides, Morell actually liked Rambo (4) because it was the first time the film was actually as violent as the book. I'm glad the First Blood film didn't end with Rambo dying though (even though it was filmed), it would of been too dark of an ending.
I don't get why don't like the sequels just because was jerk, because he the character was already gone in that point. Even if he was less of the jerk, they could of made the sequels and it would of been the same, cause the whole point was Rambo was just tired of being pushed around and he finally snapped. That's what happens in the book, and film.