THE EXPENDABLES 3 Review

by     Posted 129 days ago

the-expendables-3-review

The Expendables movies have never really thought beyond their casts.  The thinking has apparently been: “We’ve got classic action heroes, some new blood, and we shoot stuff.  The end.”  It’s been an action franchise without any memorable action, and a big cast of likable actors devoid of almost any charisma.  Although there’s something admirable in how the franchise has sought to be lo-tech in comparisons to today’s CG-loaded blockbusters, it rarely tries to even match the likable characters of those blockbusters.  The Expendables 3 is the same old bag of tricks, and while there’s a hint of passing the torch to a younger generation, Sylvester Stallone and his co-writers Creighton Rothenberger and Katrin Benedikt have no intention of really moving forward.  The cast just got bigger, the action remains bloated and unimpressive, and only magnetic performances from Mel Gibson and Antonio Banderas manage to break through this tired series.

After Barney Ross (Stallone) and his team of Expendables rescue former comrade Doc (Wesley Snipes) from jail, the guys bring him along to take down an arms dealer.  However, Ross is shocked to discover that the dealer is Conrad Stonebanks (Gibson), a former Expendable who realized that if your line of work calls for killing hundreds of people, you may as well accept that you’re a bad guy.  After Stonebanks almost wipes out the team, Barney realizes he doesn’t want their deaths on his conscious.  Instead, he decides to hire a bunch of young, new recruits (whose lives apparently don’t matter as much) to capture Stonebanks under the orders of CIA handler Drummer (Harrison Ford).  We then sit patiently and wait for Barney’s old team to come back.

the-expendables-3-review

The franchise is built on the notion of “Give the people what they want!” without ever delivering.  Everyone just has to show up, fire some guns, act gruff, throw in stilted banter, and the audience will cheer.  But assembling a cast is a promise.  It’s a promise built on the beloved films of every person involved. Or, in the case of the younger cast members Victor Ortiz and Ronda Rousey, that their real-life fighting experience will carry over (and bring their fans) to a feature film.  But there’s not a single veteran cast member who does anything close to their best work.  The best they can do is smile, which I guess is too demanding for most of the cast.

The only newcomers who seem to be having fun are Banderas and Gibson.  Banderas plays Galgo, a former fighter desperate to be on any team that will have him, but they’re likely put off by his motor mouth (the Expendables should carry around a sign reading “Enjoyment Only at Designated Times”).  In another movie, Galgo would likely be irritating, but in the dour world of The Expendables, he’s a breath of fresh of air.  Banderas seems overjoyed to be there while the other memebers just stand around and try to make as few facial expressions as possible.

the-expendables-3-review

The other great asset is Gibson.  I really wish Gibson wasn’t a horrible, insane, pathetic excuse for a human being because he is a really good actor.  I don’t know if we’ll ever see him play a good guy again because his public image is so tainted, but he (unsurprisingly) has no problem playing the heavy.  And in The Expendables 3, he’s having a blast doing it.  Additionally, he’s the only character to contradict Barney on a fundamental level.  Barney and his team have killed more people than Ebola, but presumably all their victims were bad, so who cares?  It would be interesting to see a movie that delved into the notion of the heroes being cold-blooded murderers, but The Expendables will never be that kind of movie.  It will be a movie where the mercenary army of Assmanistan (not kidding; that’s how Drummer pronounces it) gets mowed down in an endless action scene.

Director Patrick Hughes throws in a lot at the set pieces, and his direction is serviceable at best, crowded at worst.  To be fair, he’s hamstrung by a bizarre PG-13 rating, which the previous two movies didn’t have to deal with.  When bad guys on a speeding train get clotheslined, they’re knocked down instead of torn in half.  This is a movie that at the very least demands blood since it wants to be in the vein of the 80s action flicks where we knew an R-rating wouldn’t scar kids for life.  That being said, the film’s climax is a mess as Hughes scrambles to gun fights to beat downs to helicopter battles.  Individually, none of these scenes are particularly memorable, and smashing them all together doesn’t make them any better.

the-expendables-3-review

That’s the ethos of The Expendables franchise: Quantity over quality.  It’s better to stuff your movie full of actors instead of making them characters.  As long as there is plenty of gunfire and explosions, no one should ask for anything more.  I’ve asked for more three times now, and for the most part all I’ve received in return are a bunch of grumpy faces and forgettable action.

Rating: C-

expendables-3-final-poster




Like Us


Comments:

FB Comments

  • Strong Enough

    and he wanted to outdo the raid? lmaoo

  • TurnerTC

    Good review. I’ll just wait and rent “Expendables” from Amazon.

  • appolox

    Why won’t anyone just forgive Mel Gibson?

    • Georce Johnson

      Because they’re hypocrites who still lap up everything Alec Baldwin churns out.

      • Guest

        STFU just listen how this reviewer has to announce his dissaproval of Gibson in such PC manner…of shut the fuck up u ass kissing PHONY you proably agree with everything he has said or done at one time or another so stop being so political

      • MJ

        You sound like Gibson after a bottle of scotch in Malibu.

      • Melissa Brookes

        I agree everyone….including this reviewer feels they have to be so political and ANNOUNCE how they dissaprove of Mel Gibson before they talk about him (in this case admirering his work in this movie)

      • appolox

        Yeah it’s like saying “oh your a piece of filth and I hate you. But ill watch anything your in just because your such a good actor”.

      • Eskay

        Hey, at least he’s being honest. That’s EXACTLY how I feel about the guy. Should I just lie and tell you something different just to make you more comfortable?
        I think a lot of people thing Gibson the Person is a dirtbag, but still appreciate his performances. What is wrong with being upfront about that, if that is who a lot of us feel? Should we lie instead?

      • MJ

        I agree 100%

      • http://thenonessentials.blogspot.com/ Sean Chandler

        My personal issue is that Mel Gibson is put in unique category where it’s assumed everyone has to state their opinion on him as a person before you can praise his work or say you’re a fan.

        The entertainment industry is FILLED with dirtbags who have done far worse things than get drunk and say crazy racist stuff.

        * Roman Polanski is a child rapist
        * Mike Tyson is a convicted rapist
        * Tim Allen was a convicted of drug trafficking
        * Michael Vic was convicted of running a dog fighting ring
        * The number of professional athletes charged with murder is astounding
        * The amount of music with blatantly racist or mysogonistic lyrics by men and women is astounding

        But Mel Gibson is in a special category where you have to make sure everyone knows you think he’s a scum bag before you can admit to liking his work. Why? Because he says really dumb stuff when angry or drunk…and he clearly has a drinking problem.

      • lord jim

        Polanski is not a child rapist, hell edgar allen poe and jerry lee lewis married a 14 year old.not so long ago it was still legal, and the sixties had different videas of what is sexually acceptable. he slept with a drugged 13 year old who was driven there by her mother, in make-up that made her look older.her mother made a lot of money with the case, and polanski was never charged with rape, he spend half of the supposed time in prison for sleeping with an underage and was released but the judge changed his agreement so polanski didn´t know what to expect and left the country.the girl has forgiven him a long time ago, said he never tried to hurt her and wrote a book about the case so people would finally shut up.of course they didn´t because a lot of americans like to feel like avengers of morality who never made a mistake.
        and mel gibson is a conservative catholic who´s best friend is a liberal lesbian from harvard – jodie foster.he is absolutela not the narrow minded asshole people make him out to be, and he has been fighting manic depression for his whole life, which of course doesn´t do well with drinking.but a lot of people like to judge others they don´t even know, just to fell better – those are the real assholes, unforgiving hypocrites.

      • http://thenonessentials.blogspot.com/ Sean Chandler

        I think I mostly agree with you. I don’t know Gibson or any of the other people I listed. I know what the news reported and the news is biased towards sensationalism.

        It’s extremely frustrating to me that people put Gibson in this unique category just because some of his low moments were reported to the news. I don’t mention the others because I think we should drag everyone over the coals. I mention them because I don’t think every news site should have to tell us how awful Gibson is before they say they like his work.

      • BatemanBegins

        Why do people love Roman Polanski, despite the fact that he was tried, and ruled as a sex offender? The man has talent, and not dissimilar, as evidenced by his personal conduct, Mel Gibson has proven himself to be a world class asshole, albeit one with a stage presence of noted charm and charisma. With these two, I stick to my believe that one often has to separate art from the artist.

      • appolox

        Yeah really. The guy didn’t murder anyone, he didn’t rape anyone, he didn’t commit any kind of crime. He just had his bad moments and made some mistakes. You know? The kind of mistakes EVERY human being on the face of the earth makes. And he’s trying to make up for it and I think we should all be willing to give him a second chance. After all. We did with Sean Penn and Robert Downey Jr. So why can’t anyone find it in their hearts to forgive old Mel?

      • https://soundcloud.com/soup_herman soup, herman?

        Is it a mistake? Or are those just his views which he’s now afraid to speak about publicly without a backlash? Did he accidentally say those things? I don’t think so.

      • MJ

        He was either drunk or having a private argument with his girlfriend.

        I don’t condone it — in fact I agree with what Matt said — but let’s not exaggerate it like he gave public speeches saying this stuff — that was not the case.

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        We did forgive him when he was drunk driving, called the arresting officer “sugartits”, and said Jews were responsible for all the wars in the world.
        It was slightly harder to forgive him a second time when he told his girlfriend he hoped she got “raped by a pack of n-words.”

      • http://thenonessentials.blogspot.com/ Sean Chandler

        The entertainment industry is FILLED with dirtbags who have done far worse things than get drunk and say crazy racist stuff.

        * Roman Polanski is a child rapist
        * Mike Tyson is a convicted rapist
        * Tim Allen was a convicted of drug trafficking
        * Michael Vic was convicted of running a dog fighting ring
        * The number of professional athletes charged with murder is astounding
        * The amount of music with blatantly racist or mysogonistic lyrics by men and women is astounding

        But Mel Gibson is in a special category where you have to make sure everyone knows you think he’s a scum bag before you can admit to liking his work. Why? Because he says really dumb stuff when angry or drunk…and he clearly has a drinking problem.

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        To everyone you named: What is a key difference between Mel Gibson and those people?

        Mel Gibson disrupted his on-screen persona by revealing an ugly off-screen side. It’s on tape. Plenty of actors have done bad things, but we’ve never seen them. Tim Allen as convicted of drug trafficking, but we don’t see him as a drug trafficker because we literally never saw him sell drugs.

        Maybe one day, Gibson will be able to play good guys again, but for now, when people see him on screen, they be reminded of his lunatic ramblings just by the sound of his voice.

      • http://thenonessentials.blogspot.com/ Sean Chandler

        Fair point.

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        To everyone you named: What is a key difference between Mel Gibson and those people?

        Mel Gibson disrupted his on-screen persona by revealing an ugly off-screen side. It’s on tape. Plenty of actors have done bad things, but we’ve never seen them. Tim Allen as convicted of drug trafficking, but we don’t see him as a drug trafficker because we literally never saw him sell drugs.

        Maybe one day, Gibson will be able to play good guys again, but for now, when people see him on screen, they be reminded of his lunatic ramblings just by the sound of his voice.

      • lord jim

        I find it honestly very strange, that most people seem to believe that saying something could be worse than actually beating your wife like Alec Baldwin or Charlie Sheen did.And Mel Gibson is a manic depressive – If you have ever met people who are manic depressive you know that they have a tough time to not do or say the worst that comes to their mind.Anyway I never understood people who have a problem to forgive someone for something they said, and I think that this world is such a violent place because of this lack of forgiveness.

      • MicoY

        Matt, I guess your life until now was quite nice, simple and with minor problems. You should have been loved as a young kid. You probably never struggled with depression, bipolarism, anger issues, and illnesses like that. I think that this is the reason why you state so lightly “it was slightly harder to forgive him etc. etc.”… I assure you: life could be hard. Very, very hard sometimes, and when is so, it’s hard to control your words sometimes. You have so many other things to keep under control, and to avoid to happen. Sometimes, while your mind is pushing you to be violent and (auto)destructive, the best you can do is tell terrible things “only”. I perfectly know the value and the importance of words, they could be knives, but you should understand that real knives are worst when used against someone.

    • https://soundcloud.com/soup_herman soup, herman?

      “I hope you get raped by a pack of ni**ers!” <— that's just one of Mr Gibson's witty bon mots. I do agree with Matt, I wish he wasn't such a reprehensible prick because he can act. But anyone with a semblance of integrity should prioritise their basic values of decency over being entertained for 90 minutes.

      • Merlin235

        If that were the case, I doubt we could watch many movies coming out of Hollywood.

      • David

        However . . . . if you’re going to put more emphasis on what someone says (in a private phone call, no less) over what someone does, then we got a real problem with morality in this country. What brought Sterling down was that he had a history of racially charged attacks against minority tenants, but Mel Gibson has never done anything hurtful to anyone outside of cuss out his wife. . . . who he’s paying alimony to in an amount that exceeds all of our net worths combined.

    • the king of comedy

      What did Mel Gibson do in order to be hated this much?

      • http://thenonessentials.blogspot.com/ Sean Chandler

        One time he was hammered drunk and said some truly awful and racist things to a cop and then a few years later he said some truly awful things in a private message to his ex-girlfriend. In short when he loses his temper or gets drunk he says terrible things. …like lots of people.

      • Strong Enough

        most of us don’t go on racist rants though. his true feelings came out when he downed a bottle of whatever he was drinking.

      • http://thenonessentials.blogspot.com/ Sean Chandler

        Or he was drunk out of his mind and said a bunch of non-sense. Some people are overly affectionate when drunk. Others are angry lunatics. Alcohol is truth serum for some people and it’s crazy juice for others. I’ve never met the man so I don’t know if his drinking problem brings out the truth or brings out the crazy. Clearly he has a drinking problem, but it seems half of Hollywood has some kind of substance abuse problem.

        What does seem obvious is that the entertainment industry has very strange double standards when it comes to forgiving rapists, murders, pedophiles, hardcore drug addicts, and criminals, but being totally unwilling to forgive people that make racist or homophobic comments while extremely intoxicated or extremely angry.

      • appolox

        Exactly. If Gibson recognizes his mistakes and is willing to try and make up for it, then I see no reason why we shouldn’t give him a second chance.

      • Strong Enough

        I can’t speak for the rest of hollywood and yes there are double standards but that doesn’t change the fact gibson is still a racist piece of shit and should be treated as so

      • http://thenonessentials.blogspot.com/ Sean Chandler

        So long as you believe all the rapists should be treated as rapists, killers should be treated as killers, drug addicts should be treated as drug addicts, wife beaters should be treated as wife beaters, pedophiles should be treated as pedophiles…I’m fine with it. But that isn’t how things work. Gibson is put in a unique category. PERIOD!

        He said awful things while drunk and another time when angry. Therefore we continue to have to label him that way. We don’t do that with rapists, pedophiles, dog fighters, wife beaters, drug addicts, etc.

        Why is Gibson’s actions the one thing we can’t move past?

      • Strong Enough

        Plenty of people have moved passed. just look at all the movies he was cast in after the incident. It’s just different for different people. With me I agree with what you are saying. everyone should be treated equally if they did some bad shit. you can’t give a pass to charlie sheen who choked some chick out in the hotel room then crux chris brown. But still… Mel gibson is a piece of shit lmao

      • http://thenonessentials.blogspot.com/ Sean Chandler

        I think that’s my frustration. People have moved passed Gibson turning into a monster when drunk or angry, but every movie reporter hasn’t. They have to comment on his behavior. They don’t do that with Chris Brown (who’s a great example of my frustration that I forgot).

      • Strong Enough

        Well i think those that do comment were the ones most offended. I mean matt Goldberg i assume is Jewish so of course he is going to cringe whenever he sees Mel’s name. He did praise his performance though

    • http://www.collider.com/ DNAsplitter

      Because it’s Hollywood. Where you can have a movie with a convicted rapist and outright thug can play a comedic role and it’s funny (see Mike Tyson in the Hangover) but that same crew wont’ work with Mel Gibson because he got intoxicated and made terrible remarks about Jewish People because he felt like he was attacked for his film Passion of the Christ.

      Apparently actions do not speak louder than words in California or at least Hollywood. Or at least they’ll give passes to some and not others (see Alec Baldwin’s homophobic remarks and statements towards his children and ex-wife Kim Basinger).

      The sad part is that we may never get a film directed by Gibson – which is a shame as he’s one of the best IMO (Apocolypto, Braveheart and The Passion were all beautifully shot). Was so excited a few years back that he was considering directing a Viking film w Leo DiCaprio starring that was to be in all subtitles but then seemed to lose steam after the scandal w his ex wife came out.

  • Melissa Brookes

    These movies don’t need to bother with lowering the rating cuz NO younger kids or teens give a shit about these movies. They need to make part 4 rated R and stick to the 1980′s style of action movies. ….you don;t need nine hundrd climaxs and have lots of fun swearing and heavy handed shoot outs…BUT NOT like that crap Rambo 4 that was ridiculous and obviously using the heavy violence to mask Stallones age…..and they didn’t need to do it since he is in fine form in these movies they just need to tighten it up and stop trying to compete with comic book movies by making them TOO big.

  • PresidenObama

    I like these movies for what they are worth which is essentially all the 80s heroes teaming up and destroying everything, together. What troubles me (as it almost was for Part 2, poor Chuck Norris) is that the producers/Sly have actually watered down the theatrcial version “because they want younger audiences to enjoy it, as well.” B.S.! They thought they could do better at the box office by doing so, but they’re forgetting the main reason why the 80s fans went to the theatres to watch this series was because of the R-rated violence, period! And as someone formerly mentioned in this “section” the younger generation don’t give a rat’s ass about the 80s heroes. So as the director himself has publicly announced that they already have an “uncut version” for the DVD/Bluray, I doubt that I’ll be the only one skipping the shitty theatrical version and wait for the “unrated version” to come out. And if you do the simple math, it’s clear to see that audiences used to the “R-rated” violence will not be happy with the watered down Part 3, and there aren’t going to be a massive amount of younger generations going to see this, so instant failure. Really disapointed because I acutally supported this series up until now. I guess we won’t be seeing a Part 4, truly sad:(

    • https://soundcloud.com/soup_herman soup, herman?

      The film fails to reward its audience with things like legendary matchups (Stallone vs. Arnie), revisiting past fights from other movies (Simon Phoenix vs. John Spartan from Demolition Man), it has nothing macho to quote (Predator: “I ain’t got time to bleed” – Jesse Ventura). It was a joyless POS. Instead of lightly poking fun at their careers as actors (i.e. Snipes’ tax evasion quips), they should have been embracing the energy and machismo of the characters that made them famous in the first place.

  • https://soundcloud.com/soup_herman soup, herman?

    Such a bad movie, in desperate need of comedic punch up. The writers room should have been packed with comedians throwing macho one-liners at each other. Even the worst of these would have made for some entertaining banter. But the dialogue was so stilted. Nothing quotable. Nothing memorable. Bad.

    • Eskay

      Dead wrong. That’s why Expendables 2 stunk — too many dumb jokes that took you out of the movie. They didn’t repeat that mistake this time.

  • Guest

    “I really wish Gibson wasn’t a horrible, insane, pathetic excuse for a human being…”
    - Matt Goldberg.

    Shame on you, Mr. Goldberg. And shame on Collider.com for facilitating and endorsing your behaviour.
    Irrespective of Mr. Gibson’s personal views and private challenges, your choice to voice your personal opinion of the man in this manner is nothing less than a complete and utter disgrace to journalists everywhere.
    I will not be visiting this website ever again.

    • MJ

      Wow. Did it occur to you, dumb-ass, that Matt is probably Jewish, and thus was greatly offended by Gibson’s past statements?

      Are you living in a fracking bunker or something? Go cry yourself a river, you big baby.

      • RacistHater420

        Racists deserve to be put down!

        So there whole family can cry and say “thats not like them, he didn’t mean it”

      • doctor_robot

        “their”.

        and… what do you mean by “put down”?

      • Guest

        Good grief. Really? A man with the surname ‘Goldberg’ might possibly belong to the Jewish faith? My goodness. I am stunned. Thank you for illuminating this possibility. How can I ever repay you?

        As for your question- no, Sir, I do not reside in a fracking bunker.

        I reside on a planet where Mr. Gibson has not voiced any distasteful personal opinions in a public forum, ever.

        I reside on a planet where concepts such as Professionalism and Maturity exist, and where Trial By Media remains distasteful to many.

        I reside on a planet where Mr. Gibson, under the influence of alcohol, made disparaging remarks regarding the Jewish fath during interview with an Officer of The Law, who was bound to conditions of Due Process and Confidentiality, and who, subsequently, chose to dishonor himself and the badge he wore, by selling details of said conversation to The Press in a deliberate attempt to profit and to defame Mr. Gibson.

        I live on a planet where, subsequently, Mr. Gibson, again under the influence of alcohol, made remarks regarding persons of darker skin than himself during a private telephone conversation held between himself and his then spouse, who had taken an oath before God- the same God Catholics, Protestants and Jews worship, to Honor Her Spouse. Said individual subsequently chose to record a telephone conversation between herself and Mr. Gibson, at a time when it was known to her that Mr. Gibson was under the influence of alcohol, and at a time of increased stress when it was extremely likely that Mr. Gibson may verbally compromise himself. Said individual chose to not only record said conversation, but furthermore to release edited recordings of said conversation into a public forum in an attempt to profit from Mr. Gibson and to defame him.

        The Bible worshiped by Christians and Jews alike states ‘Let he who is without sin cast the first stone’.

        I challenge any adult man, Mr. Gibson and Mr. Goldberg alike, to, with complete honesty, state that they have not said or done anything in private that they are glad the general public remain unaware of.

        I stand by my statement that Mr. Goldberg’s juvenile name-calling is a shameful disgrace to journalists everywhere, and an affront to caring human values.

        I do not like you, Sir, or your opinions. You, and your opinions offend me.
        However, I have refrained from calling you “a horrible, insane, pathetic excuse for a human being…” a “big baby” or, indeed, a “dumb-ass”, because I am an adult, I live on Planet Earth, I am in possession of a brain, and I am a fallible Human Being who recognises that he, like all other Human Beings, is inherently fallible- a trait forgiven by the Christian and Jewish God.

        Peace be with you, whoever you may be.

      • MJ

        “I reside on a planet where Mr. Gibson has not voiced any distasteful personal opinions in a public forum, ever.”

        Ah yes,

        You reside on PLANET DONALD STERLING

        Congrats on your great planet!

      • JM

        Mr Gibson has never voiced any distasteful personal opinions in a PUBLIC FORUM, is what he said. A PUBLIC FORUM.

        What part of Guest’s post did you not understand?

      • JM

        Mr Gibson has never voiced any distasteful personal opinions in a PUBLIC FORUM, is what he said. A PUBLIC FORUM.

        What part of Guest’s post did you not understand?

      • Your Move, Creep

        “I challenge any adult man, Mr. Gibson and Mr. Goldberg alike, to, with complete honesty, state that they have not said or done anything in private that they are glad the general public remain unaware of.”

    • mattinacan

      it’s a blog moron, not a news site. we come here for their personal opinions, obviously you think you think you clicked on Hollywood Reporter.com

    • Grendal Sven

      To bad, he’s not wrong.

    • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

      Oh no. I am filled with regret.

      • http://thenonessentials.blogspot.com/ Sean Chandler

        Why don’t you more regularly join the comment section to discuss movies? It seems you’re far more likely to get involved in the discussion if it’s over controversial posts rather than movies.

        I think you have like 5 comments on this post, and none of them are actually about THE EXPENDABLES 3.

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        If I feel there’s a point worth discussing, I will. But I’m tired of letting hostility stand.

      • http://thenonessentials.blogspot.com/ Sean Chandler

        That’s fair.

        But as a reader of 3 years, it comes off very different than that. The writers aren’t known for interacting all that regularly with the readers on a friendly level to discuss movies and movie news. They’re more known for joining the conversation when controversy breaks out. Thus it comes off very different to the readers than it would for the writers.

        As a reader I suspect that much of the hostility would be removed if you interacted on a friendly level regularly just about movies and movie news. When you only join the conversation to end hostility, it comes off as combative. When you build a relationship for being known for joining a conversation, you build rapport..

  • MJ

    Loved this third entry — lot’s of fun. It put the piss-poor second movie in the rear-view mirror for me now. Expendables and Expendables 3 are action classics…period!

    Kind of mystified by the Collider “bait and switch” on the editorial staff with Frostly telling us how great this movie was and Matt giving it a C-minus….BTW, Frosty was right on this one. Matt just doesn’t get what a lot of us want to see in these movies…hint, it’s not great characterizations….lol

    I would have liked to have seen Matt show the same sort of editorial staff level of disagreement last week when Adam had that wackjob editorial on the Marvel films that 90% of us here thought was full of crap.

    • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

      Bait and switch? You do realize we’re different people, right? And being different people, we sometimes have different opinions.
      Do you not know how an editorial staff works? It doesn’t mean agreement among all parties.

  • Eskay

    Just got back from seeing in — great movie! Better than the first two combined.

    • Joe Danger

      my thoughts exactly! a C- grade seems very unfair, I thought it earned its emotional payout much more than Guardians of the Galaxy did, for instance – and I enjoyed it’s balls-to-the-walls finale, tongue-in-cheek attitude and self-referential send-up of its cast’s combined action-movie history.

      finally, the promise of the somewhat-meta Expendables narrative has won through – not too self-serious, just “macho” enough and thoroughly engaging and entertaining throughout its running time :D

  • RockNRollerER

    Mel Gibson talked a lot of sh!t, mostly when he was drunk or out of his mind. I don’t know the man personally, but talking isn’t the worst crime on the planet. It DOES give me pause that he might have hit his ex-girlfriend, but then Sean Penn tied Madonna to a chair and beat her… Hollywood gave him two Oscars after that. I’m sure he kept it nice and PC while he did it, though.

    (PS: Bill Murray… also a wife beater)

    • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

      Yep. It’s amazing what tangible proof will do.

      • RockNRollerER

        That’s no excuse for hypocrisy. “Out of sight out of mind” is a very slippery moral high ground to stand on. It’s the kind of faulty thinking that Holocaust-deniers use (and yes, this is probably setting you up for a very lazy, easy Mel Gibson crack).

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        It’s not “out of sight, out of mind”. It’s always “in sight” because we heard it straight from him. It’s his voice.

      • RockNRollerER

        No (face palm), “out of sight, out of mind” is referring to your stance that Mel Gibson is more worthy of public shame than other celebrities who’ve done f***ed up things; the idea that because we don’t have audio/visual evidence of their bad behavior (out of sight), we can pretend they are still decent, respectable people (out of mind). I’m saying that’s a stupid excuse for your sanctimonious hypocrisy. I’m saying that in singling out Mel Gibson – and not doing the same for other celebrities who’ve done wrong – you’re being selective with your so-called morals and ethics. It doesn’t matter that we can listen to Mel Gibson ranting on youtube, that doesn’t mean that Sean Penn hitting Madonna with a baseball bat didn’t happen and isn’t an even worse offense. If you’re unwilling to describe him as a misogynistic-wife-beating-@sshole the next time you review one of his movies, then your self-righteous take down of Gibson comes off as being a cheap personal attack, rather than the ethical stance you want it to be (you’ll have lost that moral high-ground you mistakenly feel you’re standing on).

      • http://collider.com Matt Goldberg

        Not my high ground!

  • LEM

    Barney doesn’t want the guys who have risked their lives time and time again for him to come on this mission because they might die yet will go corral a group of young people he doesn’t know to die for some vendetta he has. They may want to take some of the production cash and invest in good writers.

  • mattinacan

    it amazes me that Stallone has had three movies with these great action actors, and he only managed to make three pieces of shit. Mel Gibson needs to get off the black list and back into movies, he is a fantastic actor and director and i miss his work.

    • http://www.collider.com/ DNAsplitter

      I agree. Gibson’s directing talent is sorely missed. Wish he would have made that viking film w Leo DiCaprio that he had in the works a few years back as it sounded pretty bad ass.

  • Chippah

    “I really wish Gibson wasn’t a horrible, insane, pathetic excuse for a human being because he is a really good actor.”

    Ugh, it was only a matter of time before another Goldberg review got annoying. Sanctimonious much, Matt?

  • Deth

    Fantastic movie…enjoyed it. Surely gonna watch it again. So tired of superhero & scifi movies nowadays, that it feels good to see these guys blow up stuff even if there isn’t much of a storyline.

  • T_Toughnuts

    This whole series was incredibly disappointing. They should have had more practical effects and then let the cast do what they individually do best. Instead we got CGI blood, CIG planes, CGI explosions, and therefore, ZERO STAKES.

  • the king of comedy

    I hated the first Expendables movie, but I actually enjoyed the secod one, it`s by no mean a masterpiece but it`s still fun to watch, Van Damme was great as the villain and it had some decent action and one liners, I hope this one is better since I do believe that Mel Gibson is an amazing actor.

  • Ryan DiBenedetto

    I think Mel Gibson deserves a comeback.

  • Steven Fox

    Yeah, it`s a good rental, but not worth the cinema admition price. Good opening and strong closing, but middle part is just horribly borring and forced. Really liked the UFC chick, she`s got the talent to make it.

  • doctor_robot

    people get drunk and say stupid shit. then… there are those who should never drink because they say and do really, really stupid shit. i kinda feel bad for gibson.

  • LEM

    Gibson was great and Banderas stole every scene he was in. I liked that Gibson could have easily been playing Martin Riggs if he’d lost it and became a mercenary for hire.

  • Lucas Accardo

    I hate that something like this does bad at the box office. Granted, the movies are flawed… I just love (most of) this guys too much to me objective.

Click Here