Rambo: First Blood Part II - Did it REALLY need to happen?

Okay, so we just finished watching Rambo: First Blood Part II. Honestly, guys, I'm kinda torn. The first Rambo was, like, actually good, right? It had a point! PTSD, how society treats vets... This one? It's just... explosions. SO many explosions. My ears are still ringing. Don't get me wrong, it was entertaining in a cheesy, 80s action movie kinda way, but did it need to exist? I'm not so sure. I mean, the whole plot is basically "Let's send Rambo back to Vietnam to find POWs, even though we KNOW it's a suicide mission." And then the double-cross? Ugh. Pure villainy. But honestly, the best part for me was probably when Rambo completely loses it and starts wrecking everything. The scene where he's covered in mud and taking down the helicopters? That was peak 80s awesomeness, even if it was totally unrealistic. And the bow and arrow with the exploding tips? Seriously? But I'm also not gonna lie, I fist-pumped a little. I guess what bothers me most is how different it is tonally from the first one. It feels less like a character study of a struggling vet and more like a cartoon. Like, Stallone's biceps are practically secondary characters at this point. Co Bao, the Vietnamese woman who helps Rambo, was interesting, but her whole storyline felt rushed. And her fate? Brutal! Talk about a character they could have developed more. Overall, it's a fun but flawed action flick. It's definitely watchable, especially if you're in the mood for some mindless entertainment and massive explosions. But if you're expecting something with the depth and emotional weight of the first movie? You're probably going to be disappointed. Still, explosions! What did you guys think?