The Expendables is a shoot-'em-up in classic Stallone - lots of boom, bang and blood but not too much substance. Let's see why, shall we?

By PAULINE WONG

Upon leaving the freezing cinema, my first thought was 'what a load of crap.'
Now, if that seemed harsh, well, it was. But after some reflection (thanks to a sleepless night and an insecure pet dog who demanded attention in the wee hours of the morning), I realised that while it had no plot, no point and absolutely no shirtless Jason Statham, it did have one thing: Style. Albeit a brutal, bloody and greasy one.

The story goes something like this: Unwashed and unkempt mercenary Barney (just Barney, I think, that's how cool these guys are), played by action-legend Sylvester Stallone, is the leader of a rag-tag and heavily armed group of mercenaries who call themselves the Expendables. They don't refuse jobs, so long as the money is right, and the money is good for a job to take out a corrupt dictator in a small island called Vilena.

They agree - 'they' being Yin (or Yang, we never find out, played by Jet Li), Lee (played by Jason Statham), Toll (Randy Couture) and Hale (Terry Crews) - and set off to the island only to find two things: They have bitten off way more than they expected to chew, and a girl who isn't who she seems to be (of course).

They then try to call the job off, but nothing is ever easy, especially not when the guy who gave you the job is a CIA agent, Agent 'Church', in a hilarious cameo by Bruce Willis. There is also a greedy former agent called James Monroe involved (Eric Roberts), who wants something on the island that will make him so rich money would bleed out from his ears.

There is also Arnold Schwarzenegger in this movie, as ol' Barney's rival, and he is the funniest bit of the movie. More on him later.

The reason I had initially thought it was terrible is because of a few reasons.

First: What plot? So much is unexplained and unexplored that you feel like you're watching Part Two of a three-part trilogy, without watching Part One. Nobody bothers to explore the history of these Expendables, and even with Mickey Rourke's brilliant turn as former-Expendables-turned-tattoo-artist, nothing seems to fit anywhere.

Second: Have these guys heard of something called soap-and-water? Look it up boys. Stallone, who is also the director of the movie, seems to believe that gritty and greasy equals tough, but it just equals unhygienic. Plus with some pretty clumsy cinematography and a tendency to shoot planes flying sideways, it creates an incongruously 'dirty' feel to the movie.

Third: So much is illogical. A plank of wood over burning oil will also burn, Stallone, it will not be a bridge over troubled waters. Nobody comes back from the dead either, especially not when the entire place was bombed to smithereens. Also, arms cannot be sliced off without first slicing bone. I saw boneless people.

But lo! What is this? My criticism is merely my reaction from being subjected to too much testosterone, you say? Well, how about if I tell you that this entire movie is practically almighty homage to Stallone by Stallone and for Stallone (and his fans)?
Oh? That is the reason why this movie will rock the socks of action fans all over the world, you retort?

Well, you are right. Once I had thought it over, I realised that while it was needlessly violent, it was nonetheless exciting, frenetic, fast-paced and action-packed from the get-go. It is also a return to the brutal grace that Stallone executed so well in his glory days, so yes; his six-pack is still as impressive as ever. It was real bloody, manly, macho stuff. And yes, it had plenty of cool.

So throw out your logic, your need for a plot, your need for Inception-style, Mind Boggling-ness. Throw out your non-violent predisposition and enjoy being desensitised to heads being blown off in wet, squelchy splatters. Throw out your inner voice (which will sound a bit like Yours Truly here) and enjoy the ride.

Goodness knows it is one heckuva' ride.

1 1/2 stars