"Yo Joe!" G.I. Joe Discussion Thread

Thanks, Merlin. Sorry for the thread hijack, everyone. We now return you to the talk of the new movie.

 

Okay, I just saw it. Here's my review.

If I were hired as a consultant to assess this movie and decide what to do with it prior to release, here is what I would recommend to the studio and the filmmakers.

Keep all of the action sequences intact -- shot-for-shot, note for note. They are brilliant, awesome, spectacular fun.

Keep the broad strokes of the plot and the general cast list. It's a good, meaty story with engaging characters and solid casting.

Rewrite and reshoot everything else in the movie. Rewrite every line of dialogue, every scene of exposition, every moment of so-called drama, every joke, every love scene. All of this stuff is dumber than snot, embarrassingly juvenile and not worth the tens of millions of dollars it took to get it on screen.

So there it is. Fortunately the movie is essentially a non-stop action sequence, because between the adrenaline-pumping chases, rapid-fire shoot-outs and high-octane explosions -- all of which are gorgeously realized -- the "filler material" is useless, puerile junk.

 

Interesting. I found the action to be rather dull most of the time, but the comedy (both intentional and unintentional) to be more entertaining. They also need to take out any of the ham-fisted attempts to reference the show's tag lines. I have never groaned out loud at a movie before...this was a new experience for me.

 

Mmm-hmm. They really missed the boat on this one.

Bubble gum at least makes your jaw work for it. Rise of Cobra is more like an over-caffeinated slurpee. It's a "Buy 'N Large" movie.

I'll be waiting.

Of course there is.

You forget, you're talking to the guy who thought the Dreadnoks as a subliminal message-spewing hair metal band was good clean fun.

Unfortunately, nothing about the film recalls that innocent, kooky sincerity. It's just by-the-numbers hash without any real love or interest.

I'll be the judge of that.

 

Taking any and all criticisms of something you've bound yourself to defend does not, by extension, make said criticisms ad hominen.

No, it isn't.

There's no "feeling" involved. Bad movies are able to make movie in this sorry contemporary pop culture of ours, so they continue to be made. It's as simple as that.

Ah, but you believe that "taste is purely subjective", thus these films cannot possibly be considered works of "excellence" by any objective measure. It's all relative, and irrelevant.

If you would think about it a little harder, you might realise that it doesn't affect my position in the slightest.

And I am simply calling a spade a spade.

And in this, I am forced to question your judgment again.

 

Not every film that isn't The Godfather has to be Meet the Spartans, contrary to what you seem to believe.

It can still be torpedoed. I don't think this film is going to make enough to justify a sequel.

"Sleeper"?

I told you...

 

Yes, Michael Caine's Alfred, I mean Quiet_Mandalorian, you did "tell me so". I will regretfully "eat crow" and confess that the dialogue and characterizations pretty much stink. However, note that I really, REALLY enjoyed the action sequences, which in contrast to your opinion I find to be well-shot, well-edited, well-scored, and excellent examples of full-throttle, military-themed action-adventure. Fortunately for the movie, about 80% of it is full of these cinematic virtues, so despite the inane scripting, GI JOE still merits a B-.

 

Does anyone agree with me that the background to CC was pretty good? I know I was surprised. It?s just a pity that the ?script? and the atmosphere of the movie weren?t as good. Now, if they?d done a better job on the script and made the atmosphere of the movie darker and not so juvenile then this could?ve been a moment to rival ?I am your father? from ESB.

 

Yeah, I think the broad strokes of the plot and characters are solid and that "the Doctor" was well-conceived and effectively performed. Despite the unintentional comedy of his wig-swiping unmasking scene, as well as his climactic "Call me Commander!" scene, the character was engaging and mysterious and just over-the-top enough to be fun without seeming too ridiculous. To think it's the kid from 3rd Rock hamming it up under there is very amusing as well.

 

Now, I would say that having the scenes set up so you can't actually see the action is BAD. Honestly, if you really like those scenes, take a look at Snake-eyes's sections. If you can actually SEE what moves he is making, how he is moving, striking, blocking, etc., then fine. I challenge you to be able to identify more than 5 in the entire movie. Why? Because the camera is shaking, the camera is moving obstacles into the way (like car door frames), or the camera speed is being altered.
Submarines should not me more maneuverable than airplanes or spacecraft. Yet, amazingly, these subs are able to flip and spin with zero forward movement. This is NOT a well designed or conceived sequence.
Crashing into 1 car, and having it flip up and over the SUV so that Snake-Eyes has to dodge it it cool. Repeating the process 4 more times does not make it cooler. In fact, by tedious repetition, it deminishes the coolness factor of the first one.

The Cobra Commander origin was pretty lame. Sorry, but like so much of the movie, it was shallow, vapid, and silly. The cartoon never gave him an origin, but the comics did, and one that made sense--sort of a huey long--he was a used car salesman who built up a cult of personality around the notion that the US was failing to live up to their ideals, and that they (the people) should join and support him in returning to a better way of life. And over time, he got the quasi KKK build-up with security guards to protect him from ATF agents and what-not. OK, I'm not describing it well (that's what happens when I try to summarize a comic book I read 15 years ago, and why I am not a professional writer).

Why make up a new name for Brendan Fraiser's character. With that outfit he was close enough to Flint that several of the people I talked to (who didn't look at wikipedia) thought that was who he was supposed to be playing.

My advice to the producers of the movie:
Scrap this entire movie. Let it be like the 1997(?) Fantastic Four movie--the one with the soundtrack that sounds like Jurasic Park that was never officially released.
Keep the cast (except for Channing Tatum)
Get completely new writers (or just Hana, who might have an idea or two...) Make sure script pays at least some attention to established characters and concepts.
Get the camera crew filming the fights to coordinate with Ray Park so we can actually see and appreciate the work he's putting into the show.
No giggile or shakeycam. No messing with film speed.

 

For a movie I had every reason to believe was going to be the worse movie of the summer, I am shocked at how good this actually was. If you just kind of skip everything but the action sequences, it's a really good film! FAR better than Transformers 2 (which now remains the worst film of the summer). The special effects were a mixed bag, where most of the time you could tell they were walking around on green screen, the action sequences were pretty seamless between CGI and reality. The chase in France is one of the most exciting scenes I've seen in a long time. I consider myself a pretty picky movie goer, and really this was big and stupid movie making at it's finest, and there's NOTHING wrong with that if it's done right.

 

Yep, as I said in my post on the last page, the action scenes were way too much in your face CGI and impossible stunts. For example, I haven't seen a motorcycle manoeuvre like that in heavy city traffic since Street Hawk, and that was a computerised fly-by-wire bike, not any old bike found on the street! Matrix eat your heart out!

EDIT: I just remembered that Trinity rode a Ducati in exactly that style in one of the Matrix films!

As I pointed out, I thought it could've been really good if the script and the atmosphere of the movie had been done right. Done right it could've added quite a gritty vengeance twist to the plot.

Read my post on the previous page. Yep, I thought he was Flint too! I mean, what with his outfit and looks he was a dead ringer for Flint!

 

It's supposed to be 'Steeler', but I got the gist of it.

*Looks at list* Snake Eyes stands out a bit...

 

My bad. I had just posted in a Woody Allen thread, I think, and Sleeper was on my mind!

 

Hey, thanks for finding the list!

 

I don't know why The Godfather is considered such a great movie, but I'll let that one slide.

Not every movie that wallows in juvenile stupidity is bad.

American Pie plunges the depths of adolescent, purile, juvenile humor, but was still a decent movie (OK, not one I'd want to watch with my parents).
Earth Girls are Easy was a rediculous piece of fluff, but fun.
Dude, Where's My Car is probablly the absolutely stupidest movie I've ever sorta liked in spite of the IQ setting.
Army of Darkness is an extremely flawed and cheezy movie, as is Flash Gordon. No brain power required, but fun.

On the other hand, we have oscar-winning movies where industry politics have obviously over-ridden quality. "Reds", "GlenGarry/Glenn Ross", "Unforgiven", "Inconvenient Truth", and "Bowling for Columbine" top the list, but they have lots of company.

Some movies suck beyond the telling of it, but are somehow popular. "Home Alone" is a perfect example.

Other movies are great, but never receive any attention whatsoever for reasons unknown. "Lionheart" (Eric Stoltz & Gabrielle Byrne, NOT Jean Claud VanDummie) is a perfect example.

And some movies I like for reasons that have nothing to do with the movie. Yes, I can rip apart "The Black Hole" as easily as anyone else, but I enjoy it in spite of the flaws.

Gettign back to G.I.Joe, I have to say that everyone else I've talked to who saw the movie hated it. OK, that's 4 people. One of them saw it with a 10-YO who did like it, but since I didn't talk to said 1-YO directly, I'm not aware why or what he liked about it.

 

No sweat. The wiki pages on GI JOE are very educational. I have a book about the 12" Hasbro JOE of the 60s/70s, but I never really knew much about the development of the Real American Hero line from 1982-on. For instance, as Q_M has noted upthread, Larry Hama wrote all or most of the card files of the original figures. This is because he was developing the Marvel comics series at the same time the figures were being developed, and Hasbro was impressed with the authenticity of Hama's characters -- enough to let him scribe the card files and basically create each character from scratch. Given this, it's deeply unfortunate that Hama's name is nowhere to be found on the new movie. I understand he was a script consultant, but not enough to earn credit according to WGA regulations. Pity.

 

I think the point was that CC didn't turn evil because he was exposed to some tecno virus, but because he wanted revenge on his former buddy, Duke. He used the virus to turn and control the others, including his sister.

 

I think a large part of the decent was the horrible scaring via the ill-timed bomb.

 

Yeah, that's why he was wanting revenge, because Duke sent him into that building and ****** up the timing for the bombing run, or at least in his mind anyway. As a result he was left not such a pretty boy anymore. Makes sense why he was just a tad ****** off.

 

Well my point was that more than just revenge, that kind of betrayal and dis-figuration would severely **** with a dude's head.

 

Uh, yeah, I think that's what I said...Being left with an onion for a head kinda crewed with his mind, to put it lightly. That and in his head it was Duke who caused it made him want to seriously get his own back big time.