Movie Review: GI JOE


Agonus

 

Posted

Well, I finally got to see it today. I liked it, it was pretty much what I was expecting going in. GI Joe has always had as much to do with super heroes as 'real military action'. The stuff that happens is nothing short of heroics, and the setting plays fast and loose with the laws of reality as much as any super hero does. They just put on Accelerator suits instead of tights and a cape.

Sure it was a bit of a restart, and making Destro Scottish was... decidedly odd. I actually like this version of the Cobra Commander more than the usual ones. I mean typically he's just a guy with a funny voice, mask and megalomania, who still somehow manages to build, fund and maintain an absurd international terrorist organization, despite being beat at every turn by the Joes.

Sure some of the characters were odd, like making Scarlett a genius for... no apparent reason really. The only thing that really didn't sit well with me was the whole business with Baroness. Which I found sad because she was always my favorite.

But all in all, the movie filled my expectations as a silly over the top action summer flick.


SG Mate: Cien, what the hell is this Rookery thing?
RadDidIt: (interjecting) Dude. It's the Rookery.
SG Mate: Yeah, but what IS it?
RadDidIt: Silliness Incarnate.

 

Posted

Did someone remove my post about this?

For folks spewing about Continuity, The man responsible for 90% GI JOE Lore.


http://www.411mania.com/movies/colum...Larry-Hama.htm

-points-


Larry Hama states:

Steve Gustafson: First, congratulations on receiving the Henry Y. Kiyama Award last month. As the first recipient of the award, it must be a huge honor for you and a testament to your contributions to the Asian and Asian American community. What are some of your thoughts on receiving the award?

Larry Hama: Surprised and humbled. It's the first and only award I've ever received. Never even been nominated for anything.

SG: Of course the big news is the live action G.I. Joe movie. How do you feel about seeing a property that you are so close to finally coming to the big screen?

LH: I've seen it five times and I love it. I've said time and again that I am not one for continuity and that RAH (Real American Hero) was made up as it went along literally page by page and a huge hunk of it was retcon. The intrinsic cores of the characters are right there in the movie, exactly as they were in the comic. Scarlett, Storm Shadow and Snake-Eyes are true to their essence. The continuity freaks need to get a life.


IN CASE YOU MISSED IT, LET ME REPHRASE A PART: "The continuity freaks need to get a life."


JJ


I delete more 50s, then you'll ever have.
http://www.pandora.com/people/jjdemon

 

Posted

Eh, I'm not so much bothered about continuity. Aside from using the same names and the same general concept, I wasn't expecting there to be much. It's just a matter of internal consistency in the movie with Scarlett, and the Baroness being an overused plot device. Certainly nothing there to ruin my enjoyment of the film, just very eyeroll-worthy.


SG Mate: Cien, what the hell is this Rookery thing?
RadDidIt: (interjecting) Dude. It's the Rookery.
SG Mate: Yeah, but what IS it?
RadDidIt: Silliness Incarnate.

 

Posted

I liked the movie. It was a great summer, non-stop action movie.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by JJDrakken View Post
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT, LET ME REPHRASE A PART: "The continuity freaks need to get a life."
Thanks JJ. I needed a new quote for my sig.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by JJDrakken View Post
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT, LET ME REPHRASE A PART: "The continuity freaks need to get a life."


JJ
JJ, do you realize that Hama is "just" a writer? He wasn't the creator. The folks at Hasbro created every comic book character based on a pre-existing concept toy. Each character had a background created by Hasbro.

Having a quote from him is like having a quote from a guy that worked catering on the set of the Matrix. He worked for Marvel, writing scripts based on the ideas of others.

So, here's a quote from me, k?

"The Hama fanboiz need to get a life."

But you, like I, are entitled to your opinion.


pohsyb: so of all people you must be most excited about the veats
Arachnos Commander: actually, I am
pohsyb: I mean you kinda were one already anyways ^_^
Arachnos Commander:

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by JJDrakken View Post
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT, LET ME REPHRASE A PART: "The continuity freaks need to get a life."


JJ
I have very little invested in G.I. Joe, since at the time of my youth, I was more entertained by My Little Pwnies and Tetris, but I find it odd that we're placing so little value on continuity.

Or is it just specific to this franchise, where we say frak all to what's been established before?


 

Posted

Lorne Greene never said 'frak' and where the heck was Daggitt? I missed that creepy lil bear robot.


Let us stifle under mud at the pond's edge
and affirm that it is fitting
and delicious to lose everything. ~ Donald Hall

 

Posted

Come now, fellows. Let us all listen to some soothing music.


The Elysienne; Magical controller
Silent Sickle; Natural scrapper
And many more.
Aenigma Rebis: "Actually, Ely's more like Jean Grey. Only... smart."

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elysienne View Post
Come now, fellows. Let us all listen to some soothing music.
WOW! Just wow!

All I have to say... if that cast was in the actual movie, I'd be a HELL of a lot more impressed. I mean.. Chuck Lidell as Gung Ho, Henry Rollins as Duke, and Julianne Moore as Scarlett... wow!

Elysieene, you gets + rep from me

<--- new avatar (Vinnie Jones as Destro playing the clarinet)


pohsyb: so of all people you must be most excited about the veats
Arachnos Commander: actually, I am
pohsyb: I mean you kinda were one already anyways ^_^
Arachnos Commander:

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Commander_NA View Post
What's wrong with Cobra Commander having been a used car dealer? Jimmy Carter was a peanut farmer before he was President. The idea is that the original story, albeit far fetched, had merit (in the GI Joe universe.)

The background were not 'tweaked'. They were paved over. Cobra Commander WAS NOT the brother of the Baroness. The Baroness wasn't the fiancee' of Duke. Duke wasn't every going to be brothers with Cobra Commander.

But I can see where people would rather smile and nod because culture has dumbed down things to the point where it's okay to ignore canon.

Let me ask you this:

If CoH totally broke canon and rewrote the entire thing to the point where it was nothing like we've learned, would you be happy? Or should I just say, "Hmm.. you've played for 5 years and pumped your money into this product... too bad! They aren't making this for you anymore... it's now marketed to a whole new demographic. Get over it."
Technically, they've already done this (in true comic book fashion) with the Flashback issue, Praetoria and to a degree with Cimerora.

As with the new generation of Joes, Autobots, Trons and Myers'; they don't replace their canons, they co-exist with them.

It's like Hollywood is catching up with the 'What If..' trend from the 80s.


Apparently, I play "City of Shakespeare"
*Arc #95278-Gathering the Four Winds -3 step arc; challenging - 5 Ratings/3 Stars (still working out the kinks)
*Arc #177826-Lights, Camera, Scream! - 3 step arc, camp horror; try out in 1st person POV - 35 Ratings/4 Stars

 

Posted

Someone give Yogi a Picnic Basket & Cigar.

Common sense over-riding "OMG MY CHILDHOOD" dorks.


I for one, happy period to see anything I grew up on, in another fashion, be it Big Screen, New Games, etc...


JJ


I delete more 50s, then you'll ever have.
http://www.pandora.com/people/jjdemon

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elysienne View Post
Come now, fellows. Let us all listen to some soothing music.
wow that was rather well done.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by JJDrakken View Post
Someone give Yogi a Picnic Basket & Cigar.

Common sense over-riding "OMG MY CHILDHOOD" dorks.


I for one, happy period to see anything I grew up on, in another fashion, be it Big Screen, New Games, etc...


JJ
Is that why you love the Hello Kitty game so much?


Defenders do it with protection.
Blasters do it from behind.
Tankers do it with a group.
Controllers do it with restraints.
Scrappers do it with a death wish.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by JJDrakken View Post
Someone give Yogi a Picnic Basket & Cigar.

Common sense over-riding "OMG MY CHILDHOOD" dorks.


I for one, happy period to see anything I grew up on, in another fashion, be it Big Screen, New Games, etc...


JJ
So we should be expecting a glowing review from you on the upcoming Monopoly, Battleship, and maybe Candyland movies?

Since you will, for one, be happy to see anything you grew up with in another fashion.


 

Posted

I for one would like to see JJ's glowing review of the TMNT movies, Street Fighter movie, MK movies and also his personal opinion on other such things.


Now! This is it! Now is the time to choose! Die and be free of pain or live and fight your sorrow! Now is the time to shape your stories! Your fate is in your hands!

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Commander_NA View Post
What's wrong with Cobra Commander having been a used car dealer? Jimmy Carter was a peanut farmer before he was President. The idea is that the original story, albeit far fetched, had merit (in the GI Joe universe.)

The background were not 'tweaked'. They were paved over. Cobra Commander WAS NOT the brother of the Baroness. The Baroness wasn't the fiancee' of Duke. Duke wasn't every going to be brothers with Cobra Commander.

But I can see where people would rather smile and nod because culture has dumbed down things to the point where it's okay to ignore canon.

Let me ask you this:

If CoH totally broke canon and rewrote the entire thing to the point where it was nothing like we've learned, would you be happy? Or should I just say, "Hmm.. you've played for 5 years and pumped your money into this product... too bad! They aren't making this for you anymore... it's now marketed to a whole new demographic. Get over it."

Game: Star Wars Galaxies. Killed my inner child over a period of 2 years. Anyone remember when the game launched they touted it taking place during the pivotal time between A New Hope and Empire Strikes Back?.... Perfect example of killing a concept that didn't need killing. The GI Joe movie is no different. If they honored the canon, the folks who were once kids and spent so much time with it would have loved it, and it could easily work for a new generation. Why do Hollywood screenwriters think they have the new special sauce to add everytime they get their hands on an old beloved franchise? Monkey-munchers.


My New Rig : Geforce 580 GTX, Core i7 950 @ 3.20 Ghz, 24GB RAM, 240GB SSD for OS, 60GB SSD for swap = Heaven.

 

Posted

My Review of TMNT Movies, Loved all 3, period.

Street Fighter movies, they where fun action flicks & good campy humor.


Double Dragon, I barely remember it, I jus thought it was cool I got see a video game, I played the living hell out of, on the big screen.


PSYCHOSUS, ZOMG ZOMG ZOMG, <3




JJ


I delete more 50s, then you'll ever have.
http://www.pandora.com/people/jjdemon

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Space_Cop View Post
. Why do Hollywood screenwriters think they have the new special sauce to add everytime they get their hands on an old beloved franchise? Monkey-munchers.
...umm no one really wants to know the truth, but most hollywood screen writers are Sea manatees, and push balls with words for the producers who only care about the pre-sale of a film, if the movie makes its desired money then they make a squel.

the only time film people care about the product is when they want to get silly awards (sundance, oscar, ... ect).

so use this formula to see if you can build a hollywood movie

A=plot B=actors/actoress C=Budget D=Director

if B is = to or greater then C then Hire D who is = C+B pre-sale movie so that C is four times greater, hire second cousin to write script pay him peanuts forget A

if B is less then C then hire foreign D and pay known B for one days work, hire D to co-write script with second cousin forget A


 

Posted

meh.

Unimpressed by the reviews, both the good ones and the bad ones. The good ones uniformly have the caveats "turn off your brain", "made for kids", "summer actioner" and the like, which do not pique my interest at all.

The bad ones, are worse, even if I discount the GI Joe continuity hatred (and I'm a big Joe fanboi). Generic actioner, huge plot holes, pointless characterization, etc.

Someone is gonna call me an elitist or something for even bringing up these points. If you knew me, you'd know I'm not not elitist, I like some very stupid stuff and am very mainstream in my tastes.

But, this just does not look interesting to me. I'll catch it on cable.


 

Posted

I have to laugh at all of the seriousness at which people are taking this. This isn't saying that people shouldn't be a bit disappointed if something doesn't quite fall into a preconceived mold.

Black Kingpins; 2 different Sabertooths between the 4 X-Titles; the birth, life and death of every major comic book villain in the span of 90 minutes, etc... it happens.

It even happens within the original medium; not just in its translation to a different one.

There's really no justification for rallying against an interpretation that isn't 100% true to canon when the source material is littered with parallels, skews and outright changes.

And it really isn't logical to pay $20 to see something that is exactly like something you've already read... especially when it comes with accompanying pictures.

The big thing to remember is that most of the source material was cheesy as heck to begin with and to expect any translation of cheesy material to a different medium with the intent of making it not cheesy... well, lol and good luck with that.

The actuality of the problem is that some people are just too fanboish about fiction to be grounded in reality.

I liked TMNT (movies and cartoons) despite it's lack of it's source material's edginess. Super Mario Bros sucked... don't remember the DD movie. Street Fighter sucked because it tried too hard to keep to character. Blades I & II rocked. I liked the first 3 Supermans and every incarnation of Spiderman (cartoons). Don't like the trend of ensemble villains in comic book movie sequals (original Batman movies and Spiderman). Watchmen was darker and more put together than the latest Batman installment. Iron Man was almost flawless. Spawn sucked, DareDevil sucked, Punisher sucked (1st one... but it had ninjas); villains made Elektra tolerable. X-Men 2 was the best of the trilogy... even with no Psylocke. Transformers was okay even though Jazz wasn't a badge AND he got gutted within 90 minutes. I admit, I got miffed when they scrapped 'canon' when they released Alien 3 but I still liked the movie (hated Resurrection). Got a kick out of Speed Racer but won't watch DB: E.

But point is; I tend to take the presentation for what it is and the stuff in the GI Joe movie isn't any more off-base or unrealistic than anything from the cartoons.


Apparently, I play "City of Shakespeare"
*Arc #95278-Gathering the Four Winds -3 step arc; challenging - 5 Ratings/3 Stars (still working out the kinks)
*Arc #177826-Lights, Camera, Scream! - 3 step arc, camp horror; try out in 1st person POV - 35 Ratings/4 Stars

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yogi_Bare View Post
I have to laugh at all of the seriousness at which people are taking this. This isn't saying that people shouldn't be a bit disappointed if something doesn't quite fall into a preconceived mold.

Black Kingpins; 2 different Sabertooths between the 4 X-Titles; the birth, life and death of every major comic book villain in the span of 90 minutes, etc... it happens.

It even happens within the original medium; not just in its translation to a different one.

There's really no justification for rallying against an interpretation that isn't 100% true to canon when the source material is littered with parallels, skews and outright changes.

And it really isn't logical to pay $20 to see something that is exactly like something you've already read... especially when it comes with accompanying pictures.
Actually, I think expressing displeasure about an interpretation is perfectly valid, even if the source is littered with contradictions.

After all, you see it all the time between different religious denominations and sects.

The debate, I'd think, is actually more over whether said interpretations make sense; any adaptation or translation is necessarily going to change things, but that shouldn't mean that editorial changes should be immune to criticism.

Quote:
The actuality of the problem is that some people are just too fanboish about fiction to be grounded in reality.
I don't think that discounting such arguments automatically follows, however. They may have very good points to make. (For one, I do think it's odd that G.I. Joe, which is a very American thing, was turned into a multi-national force. Seems odd that other nations would go along with such a nickname... Of course, I haven't seen the movie, so.)

Quote:
But point is; I tend to take the presentation for what it is and the stuff in the GI Joe movie isn't any more off-base or unrealistic than anything from the cartoons.
I don't think anybody made the argument that any G.I. Joe was remotely realistic. At least, I hope they didn't. What little I've seen of G.I. Joe...


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yogi_Bare View Post
I have to laugh at all of the seriousness at which people are taking this. This isn't saying that people shouldn't be a bit disappointed if something doesn't quite fall into a preconceived mold.

Black Kingpins; 2 different Sabertooths between the 4 X-Titles; the birth, life and death of every major comic book villain in the span of 90 minutes, etc... it happens.

It even happens within the original medium; not just in its translation to a different one.

There's really no justification for rallying against an interpretation that isn't 100% true to canon when the source material is littered with parallels, skews and outright changes.

And it really isn't logical to pay $20 to see something that is exactly like something you've already read... especially when it comes with accompanying pictures.

The big thing to remember is that most of the source material was cheesy as heck to begin with and to expect any translation of cheesy material to a different medium with the intent of making it not cheesy... well, lol and good luck with that.

The actuality of the problem is that some people are just too fanboish about fiction to be grounded in reality.

I liked TMNT (movies and cartoons) despite it's lack of it's source material's edginess. Super Mario Bros sucked... don't remember the DD movie. Street Fighter sucked because it tried too hard to keep to character. Blades I & II rocked. I liked the first 3 Supermans and every incarnation of Spiderman (cartoons). Don't like the trend of ensemble villains in comic book movie sequals (original Batman movies and Spiderman). Watchmen was darker and more put together than the latest Batman installment. Iron Man was almost flawless. Spawn sucked, DareDevil sucked, Punisher sucked (1st one... but it had ninjas); villains made Elektra tolerable. X-Men 2 was the best of the trilogy... even with no Psylocke. Transformers was okay even though Jazz wasn't a badge AND he got gutted within 90 minutes. I admit, I got miffed when they scrapped 'canon' when they released Alien 3 but I still liked the movie (hated Resurrection). Got a kick out of Speed Racer but won't watch DB: E.

But point is; I tend to take the presentation for what it is and the stuff in the GI Joe movie isn't any more off-base or unrealistic than anything from the cartoons.
You bring up an interesting point, why all this for GI Joe? I mean I have been and always will be a "Trekie". In addition, when the recent Star Trek Movie came out I did not see this kind of outrage over the major brake with known star trek Lore, in fact, I didn’t even see anyone post about the one brake in lore that was not able to be shifted with a alternate timeline that JJ Abrams had said he did.
If going on an alternate timeline the tech could be rationalized in both the movie and the series “Enterprise” because of the next generation movie “First Contact” but move forward in Star Trek history from “Enterprise” yes the Tech would be better than the 1960’s show. Nevertheless, even with this, you could never justify how a Federation crew 30 years before Captain James T Kirk had his first run in with the Romulan Space Empire knew what a Romulan Star ship or its crew looked like. And yet in the opening of the recent Star Trek Movie they knew instantly that the hostile ship was a Romulan ship and they didn’t react that a Romulan looked like a Vulcan.


 

Posted

Quote:
Actually, I think expressing displeasure about an interpretation is perfectly valid, even if the source is littered with contradictions.
Not when the basis of your arguement centers on a materials contradictions.

You can not like a movie because it doesn't quite match up with your favored version of canon. However, when there are multiple versions of canon, being upset at an additional version of canon just because it's an additional version seems to be self defeating, IMO. If that were a legitimate arguement, then no fanboi alive should like XMen, Spiderman, Batman [or TMNT] in any of its incarnations [outside of the first].

Quote:
The debate, I'd think, is actually more over whether said interpretations make sense; any adaptation or translation is necessarily going to change things, but that shouldn't mean that editorial changes should be immune to criticism.
When you think about it, the originals made little sense; criticisms could be made against both materials but again; criticizing a new recipe for fruit salad on the basis that it doesn't match the long list of different recipes for fruit salad that preceded it shows an extreme inflexibility to the idea of what the progression of fruit salad should look like... as opposed to not liking it because it tasted like a load of carp.

Quote:
I don't think that discounting such arguments automatically follows, however. They may have very good points to make. (For one, I do think it's odd that G.I. Joe, which is a very American thing, was turned into a multi-national force. Seems odd that other nations would go along with such a nickname... Of course, I haven't seen the movie, so.)
The points may be valid but the basis of the argument could still be flawed. And very 'American' things are made multi-national in real life while still clinging to an American monicker (as in both Gulf Wars, the 'War on Terror' and the 'War on Drugs')



Quote:
As a hardcore fan of the original GI Joe series/comic, I have to say that this movie was the worst GOD-AWEFUL thing I have ever seen. 99% of the story was "original" had had nothing to do with the original series. If they took away every name of the Joes and Cobra, you'd think this was any other mildly entertaining action movie.

Now, believe me, I LOVE the original story of GI Joe vs Cobra. But this thing was so the opposite of the original series, it made my stomach knot up.

SPOILER ALERT *Do not read past here if you don't want to know...*









My belief: If you are going to 'recreate' something as iconic as GI Joe, don't [censored] on the fans that grew up with it. Don't make us feel like the hours we spent, immersing ourselves in their world, was wasted. Don't make us leave, scratching our head, thinking "Cobra Commander and the Baroness are brother and sister? Wait, the Commander is a doctor too? When the [censored] did that happen?"

I think that this movie set back GI Joe from what it should have been. Now it's just a laughing stock, take the money and run, box office manure pile!

Oh, by the way... Cobra Commander ALWAYS WORE A MASK... ALWAYS!!


Apparently, I play "City of Shakespeare"
*Arc #95278-Gathering the Four Winds -3 step arc; challenging - 5 Ratings/3 Stars (still working out the kinks)
*Arc #177826-Lights, Camera, Scream! - 3 step arc, camp horror; try out in 1st person POV - 35 Ratings/4 Stars

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yogi_Bare View Post
Not when the basis of your arguement centers on a materials contradictions.
So the entire discipline of Theology is ridiculous?

Quote:
You can not like a movie because it doesn't quite match up with your favored version of canon. However, when there are multiple versions of canon, being upset at an additional version of canon just because it's an additional version seems to be self defeating, IMO. If that were a legitimate arguement, then no fanboi alive should like XMen, Spiderman, Batman [or TMNT] in any of its incarnations [outside of the first].
*shrugs* I don't think that they're mad that it's an additional version--just that it doesn't match up to their favored version. Is it self-defeating? Not necessarily. Does it mean that they'll be much more skeptical of those movie producers? One can only hope. Movies like this are an embarrassment to the craft.

Quote:
When you think about it, the originals made little sense; criticisms could be made against both materials but again; criticizing a new recipe for fruit salad on the basis that it doesn't match the long list of different recipes for fruit salad that preceded it shows an extreme inflexibility to the idea of what the progression of fruit salad should look like... as opposed to not liking it because it tasted like a load of carp.
Again, I'm not quite sure that's what the major complaint is.

Part of the reason that the new Star Trek didn't raise as much ire is because they took all of the ingredients in the original recipe, stripped out ones they didn't like, and threw in new ones (like a plot that seems a bit taken from Star Wars), and then blended them together well.

That's not the sense I'm getting from the reviews of this movie; instead, it seems like they've taken some of the ingredients, decided to add in a bunch of new ones, and didn't care to see if they meshed well--which is why many people think it tasted like, in your words, a load of carp.

Quote:
The points may be valid but the basis of the argument could still be flawed. And very 'American' things are made multi-national in real life while still clinging to an American moniker (as in both Gulf Wars, the 'War on Terror' and the 'War on Drugs')
Actually, my criticism was more on the terminology. "G.I. Joe" sounds very uniquely American. When you're talking about things like the Gulf War and the Iraq War, the names do actually change depending on which side you were on, and even where in the world you were.

The difference with those, however, and "G.I. Joe", is that the origins of the former were by their nature multi-national, while the latter is distinctly American. G.I., of course, being shorthand for US soldiers, not any soldiers; the series was billed as being a "real American hero"; and, I'm pretty sure, I remember them being called something else in foreign countries, without using the G.I. Joe name.

You could make the argument that it was because they didn't want to pay the licensing for that brand, but I'm willing to bet it's because the association of the name wouldn't have worked as well with the foreign kids. After all, they had other nicknames for their soldiers.