Hollywood hasn't grown up, why should we---?

[Snake Eyes-Joe Ninja]

Okay, not to be a one-track mind here, but Snake-Eyes (he's my all time fave character, give me a break...) wasn't in the old cartoon a lot, they pretty much cut him out due to the writers not being able to handle a silent bad-ass (yet almost every video game until 2000 had one... work with me here). They started te romance a bit in the first mini-series with Scarlett, and then BAM, he was gone by the series... Sure, he popped up here and there, but otherwise he was nothing more than a background character.

Still, at Comic Con, they've now said that the added the Ripcord-Scarlett-SE love triangle because they didn't know how to write for a silent character.....


IT'S BEEN 25 YEARS!!!! Are you seriously telling me that in 25 years, their ability to write hasn't improved?

On to my other bone I am picking, they've also said "resolute is for adults; Joe fans have grown-up, blah blah blah."...

Too bad they couldn't do so for the movies, AS MOVIES THAT DON'T BEND TO DEMOGRAPHICS SEEM TO MAKE THE MOST MONEY!!!! *cough*Dark Knight*cough*Iron Man*cough*

[NateR]

Honestly, Snake Eyes is one of my all-time favorite fictional characters also, but I've never read much of the comic book version of him at all. All I know of him is from the cartoon series and his filecard. Scarlett was Duke's love interest in the cartoon and SE was little more than a background character; but I still thought he was the coolest character ever created when I was a kid. Not even the breakdancing and cross-dressing could ruin that for me.

I kind of think that the less the movie attempts to develop him the better. Look what the Star Wars prequels did to Boba Fett's and Darth Vader's cool factor by revealing too much background information.

[CynthiaCM]

Honestly, Snake Eyes is one of my all-time favorite fictional characters also, but I've never read much of the comic book version of him at all. All I know of him is from the cartoon series and his filecard. Scarlett was Duke's love interest in the cartoon and SE was little more than a background character; but I still thought he was the coolest character ever created when I was a kid. Not even the breakdancing and cross-dressing could ruin that for me.

I kind of think that the less the movie attempts to develop him the better. Look what the Star Wars prequels did to Boba Fett's and Darth Vader's cool factor by revealing too much background information.

Normally, I would agree about less = more, but Snake-Eyes' origin is juts too darn awesome to leave out, in my opinion.

If you like Snake-Eyes, you should really check out the comics. He's a much cooler character there. A bit later in the Marvel series, they started over-using him, but up until then, he was incredible.

[delta]

Okay, not to be a one-track mind here, but Snake-Eyes (he's my all time fave character, give me a break...) wasn't in the old cartoon a lot, they pretty much cut him out due to the writers not being able to handle a silent bad-ass (yet almost every video game until 2000 had one... work with me here). They started te romance a bit in the first mini-series with Scarlett, and then BAM, he was gone by the series... Sure, he popped up here and there, but otherwise he was nothing more than a background character.

Still, at Comic Con, they've now said that the added the Ripcord-Scarlett-SE love triangle because they didn't know how to write for a silent character.....


Sorry Man, but I'm not gonna ever cry tears over Snakeeyes not gettin enough play. Not when too many other major players in the Joe vs. Cobra saga are getting the shaft, Flint (my all time favorite), Roadblock, the Dredknocks...

If you look at snakeeyes history (not the fictional one but as a toy) He really was a fill in character. The 82' Snakeeyes was all black so no need for extra cost in painting the figure, all he needed was a new head sculpt. He was a cheep figure to make for hasbro. On the cartoon, and comic SE was the "break out character" like fonzie on 'Happy days', or (to a lesser extent) Urkel on 'Family Matters'.

That means that Snakeeyes was never ment to be the main character, but due to fans liking him he became the main character. Sorry this is the last time I'll compair SE to Urkel, but Urkel was supposed to appear on one episode of Family matters. The one episode he appeared in got such good fan reaction that the whole show became about Urkel!! Then take Fonzie on 'Happy Days' the same thing happend with him, that happend to Urkel, that happend to Snake Eyes. Fonzie became the star of the show even more so when Ron "Richie" Howard left.

The Marvel series on it's last legs infact named the series Snake-Eyes....featuring gi.joe. So sorry man like I said I'm not crying any tears for Snake Eyes.


Too bad they couldn't do so for the movies, AS MOVIES THAT DON'T BEND TO DEMOGRAPHICS SEEM TO MAKE THE MOST MONEY!!!! *cough*Dark Knight*cough*Iron Man*cough*

Coulden't agree more with this statement! This is what I had to say about that in a thread I posted that got closed.

O.k. So I saw the Dark Knight last weekend. It F'ing Ruled. I'm not even a quarter as big a Batman fan as GI.Joe or Transfomers. Still I recognize that the new Batman movie was great.

The New Batman movies are well made, well acted, well directed and definitely not just for kids. However you can't deny that some of Batman's encarnations have been..well..rather silly.

Like this. "Holy Sardine!!"
YouTube - Exploding Shark (http://youtube.com/watch?v=X0UJaprpxrk)

Or this craptacular Batman from a more recent 1997 exploit
YouTube - BATMAN AND ROBIN WORST MOVIE EVER (http://youtube.com/watch?v=AJWpmPGCR1c)

GI.Joe has had it's fair share of silliness, Eco Worriors, Battle force 2000, Cobra-la, but I don't think it's ever gone past the redemption point though.

So what I am wondering is why not show the same respect to the new GI.Joe movie (or Transformers movie for that matter) as they have shown to Batman in his new movies?

This is a quote from a Tanker about the new Joe Movie
"..this movie WILL rule...if you are expecting saving private ryan-then you really dont know what gi joe is all about!"

I'm personally not expecting the GI.Joe movie to be like 'Saving Private Ryan' or 'Apocalypse Now' or 'Full metal Jacket'.
But please spare us Powersuits, comic relief characters, and Laser guns.
Were adults now dammit!!

[pud333]

The quality of the writing in Hollywood is suspect at best. So it doesn't surprise me they don't know how to write a silent character.

However, Snake eyes is a character that is definitely really hard to write for, and I don't think will resonate that well with the mainstream. Yes, Joe fans will love him, but the problem with Snake eyes is that not only is he mute, he's faceless. He's got that hood and visor, which basically takes away any facial expressions or emotion. They say the eyes are the windows to the soul; well, you can't see his eyes.

In the past, actors have portrayed well written chacters with disabilities. Even mute, at least they had their eyes to emote. Snake Eyes is like a blank slate, with only his body to emote. It will be very difficult for any writer to make him personable, let alone any actor showing emotion through the performance. The key is to connect with the mainstream audience. Hardcore fans will make it a great opening weekend, but the mainstream will make sure the movie has "legs" and makes money in the weeks after (and ensure a sequel). I love Snake Eyes, but he's better off as a side character that comes in and kicks ass. More screen time should be given to the other dozens of characters whose personalities can shine on screen. The only way I see them making him personable, is to have him remove his mask when not fighting. You might get hardcore fans crying over that one, but I think it would be necessary if you want to make him a main character.

However, if they manage to pull it off, I will be impressed.

[NateR]

I think the best bet for SE in the movie is to treat him like they did in the cartoon. Keep him a cool looking background character. This way fans of the character will get to see him in action without having to worry about continuity issues with his comic book origin. Also, the average viewer of the movie will get to see him in action without overloading the story with too much development.

Similar to Boba Fett in Empire Strikes Back. Another (mostly) silent, faceless character who is still one of the most popular fictional characters of all time.

Talking and emoting are overrated, this will be an action flick, just let us see Snake Eyes kicking butt and the audience will love him.

[CynthiaCM]

I think the best bet for SE in the movie is to treat him like they did in the cartoon. Keep him a cool looking background character. This way fans of the character will get to see him in action without having to worry about continuity issues with his comic book origin. Also, the average viewer of the movie will get to see him in action without overloading the story with too much development.

Similar to Boba Fett in Empire Strikes Back. Another (mostly) silent, faceless character who is still one of the most popular fictional characters of all time.

Talking and emoting are overrated, this will be an action flick, just let us see Snake Eyes kicking butt and the audience will love him.

I respectfully disagree. I believe that reducing one of the Joe-verse's most intricate and human characters to being merely a run-in-and-kick-ass supporting character would be sheer folly.

[delta]

Talking and emoting are overrated
Tell that to my girlfriend!! :)

[Deckard]

i say let mel brooks do the character writing. I mean for shits sake he did an entire SILENT MOVIE (one of my classic faves). so if mel can do it...why can't we get a good solid representation rather than what seems to be him just being a nob blocker so pot head wayans don;t do the ol hunka chunka with an aussie scarlett.

[tile_mcgillus]

Tell that to my girlfriend!! :)

I did. Last night.

I had to I'm sorry.

[delta]

I did. Last night.

I had to I'm sorry.
Really clever smarty pants :P

[n3rf]

Delta, seriously, I thought that was a great comparison of comparing SE to Urkel. I never thought about how neglected he was...he was instantly my favorite when I was 6 yrs old though because 1) He had an Uzi and 2) He looked so "different" from the others (not realizing that they really only dipped him in tar and gave him a face mask).

Anyway, we had a good chuckle at work when I read your post aloud.

[delta]

Delta, seriously, I thought that was a great comparison of comparing SE to Urkel. I never thought about how neglected he was...he was instantly my favorite when I was 6 yrs old though because 1) He had an Uzi and 2) He looked so "different" from the others (not realizing that they really only dipped him in tar and gave him a face mask).

Anyway, we had a good chuckle at work when I read your post aloud.

hahaha! right on

[NateR]

I respectfully disagree. I believe that reducing one of the Joe-verse's most intricate and human characters to being merely a run-in-and-kick-ass supporting character would be sheer folly.

My thought on that would be to focus on the overall team for the first movie. If Snake-Eyes is popular enough, then they can make a spin off movie for him later on. If they try to cram his story into this movie, two things will almost undoubtedly happen:

1. The other characters' development will have to be sacrificed because of time constraints and all the fans will be angry that too much of the film focused on Snake-Eyes.

2. Because of the aforementioned time constraints, Snake-Eyes' story will most likely have to be butchered to fit in the film. Leaving Joe fans angry yet again.

I'll give the movie a chance, no matter what happens, but I'll feel better knowing that they don't plan to focus too much on Snake-Eyes.

It's because SE is my favorite GI Joe character that I feel this way.