|
View Poll Results: What do you think of Dixon's take on the movie? | |||
I'm already a fan of the movie, so this is icing on the cake! | 16 | 30.19% | |
If someone like Dixon thinks it'll be good, it can't be bad! | 9 | 16.98% | |
I still say it'll suck, but there's a ray of hope now! | 14 | 26.42% | |
I'm now terrified the comic book will take a turn for the worse... | 14 | 26.42% | |
Voters: 53. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools |
03-22-2009, 01:35 AM | #31 |
Dreadnok
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 394
|
Quote:
friendship hugs are in order!!
__________________
GrapeSoda: i'm not procrastinating....i'm just lazy. oh...wait.... |
03-22-2009, 01:53 AM | #32 |
Dreadnok
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 394
|
Quote:
I'm not sure how anyone can complain about the changes that the movie is making. I'm not even sure how you actually measure change in the Joeverse. What do you use as your standard...is it the filecards, the cartoon(s), the comics (which publisher)? They were all based on the same underlying concepts, but they all had their own take and their own direction.
For me, as a kid, it was always about the figures and the filecards. In a lot of cases, the cartoon took the characters in a totally different direction (Bazooka comes to mind), but many fans still love the cartoon. In my opinion, it's all good. Anything that can keep the line going is a good thing. 1) in the cartoon verses the comic, essentially the characters were the same visually and characteristicly. there were some changes, rapping roadblock comes to mind, but in essence when any joe or cobra was on screen......you knew who they were. when duke called for joes to rally in skystrykers.....it was bad ass! even if it was alpine and shipwreck in the f-ing jet amd they didn't know jack about flying!! *spoilers* 2) the main thing with the movie, for me at least, is how much was changed in the script from the original ideas......file cards, comics, cartoons, later comics......whatever. i don't like that duke and CC are marine buddies and the baroness is duke's fiance and CC's sister but they both think CC is dead....but it turns out he is plungerface. and scarlett and the wayans brother are flirting throughout the whole film (which is against EITHER mythos you decide upon). when i think about scarlett telling ripcord how to say "fire" in another language to "save the day" i just feel dirty. my whole point is....this movie is going to be CAMPY as FU*K! so.....why not just make it as campy as the source material....WHATEVER that source material is....comics....cartoons.... how can ANYONE argue for power (ranger) suits verses mechanical sea monsters when the mechanical sea monsters are SO MUCH COOLER?
__________________
GrapeSoda: i'm not procrastinating....i'm just lazy. oh...wait.... Last edited by GrapeSoda; 03-22-2009 at 01:56 AM.. |
03-23-2009, 07:33 AM | #33 |
Crimson Nerd
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Virginia
Posts: 12,578
|
I'll be honest:
I don't find the Duke/Baroness/CC thing any more over-the-top, disagreeable, or silly than the Snake-Eyes/Baroness/Cobra Commander connections from the old (and newer) comics. Indeed when I first heard it I thought to myself that they were just taking elements of "Snake-Eyes: Declassified" and assigning them to Duke instead of Snake-Eyes (as well as clearly drawing some inspiration from "G.I. Joe: Reloaded.") Truth be told, I almost kind of prefer that it be Duke with the connections rather than Snake-Eyes. It helps justify Duke's presence as the franchise front-man by making it more personal for him. Plus, it spreads the love around a little bit more. Snake-Eyes and Storm Shadow still have their "thing" but the whole UNIVERSE doesn't need to be "Six Degrees of Snake-Eyes" the way the original Hama-Verse started to get towards the end (and continuing into the DDP run). |
03-23-2009, 08:04 PM | #34 |
Lt. 13th Cavalry Viper
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: mobile, al
Posts: 116
|
Quote:
the cartoon was what it was...very cheesy, and geared to a MUCH younger audience. |
03-23-2009, 08:15 PM | #35 |
Lt. 13th Cavalry Viper
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: mobile, al
Posts: 116
|
Quote:
If there were 1 million fan boys out there for the G.I. Joe franchise, there would be a whole lot more people registered at these (and other) Joe boards.
Ain't even close to that number. Transformers might get kinda close...Star Wars and Star Trek for certain, but not G.I. Joe. Not "fanboys" on a level hardcore enough to really care that much about the changes for the movie, anyway. As for Hama and Dixon's positive statements in regards to the movie: It's a pretty good sign that they did, in fact, actually like it. Neither of them are known for beating around the bush, and if they truly didn't like it but didn't want to anger the guys that cut their paychecks, there are many ways to give a "neutral" or "sounds positive but isn't if you really look at it" answer, and both of them are smart enough to pull it off. Also worth noting that in many cases creators aren't nearly as attached to/protective of their creations as some of their fans are. i just recently joined...i was as big a fan as there was in the 80's...sorry, i didn't continue buying the toys into the 90's...the other football players i went to college with would have eaten me alive. when i saw the series ( comic ) was picked back up, i started reading it again...STILL didn't join the web sites. my point is, more than are on these fan sites are serious fans. we read the comics, watched the TV show, etc. and even if the number is fewer than you say...fine. say it's 50,000...who read the comics, got the toys, and watched the TV show. say it's less... any businessman with SENSE God gave a billygoat would know that you WANT those hardcore fans on your side...you want the dorks in the costumes at the premiers...it's good press. You STILL want a bigger, new audience, but if word gets out that it's crappy, and a few hard core fans could get that started, then you DON'T get the new audience, OR the old. IF hasbro wasn't worried about this, WHY would they have brought out Dixon and Hama? to make the FANBOYS happy. i don't care how many of you guys on here 'claim' to be this or that in the movie business...the second half of that is business, and that's about MONEY. You DON'T make it by P!$$!NG off a chunk of your devoted audience. these are the people who will take the kids to see it...twice...AND buy the toys, dvd's, games, and other merchandise. if you deny that, you're deluding yourself...OR hasbro is stupid. which is more likely? |
03-24-2009, 02:27 AM | #36 |
Dreadnok
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 394
|
Quote:
I'll be honest:
I don't find the Duke/Baroness/CC thing any more over-the-top, disagreeable, or silly than the Snake-Eyes/Baroness/Cobra Commander connections from the old (and newer) comics. Indeed when I first heard it I thought to myself that they were just taking elements of "Snake-Eyes: Declassified" and assigning them to Duke instead of Snake-Eyes (as well as clearly drawing some inspiration from "G.I. Joe: Reloaded.") Truth be told, I almost kind of prefer that it be Duke with the connections rather than Snake-Eyes. It helps justify Duke's presence as the franchise front-man by making it more personal for him. Plus, it spreads the love around a little bit more. Snake-Eyes and Storm Shadow still have their "thing" but the whole UNIVERSE doesn't need to be "Six Degrees of Snake-Eyes" the way the original Hama-Verse started to get towards the end (and continuing into the DDP run). i really did enjoy the "Snake Eyes: Trilogy" back when it came out (and still think it is one of the most exciting stories of the original series), but i felt it was unecessary to have to tie everyone's past together into some tangled web of "WTF" bull crap. the same thing goes for the movie....i don't see how any of those inter-personal relationships were necessary to an engaging story. duke could be the center piece and MAIN CHARACTER by just portraying him as such. we don't need his hand and member involved with 2/3 of the main antagonists. he can be just as strong a character if he had strong beliefs and convictions and....dare i say it, patriotism. **one side note......that comic trilogy came out in 1990 (2 years after i stopped collecting figures and just months before the whole line became neon). retrospectively, it could have been a crazy twist added to the story to try and stave readers, since the figures and comic would collapse less than 4 years later......and in the eyes of most fans and collectors, only months later from it's release.
__________________
GrapeSoda: i'm not procrastinating....i'm just lazy. oh...wait.... |
03-24-2009, 03:25 AM | #37 |
VALKYRIE
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Over the rainbow where your mom is at son
Posts: 23,515
|
Dixon's Duke movie prequel turned out pretty good, I didn't know what to expect. It wasn't campy at all, barely any sci fi, no one is connected to him yet aside from Rex(who was only mentioned once and vaguely) and Ripcord, and the whole issue was a covert op gone bad with him having a distrust towards intel and the guys who sent them there.
I don't know how the movie will turn out, but the first prequel issue was cool. |
03-24-2009, 07:38 AM | #38 |
Crimson Nerd
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Virginia
Posts: 12,578
|
Quote:
what's your definition of 'fanboy?'
i just recently joined...i was as big a fan as there was in the 80's...sorry, i didn't continue buying the toys into the 90's...the other football players i went to college with would have eaten me alive. when i saw the series ( comic ) was picked back up, i started reading it again...STILL didn't join the web sites. my point is, more than are on these fan sites are serious fans. we read the comics, watched the TV show, etc. and even if the number is fewer than you say...fine. say it's 50,000...who read the comics, got the toys, and watched the TV show. say it's less... any businessman with SENSE God gave a billygoat would know that you WANT those hardcore fans on your side...you want the dorks in the costumes at the premiers...it's good press. You STILL want a bigger, new audience, but if word gets out that it's crappy, and a few hard core fans could get that started, then you DON'T get the new audience, OR the old. IF hasbro wasn't worried about this, WHY would they have brought out Dixon and Hama? to make the FANBOYS happy. i don't care how many of you guys on here 'claim' to be this or that in the movie business...the second half of that is business, and that's about MONEY. You DON'T make it by P!$$!NG off a chunk of your devoted audience. these are the people who will take the kids to see it...twice...AND buy the toys, dvd's, games, and other merchandise. if you deny that, you're deluding yourself...OR hasbro is stupid. which is more likely? 1. Most of us are going to go see the movie anyway. Most of us aren't going to see it until opening weekend, which is when most movies make the highest percentage of their box-office take. By the time bad word-of-mouth gets out, the film has already made its' opening weekend moolah. The movie studios know that for all our righteous (or not so righteous) indignation, that we're pretty much a guaranteed audience no matter how loudly we decry the film ahead of time. In other words, it isn't just the fans (whatever number exist) that are going to have their butts in seats on opening weekend. By the time any toxic word of mouth has any impact, those tickets have already been sold. Nobody among the average American moviegoer takes fan-whining seriously, anyhow. Very few are going to the theater intending to see a spot-on accurate portrayal of Hama's early Joe comics on the big screen...they're mostly going there to waste two hours at a hopefully fun and entertaining action-adventure flick that's loosely based on something they have a few memories of from childhood. 2. Further, if we're a smaller percentage of the audience to begin with, then our own reactions to the movie become less relevant to the public's perception. 50,000 hardcore fans might scream to the high heavens that it's the crappiest movie in the history of crap, but if 5 million other moviegoers say they liked it, our voice gets drowned out, and our impact on the overall box office sales is minimal, at best. It's a balancing act, and it always has been. No, they don't want to alienate the "fan" audience, but they know that if the movie is marketed successfully that the fan audience is pretty much expendable. They also know that catering too much to the fandom is likely to result in a movie that only the hardcore fandom enjoys, and that's alienating the rest of the audience. See the MASSIVE drop offs for "Watchmen" over the last couple weeks, a movie that was practically a love letter to the fans turned out to be generally reviled by most of the general public that went to see it. PS: If the far more numerous and vocal "pre-emptive haters" of the Transformers movie couldn't dent that film's box office with toxic word of mouth, we ain't going to do diddly to Joe's box office take ourselves. The movie will stand on its own merit, flaws, and marketing. Last edited by Jmacq1; 03-24-2009 at 07:43 AM.. |
03-24-2009, 05:38 PM | #39 |
Crimson Guard
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Raccoon City
Posts: 2,540
|
I wouldn't care if the reviews were good or bad because I'll be paying to see it, regardless.
__________________
|
03-26-2009, 06:01 PM | #40 |
Lt. 13th Cavalry Viper
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: mobile, al
Posts: 116
|
Quote:
I don't recall ever implying that Hasbro or Paramount are deliberately trying to alienate any audience. But there's two things that spring to mind in regards to your post beyond that:
1. Most of us are going to go see the movie anyway. Most of us aren't going to see it until opening weekend, which is when most movies make the highest percentage of their box-office take. By the time bad word-of-mouth gets out, the film has already made its' opening weekend moolah. The movie studios know that for all our righteous (or not so righteous) indignation, that we're pretty much a guaranteed audience no matter how loudly we decry the film ahead of time. In other words, it isn't just the fans (whatever number exist) that are going to have their butts in seats on opening weekend. By the time any toxic word of mouth has any impact, those tickets have already been sold. Nobody among the average American moviegoer takes fan-whining seriously, anyhow. Very few are going to the theater intending to see a spot-on accurate portrayal of Hama's early Joe comics on the big screen...they're mostly going there to waste two hours at a hopefully fun and entertaining action-adventure flick that's loosely based on something they have a few memories of from childhood. 2. Further, if we're a smaller percentage of the audience to begin with, then our own reactions to the movie become less relevant to the public's perception. 50,000 hardcore fans might scream to the high heavens that it's the crappiest movie in the history of crap, but if 5 million other moviegoers say they liked it, our voice gets drowned out, and our impact on the overall box office sales is minimal, at best. It's a balancing act, and it always has been. No, they don't want to alienate the "fan" audience, but they know that if the movie is marketed successfully that the fan audience is pretty much expendable. They also know that catering too much to the fandom is likely to result in a movie that only the hardcore fandom enjoys, and that's alienating the rest of the audience. See the MASSIVE drop offs for "Watchmen" over the last couple weeks, a movie that was practically a love letter to the fans turned out to be generally reviled by most of the general public that went to see it. PS: If the far more numerous and vocal "pre-emptive haters" of the Transformers movie couldn't dent that film's box office with toxic word of mouth, we ain't going to do diddly to Joe's box office take ourselves. The movie will stand on its own merit, flaws, and marketing. or maybe i wasn't clear. i wasn't saying that they were TRYING to piss off the core audience. i said it would be stupid to write that group off. truthfully, it sounds like they have made moves to try to alieviate fears that the 'fan boys' have...which is smart business. as for the transformers...the changes they did were cosmetic...mainly. the allspark thing was cheesy, but it saved them time in the explaination of how they got here. other than that, the changes were to the appearance of characters, NOT to who the characters were. had they made Bumblebee the leader of the Autobots, or made Megatron and Optimus Headmasters, etc...serious changes to the characters, or relationships between the characters, the screaming would have been worse for the movie...IMO. personally, i think the bots and cons looked like tin pipe crap...except for Optimus. but, that was surface stuff, so it didn't bother me much. using Peter Cullen's voice went a LONG way to calming the hardcore transformers fans. your point that GI Joe has a smaller audience makes the hardcore fans THAT MUCH more important to the franchise. |
Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Crew Merchandise from "GI JOE Rise of Cobra"! - Special offer! | ei8htball | G.I. Joe Buy Sell Trade | 0 | 02-04-2009 06:06 PM |
Crew Merchandise from "GI JOE Rise of Cobra"! | ei8htball | G.I. Joe Buy Sell Trade | 0 | 02-03-2009 04:28 PM |
"G.I. Joe: Rise of Cobra" Releases Promotional Photos For August Theater Opening | belinda1 | G.I. Joe Live Action Movie | 8 | 01-08-2009 08:32 PM |
Crew Merchandise from "GI JOE Rise of Cobra"! | ei8htball | G.I. Joe Buy Sell Trade | 11 | 12-17-2008 01:51 PM |
Crew Merchandise from "GI JOE Rise of Cobra"! | ei8htball | G.I. Joe Buy Sell Trade | 1 | 12-07-2008 08:10 PM |
|
|
Recent Off Topic Threads |
Marvel Universe 3.75" figures |
1:18 Airwolf kickstarter |
JazWares 18th Halo |
What song are you listening to? |
Hisstank Late Night thread... |