|
Community Links |
Social Groups |
Pictures & Albums |
Members List |
Search Forums |
Advanced Search |
Go to Page... |
|
Thread Tools |
03-29-2013, 12:23 PM | #81 |
THE PITT - Head Janitor
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Running with the little guy, Fighting to make change
Posts: 1,412
|
G.I. Joe: Retaliation :: rogerebert.com :: Reviews
Well the verdict is in and it isn't a good one. I was waiting for the usual film critics to weigh in on the new sequel and they don't like it. Now many of us will disagree with these professional critics but they do make movies their business and I trust their judgement. With many of the complaints on this page, it actually coincides with what Roeper has to say. Richard Roeper working under Roger Ebert wrote this scathing review about G.I.Joe. Read on and decide for yourselves. Seeing as how "G.I. Joe: Retaliation" is a live-action cartoon, I wish we could have seen thought balloons above the heads of Channing Tatum, Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson and Bruce Willis, among others, as they filmed this ridiculous and overblown debacle. Not their characters, mind you. I wanted to see thought balloons indicating what was going through the minds of the actors as they went through their paces: Willis: "Let's see, this paycheck will cover the vacation house for what, another two years; plus, I can get a gold harmonica. Hey, I wonder if any of these punks saw the original 'Die Hard'? Wait, they want me to say WHAT about Patton's gun? Jesus…" Johnson: "I know they're going to turn this scene into a slow-motion group-walk in the editing. How many times am I going to have to walk in slow motion with flames bursting all around me? Am I going to do be doing this when I'm 70?" Tatum: "I've got to talk to my agent about these 'must appear in the sequel' contracts." Adrianne Palicki: "Hey everybody, remember me? I was on 'Friday Night Lights'! That show had actual writing!" To say "G.I. Joe: Retaliation" is a video game for the big screen is to insult a number of video games that are far more creative, challenging and better-looking. Like a Dumpster bin behind Tiffany's, this contains nothing but well-packaged garbage. In the tradition of "Transformers" (just kidding about the "tradition" part), this franchise is of course based on a collection of toys, so it's not as if we're expecting "Zero Dark Thirty." The first installment, "Rise of the Cobra" (2009), at least had a sense of its own absurdity, but the sequel is a heavy-handed, explosion-riddled, ear-piercing disaster with an insanely stupid plot and an endless stream of mostly generic fight sequences that straddle the PG-13 line. Sure, there are all kinds of cool toys and breathtaking mountain-side fight sequences and guns-and-against swords nonsense, but they're all so clearly fake, so clearly concocted in the CGI lab, that we're bored when we should be saying, "holy bleep." We pick up the action in "Retaliation" with some generic buddy-movie bonding between Duke (Channing Tatum) and Roadblock (Dwayne Johnson). They engage in semi-witty banter while taking out the enemy, playing video games or hanging with Roadblock's family. OK, not bad. But soon the playing field gets crowded, with Flint (D.J. Cotrona), Lady Jaye (Adrianne Palicki) and Snake Eyes (Ray Park) going up against the Cobra Commander, Storm Shadow and Firefly. I'm sorry, but if you're older than 12 and/or not involved in a serious nostalgia trip, how can you take any of this stuff seriously? The dialogue and exposition scenes in "G.I. Joe" are like something out of a Saturday morning cartoon from the 1980s, but the PG-13 violence is a little intense for the 7-year-old boys (and girls) who might love this stuff. The end game here is we have a villain who says he "wants it all," meaning control of the world, but as is so often the case with these bad guys, first he wants to blow up much of the world, which always has me wondering: Why does Mr. Evil Bad Guy want to rule over a vast, nuclear-poisoned wasteland? Where's the fun in that? Full disclosure here: I did not play with G.I. Joe action figures when I was a kid. Even at 10 years old, I thought that the whole "G.I. Joe, G.I. Joe, fighting man from head to toe" thing was just a goofy way of selling dolls to boys. Nor was I fan of the various "G.I. Joe" comic book series through the years — and yes, that means I'm not versed in the Marvel Comics that ran in the 1980s or the more recent series that have their fanboy bases. I can promise you when this review and the video versions are published, the comments on the websites of the Sun-Times and Roger Ebert and YouTube and a dozen other places will be more entertaining than the movie itself. To which I say: good for you. It's important to be passionate about something. But here's the thing: I'm reviewing the movie. The issue is not whether the movie is ever so faithful to the comic strip or whether it will satisfy the hardcore fans. And as a stand-alone film, from the characters to the alleged humor to the plot to the action sequences to the twists and turns, this movie … what's the word? Sucks.
__________________
"To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men." -Abraham Lincoln "A little rebellion now and then is a good thing......It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government." -Thomas Jefferson “They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security” -Benjamin Franklin |
03-29-2013, 12:41 PM | #82 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 4,187
|
Quote:
G.I. Joe: Retaliation :: rogerebert.com :: Reviews
Well the verdict is in and it isn't a good one. I was waiting for the usual film critics to weigh in on the new sequel and they don't like it. Now many of us will disagree with these professional critics but they do make movies their business and I trust their judgement. With many of the complaints on this page, it actually coincides with what Roeper has to say. Richard Roeper working under Roger Ebert wrote this scathing review about G.I.Joe. Read on and decide for yourselves. /snip/ http://www.hisstank.com/forum/g-i-jo...on-review.html |
03-29-2013, 12:48 PM | #83 |
Serpentor Imposter
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 3,910
|
Quote:
i hated Roadblock being 'Block' and Storm Shadow being 'Storm', much as I hated Ripcord being 'Rip'.
when the Cobra Secret Service guy (Zandar? I'd swear that's what Zartan called him) did the facial recognition match, it said her real name was Alison R Hart Burnett. I think Willis flubbed his line about serving with her dad. |
03-29-2013, 04:10 PM | #84 |
Crimson Guard
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Fairfield, CA
Posts: 1,024
|
Quote:
I don't know much about military ranks (the whole system confuses me to all hell) but it's made very clear through dialogue that Roadblock is one of the most senior GI Joe team members, and has passed on promotions multiple times to keep from being put behind a desk and remain in the field. That's what his and Duke's "bet" is about. Roadblock being the leader makes the most sense, because he has the most combat experience--Flint is green and Lady Jaye is a weapons expert.
Did you not listen to his Jay-Z quote at all? That's rhyming. Also, Chu stated in an interview that they scripted and even filmed a scene that explains Storm Shadow's survival, but it didn't feel needed and got cut for time. The same thing with Jinx and Firefly's expanded backstories. |
03-29-2013, 04:41 PM | #85 |
Spartan F5 Viper
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Sparta
Posts: 17,125
|
Quote:
G.I. Joe: Retaliation :: rogerebert.com :: Reviews
Well the verdict is in and it isn't a good one. I was waiting for the usual film critics to weigh in on the new sequel and they don't like it. Now many of us will disagree with these professional critics but they do make movies their business and I trust their judgement. With many of the complaints on this page, it actually coincides with what Roeper has to say. Richard Roeper working under Roger Ebert wrote this scathing review about G.I.Joe. Read on and decide for yourselves. Seeing as how "G.I. Joe: Retaliation" is a live-action cartoon, I wish we could have seen thought balloons above the heads of Channing Tatum, Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson and Bruce Willis, among others, as they filmed this ridiculous and overblown debacle. Not their characters, mind you. I wanted to see thought balloons indicating what was going through the minds of the actors as they went through their paces: Willis: "Let's see, this paycheck will cover the vacation house for what, another two years; plus, I can get a gold harmonica. Hey, I wonder if any of these punks saw the original 'Die Hard'? Wait, they want me to say WHAT about Patton's gun? Jesus…" Johnson: "I know they're going to turn this scene into a slow-motion group-walk in the editing. How many times am I going to have to walk in slow motion with flames bursting all around me? Am I going to do be doing this when I'm 70?" Tatum: "I've got to talk to my agent about these 'must appear in the sequel' contracts." Adrianne Palicki: "Hey everybody, remember me? I was on 'Friday Night Lights'! That show had actual writing!" To say "G.I. Joe: Retaliation" is a video game for the big screen is to insult a number of video games that are far more creative, challenging and better-looking. Like a Dumpster bin behind Tiffany's, this contains nothing but well-packaged garbage. In the tradition of "Transformers" (just kidding about the "tradition" part), this franchise is of course based on a collection of toys, so it's not as if we're expecting "Zero Dark Thirty." The first installment, "Rise of the Cobra" (2009), at least had a sense of its own absurdity, but the sequel is a heavy-handed, explosion-riddled, ear-piercing disaster with an insanely stupid plot and an endless stream of mostly generic fight sequences that straddle the PG-13 line. Sure, there are all kinds of cool toys and breathtaking mountain-side fight sequences and guns-and-against swords nonsense, but they're all so clearly fake, so clearly concocted in the CGI lab, that we're bored when we should be saying, "holy bleep." We pick up the action in "Retaliation" with some generic buddy-movie bonding between Duke (Channing Tatum) and Roadblock (Dwayne Johnson). They engage in semi-witty banter while taking out the enemy, playing video games or hanging with Roadblock's family. OK, not bad. But soon the playing field gets crowded, with Flint (D.J. Cotrona), Lady Jaye (Adrianne Palicki) and Snake Eyes (Ray Park) going up against the Cobra Commander, Storm Shadow and Firefly. I'm sorry, but if you're older than 12 and/or not involved in a serious nostalgia trip, how can you take any of this stuff seriously? The dialogue and exposition scenes in "G.I. Joe" are like something out of a Saturday morning cartoon from the 1980s, but the PG-13 violence is a little intense for the 7-year-old boys (and girls) who might love this stuff. The end game here is we have a villain who says he "wants it all," meaning control of the world, but as is so often the case with these bad guys, first he wants to blow up much of the world, which always has me wondering: Why does Mr. Evil Bad Guy want to rule over a vast, nuclear-poisoned wasteland? Where's the fun in that? Full disclosure here: I did not play with G.I. Joe action figures when I was a kid. Even at 10 years old, I thought that the whole "G.I. Joe, G.I. Joe, fighting man from head to toe" thing was just a goofy way of selling dolls to boys. Nor was I fan of the various "G.I. Joe" comic book series through the years — and yes, that means I'm not versed in the Marvel Comics that ran in the 1980s or the more recent series that have their fanboy bases. I can promise you when this review and the video versions are published, the comments on the websites of the Sun-Times and Roger Ebert and YouTube and a dozen other places will be more entertaining than the movie itself. To which I say: good for you. It's important to be passionate about something. But here's the thing: I'm reviewing the movie. The issue is not whether the movie is ever so faithful to the comic strip or whether it will satisfy the hardcore fans. And as a stand-alone film, from the characters to the alleged humor to the plot to the action sequences to the twists and turns, this movie … what's the word? Sucks.
__________________
... |
03-29-2013, 06:12 PM | #86 |
The Viper is Not Coming
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Cobra-La
Posts: 1,532
|
|
03-29-2013, 07:04 PM | #87 |
Cobra Viper
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Glenside PA
Posts: 270
|
|
03-29-2013, 07:08 PM | #88 |
Crimson Guard
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 2,161
|
Couldn't help but notice the Ebert sites user ratings are worse than Eberts
|
03-29-2013, 07:26 PM | #89 |
Crimson Guard
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: N Florida
Posts: 1,727
|
What kind of person lets a total stranger tell them if they are going to like a movie or not?
|
03-29-2013, 08:00 PM | #90 |
Cobra Viper
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 312
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Least Favorite parts of the movie? *spoilers* | Sudden Osprey | G.I. Joe Live Action Movie | 36 | 08-08-2009 05:26 PM |
This movie was so bad that it hurt (spoilers) | wolfrunner74 | G.I. Joe Live Action Movie | 5 | 08-08-2009 01:18 PM |
Any other Joes in the movie? ***SPOILERS*** | deathvalleymachine | G.I. Joe Live Action Movie | 1 | 08-07-2009 05:49 PM |
Movie Plot Question for those who know (spoilers probably) | generic trooper | G.I. Joe Live Action Movie | 5 | 07-21-2009 02:34 AM |
Star Trek movie- no spoilers | TU482 | Movies DVD Television | 0 | 04-27-2009 07:08 AM |
|
|
Recent Off Topic Threads |
Streets of Rage 4? by Jakks Pacific |
Hisstank Late Night thread... |
DarkLordMordred... |
Last Movie You Watched? |
What song are you listening to? |