[jlw515]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Broca

Dude, not only is Barbie popular than G.I. JOE, I daresay Barbie is arguably the greatest doll/action figure line in the history of the toy industry. To find something else that is comparable to in terms of longevity and popularity, you'd have to go to Legos or possibly [i]Mr. Potato Head,

Barbie is evergreen, (like a muthafucka,) and she's never left the public consciousness since her debut 64 years ago where as JOE has had to restart with varying levels of success during it's 59 year history.

Yeah, besides Legos, there's not another toy line that compares to the legacy of Barbie - love her or hate her; and in fact if you've seen "The Toys that Made Us," Barbie was the inspiration for the original 12" G.I. Joe line.

With the Barbie movie, it makes me wonder how Margot Robbie must feel knowing that she is now epitomized as the real-life version of Barbie. Again, love or hate Barbie, that's got to be super cool given Barbie's legacy.

As far as the success of a modern G.I. Joe movie goes, I think Saboteur actually makes several valid points in their post. The early 1980s were just a catalyst for the 3-3/4" line of Joe's success. Politics, American pride, and probably trying to right the wrong of how Vietnam vets were treated just simply made the early 1980s the perfect time for "A Real American Hero." Politics/politicians change, world-views change, etc.

I like that the recent Transformers movie at least brought G.I. Joe back into the cinematic universe in some aspect, although I really don't want to see a G.I. Joe-Transformers crossover movie. I hope that the homage was simply to acknowledge the Joe team and set up for some future movies - if anything just to bring a 4" line of action figures back into circulation.

As "fun" as Rise of Cobra and Retaliation were, I take them for what they were bubble-gum action movies with gratuitous action stars (poorly) playing roles they were never meant to portray. I honestly think Retaliation could have been much better by simply casting someone other than The Rock and Bruce Willis.

For me, the only modern take on G.I. Joe that even comes close to catching the feel of the early 80s was the Resolute cartoon series. If Hasbro/Paramount could produce a series of movies that somehow captures Resolute's vibe, then I think they would be successful.

Jason

[Fred Broca]

Live action JOE projects aren't successful for the following two reasons. As noted in this month's "I WANT TO ARGUE! Pt. XIII, About the Next JOE Movie and the Billion Dollar Barbie," Lorenzo di Bonaventura simply lacks the requisite talent and skill needed to put together competent creative team that is needed to tell a good G.I. JOE story.

The JOE movies have had three, (going on four,) directors in Stephen Sommers, John Chu and Robert Schwentke. While Stuart Beattie, David Elliot, Paul Lovett wrote the screenplay for R.O.C. and Michael B. Gordon with Stuart Beattie, and Stephen Sommers came up with the idea. Rhett Reese, and Paul Wernick, (who wrote Zombieland and the Deadpool movies,) wrote Retaliation and Evan Spiliotopoulos, Joe Shrapnel and Anna Waterhouse wrote the screenplay for the S.E. movie. Steven Caple, Jr. is directing the Transformers/G.I. JOE and the screenplay hasn't been written yet.

After working on R.O.C. Stephen Sommers career seemed to have plateaued with The Mummy flicks. Stuart Beattie went on to win awards for Tomorrow, When the War Began and Deadline Gallipoli for his screenplays. Michael B. Gordon, (according to IMDb,) isn't in the film industry anymore. It's interesting to note that he helped write 300 and a Robotech project that never came out. Post Retaliation John Chu has seen success with Rich Crazy Asians. Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick wrote Deadpool, (Nuff said.)

Before working on the S.E. Evan Spiliotopoulos helped write the live action version of Beauty and the Beast, (which was the second highest film of 2017,) Hercules was also successful at the box office. However, Beauty and the Beast and Hercules seem to be the only noteworthy bullet points on his resume which mainly consists of projects that were bricks at the box office or medicore at best.

The interesting thing to note is that Snake Eyes: G.I. JOE Origins was the biggest project that Shrapnel and Waterhouse worked on. They're also a writing team who have a total of 11 writing credits between them before being tasked with writing the Snake Eyes.

Now I'm all for giving muthafuckas a chance, but considering that Snake Eyes was supposed to be the film that was supposed to lay the foundation down for a JOE franchise why didn't di Bonaventura pick some screenwriters with more experience in writing these types of movies? I'm inclined to believe that di Bonaventura was "up against it," time wise and he needed to get out a JOE movie in order to fulfill his contractual obligations in order to maintain the film and t.v. rights to the JOE i.p.

I'm also starting to believe that di Bonaventura is having a "Loren Michaels/Saturday Night Live," effect on the talent he hires for these JOE projects.

The "Loren Michaels//Saturday Night Live," effect is in short executives stifling creative people's ability put out their best work. After watching 30 Rock and laughing my ass off for 22 minutes, (I watched it on a DVD box set,) I realized that Tina Fey and Tracy Morgan were some funny muthafuckas. I was trippin' because as I was thinkin' to myself, "Okay. Why is that Tina Fey and Tracy Morgan are funny as hell on 30 Rock and they were obviously funny enough to get a spot on SNL, why is it that when they get on SNL they're suddenly not funny? Ohhh, I get it. Saturday Night Live, (in this case Loren Michaels,) has a way of making funny muthafuckas unfunny."

The same holds true with Lorenzo di Bonaventura. LdiB had the dudes who wrote Deadpool, but when they were fuckin' with di Bonaventura the best we got was Retaliation, (which was a "meh," movie at best.)

So it brings us back to your question concerning the problem with the JOE films. The common dominator is LdiB. He doesn't have the eye to put together a good creative and when he does have a good creative team he doesn't get their best work because he doesn't know what to do with them. (Kinda like Nolan Ryan when he played with the Mets and Steve Young when he played for the Bucs.)

Also, playing a part in JOEs lack of success is Hasbro's laissez-faire attitude that they seemingly have towards LdiB and these bullshit movies that he's putting out. Muthafuckas think that just because Transformers is a multi-billion film franchise G.I. JOE should be one too just as a matter of principle. The issue is the people at Hasbro don't seem to realize that the thing that gets the Transformers movies over is the fact that audiences enjoy the spectacle of seeing giant robots fight on scene and G.I. JOE needs a good story behind it to drive ticket sales.

What Hasbro needs to do is became more involved with the JOE movie like Mattel was with Barbie. Hasbro needs to exercise its veto power over the scripts and have somebody (other than Larry Hama,) who's familiar with G.I. JOE take a look at the script and decide on whether or not that particular script would be a good idea to go with.

At the end of the day Lorenzo di Bonaventura is causing harm to the G.I. JOE brand with these lackluster movies. Hasbro needs to end its relationship with Di Bonaventura Pictures, negotiate a fee agreeable to both parties in order to get the film and t.v. rights back and find their version of Kevin Feige in order to have G. I. JOE reach it's potential and be the billion film franchise that it's supposed to be.

[AWOL]

Barbie and Transformers had better creatives at the helm.

[DarkLordMordred]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Broca

Live action JOE projects aren't successful for the following two reasons. As noted in this month's I WANT TO ARGUE! Pt. XIII, About the Next JOE Movie and the Billion Dollar Barbie Lorenzo di Bonaventura simply lacks the requisite talent and skill needed to put together competent creative team that is needed to tell a good G.I. JOE story.

The JOE movies have had three,(going on four,) directors in Stephen Sommers, John Chu, Robert Schwentke. While Stuart Beattie, David Elliot, Paul Lovett wrote the screenplay for R.O.C. and Michael B. Gordon, Stuart Beattie, and Stephen Sommers came up with the idea.

Rhett Reese, and Paul Wernick, (who wrote Zombieland and the Deadpool movies) wrote Retaliation and Evan Spiliotopoulos, Joe Shrapnel and Anna Waterhouse wrote the screenplay for the S.E. movie Steven Caple, Jr. is directing the Transformers/G.I. JOE and the screenplay hasn't been written yet.

After working on R.O.C. Stephen Sommers career seemed to have plateaued with The Mummy flicks. Stuart Beattie went on to win awards for Tomorrow, When the War Began and Deadline Gallipoli for his screenplays. Michael B. Gordon(according to IMDb,) isn't in the film industry anymore. It's interesting to note that he helped write 300 and a Robotech project that never came out.

Post Retaliation John Chu has seen success with Rich Crazy Asians. Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick wrote Deadpool, (Nuff said.)

Before working on the S.E. Evan Spiliotopoulos helped write the live action version of Beauty and the Beast, (which was the second highest film of 2017,) Hercules was also successful at the box office. However, Beauty and the Beast and Hercules seem to be the only noteworthy bullet points on his resume which mainly consist of projects that were bricks at the box office or medicore at best.

The interesting thing to note is that Snake Eyes: G.I. JOE Origins was the biggest project that Shrapnel and Waterhouse worked on. They're also a writing team who have a total of 11 writing credits between them.

Now I'm all for giving muthafuckas a chance, but considering that Snake Eyes was supposed to be the film that was supposed to lay the foundation down for a JOE franchise why didn't di Bonaventura pick some screenwriters with more experience in writing these types of movies? I'm inclined to believe that di Bonaventura was "up against it," time wise and he needed to get out a JOE movie in order to fulfill his contractual obligations in order to maintain the film and t.v. rights to the i.p.

I'm also starting to believe that di Bonaventura is having a "Loren Michaels/Saturday Night Live," effect on the talent he hires for these JOE projects.

The "Loren Michaels//Saturday Night Live," effect is in short executives stifling creative people's ability put out their best work. After watching 30 Rock and laughing my ass off for 22 minutes, (I watched it on a DVD box set,) I realized that Tina Fey and Tracy Morgan were some funny muthafuckas. I was trippin' because as I was thinkin' to myself, "Okay. Why is that Tina Fey and Tracy Morgan are funny as hell on 30 Rock and they were obviously funny as hell to get a spot on SNL Why is it that when they get on SNL they're not funny? Ohhh, I get it. Saturday Night Live, (in this case Loren Michaels,) has a way of making funny muthafuckas unfunny."

The same holds true with Lorenzo di Bonaventura. LdiB had the dudes who wrote Deadpool, but when they were fuckin' with di Bonaventura the best we got was Retaliation, (which was a "meh," movie at best.)

So it brings us back to your question concerning the problem with the JOE films. The common dominator is LdiB. He doesn't gave the eye to put together a good creative and when he does have a good creative team he doesn't get their best work because he doesn't know what to do with them. (Kinda like Nolan Ryan when he played with the Mets and Steve Young when he played for the Bucs.)

Also, playing a part in JOEs lack of success is Hasbro's laissez-faire attitude that they seemingly have towards LdiB and these bullshit movies that he's putting out. Muthafuckas think that just because Transformers is a multi-billion film franchise G.I. JOE should be too just as a matter of principle. The issue is the people at Hasbro don't seem to realize that the thing that gets the Transformers movies over is the fact that audiences enjoy the spectacle of seeing giant robots fight on scene and G.I. JOE needs a good story behind it to drive ticket sales.

What Hasbro needs to do became more involved with the JOE movie like Mattel was with Barbie. Hasbro needs to exercise it's veto power over the scripts and have somebody other than Larry Hama who's familiar with G.I. JOE take a look at the script and decide on whether or not that would particular script would be a good idea to go in.

At the end of the day Lorenzo di Bonaventura is causing harm to the G.I. JOE brand with these lackluster movies. Hasbro needs to end it's relationship with Di Bonaventura Pictures, negotiate an acceptable fee to both parties in order to get the film and t.v. rights back and find their version of Kevin Feige in order to have G. I. JOE reach it's potential and be the Billion from franchise that it's supposed to be.

Fuckin' A, dude

[ScottyHawkeye]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AWOL

Barbie and Transformers had better creatives at the helm.

Barbie yes. Transformers only as of recently. Lest we forget that Michael Bay helmed the first five films and gave us disasters like this.




I'll take the three GI Joe movies we got over 3/5 Bayformers movies.

[AWOL]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottyHawkeye

Barbie yes. Transformers only as of recently. Lest we forget that Michael Bay helmed the first five films and gave us disasters like this.




I'll take the three GI Joe movies we got over 3/5 Bayformers movies.

I'm no fan of Bay's Transformers, but it's hard to argue with the box-office take of those first couple of movies.

[ScottyHawkeye]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AWOL

I'm no fan of Bay's Transformers, but it's hard to argue with the box-office take of those first couple of movies.

They were successful at the box office, but then that's worked to the detriment of the franchise because people don't think highly of the franchise and the post-Bay films have just been modest successes as a result instead of billion-dollar hits like the Bay films were. The GA's perception of TF has been tainted by Bay's movies.

[AWOL]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottyHawkeye

They were successful at the box office, but then that's worked to the detriment of the franchise because people don't think highly of the franchise and the post-Bay films have just been modest successes as a result instead of billion-dollar hits like the Bay films were. The GA's perception of TF has been tainted by Bay's movies.

A now G.I. Joe has been hitched to TF's wagon... what a world.

[Fred Broca]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AWOL

I'm no fan of Bay's Transformers, but it's hard to argue with the box-office take of those first couple of movies.

But AWOL, yes the Transformers are a billion film franchise, but like ScottyHawkeye said, "it's to the detriment of Transformers and to an extension JOE. Muthafuckas at Hasbro and LdiB think "damn a story," we'll just put muthafuckas being shot and shit blowin' up and people will do see the movie."

This concept works with Godzilla movies and to a certain extent the Transformers because people go see those movie to see the Autobots fight the Decepticons (and in the case of Godzilla,) we're to go see that movie to see Godzilla fight Kong, Rodan, Mechagodzilla, etc.)

Yes, we want to see the JOEs fight COBRA, but there needs to be a compelling reason for the inevitable confrontation.

[AWOL]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Broca

Yes, we want to see the JOEs fight COBRA, but there needs to be a compelling reason for the inevitable confrontation.

Good vs Evil is pretty universal.