GI Joe: Rise of Cobra Discussion and Reviews [SPOILERS]

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
There are plenty of serious and realistic war movies. If you want something based on reality, watch "Saving Private Ryan."

So what if they made Beast pink? Or Wolverine a woman? Would we be having this discussion?

The point you "pro-movie" people seem to be missing is that from day 1, this movie, through the producers', directors', Hasbro's own words was aimed directly at the "hardcore" fans. It's like me promising you a gourmet dinner and then serving you a heaping, steamy pile of ^^^^. Sure there are people who eat ^^^^ :)google) but would you appreciate it?

Wait...it's cool to like this movie now? :lol

No, it's definitely not "cool" to like this movie now. :lol When I saw Khev's post, I was reminded of Jabba's comment to Bib Fortuna when he introduces Luke. :p
 
Wow. Yep taking Batman seriously is a MAJOR flaw :duh Saying something like this is no way to make a point as your wrong, plain and simple.

Um, no.

Within the world of Batman there are characters with many levels of seriousness. There are little kids who run around and play and on the other end of the spectrum there are characters like Batman who should be written in a very serious way because they take themselves very seriously within the reality of the story.

Now, in the REAL WORLD you have people like writers, artists, directors etc. and its up to them to find a style and tone that is appropriate for the material.

Batman is the story of an indestructible guy who is magically the best detective/scientist/martial artist that ever lived with an incorruptable moral sense who runs around in a rubber bat suit with a cape. It's a ridiculous concept that only works when taken seriously but not too seriously.

Bruce Timm understood this. Tim Burton understood this. Directors of other comic book movies understand this but Christopher Nolan thinks he can bring it all down to earth if he sucks the joy out of it and just tries to force a bunch of inappropriate realism into it. Again, there's a word for that and that word is "pretentious".

There are a lot of fanboys like to think they're just a lottery ticket and a dark walk down an alley away from being Batman but let's face it, Batman is just as unrealistic as all the other characters that make fanboys hose their shorts.

Nolan's interpretation ^^^^s all over the tone and aesthetics of the source material and aside from Heath Ledger's death it was also successful because most people hate comic books and a lot of fanboys have a serious case of self-loathing and a desire for mainstream acceptance.

Most people who actually understand the genre will tell you that Timm's interpretation of Batman is the definitive one outside of comics but most people will always see them as kids cartoons but I don't care, I'll take those over Nolan's hilarious attempts at making Growly Rubber Bat Suit Man For Grown-Ups.
 
...and aside from Heath Ledger's death it was also successful because most people hate comic books and a lot of fanboys have a serious case of self-loathing and a desire for mainstream acceptance.

:lol :lol :rotfl :lol :lol

Oh, man, that's just too good. You should have a blog with these theories. Seriously.
 
A ^^^^ty tone? Batman Begins and The Dark Knight were as dark as a PG 13 would let and was true to the comic.
 
Eye of the beholder. LOTR isn't anything special either.


AND... you see LOTR IS special because it appealed to the main stream as well as to the fan boys (like myself). It had a very successful marketing campaign, including children (several toy lines) and adults (SSW, UC, SS) alike. So I would say PJ's LOTR is very special.

But I can see how the 'Joe movie didn't appeal to die hard fans like Irish. Fortunately, I'm not in that club, so I enjoyed the flick.

But nothing will EVER replace LOTR. Not for many many years at least.
 
Took you almost 3 hours to come up with a better second reply?????

They were good movies because they respected the source material. They should have done the same with Joe.
 
Took you almost 3 hours to come up with a better second reply?????

They were good movies because they respected the source material. They should have done the same with Joe.

Geez, calm down, I went outside, had a swim and a beer, fed the dogs, and now I'm back.

So this source material (forgive my ignorance), is it the toys or the comics/TV show? I seriously don't know. If it's the toys, Hasbro succeeded in their goal with this movie. This is why I enjoy not being a huge SW or (apparently) a GI Joe fan, because I can still enjoy what is put out, and if not, not get that upset over it.


And now I'm leaving again.
 
Cashing in my two cents. I've got zero interest in this movie. To me it's just too far away from what I remember as GI Joe. On top of that it's the same "turn your brain off" action movie that I've seen 1,000 already. I'm tired of this concept that just because things get blown up or there's cool sequence or two that a movie is actually "good" despite the major flaws of both plot and character developement. No, I've publicly given Hasbro two tries at movies and gotten less than great results for it (TF 1 and 2) so I've little interest to sit through yet another, especially one by a mediocre director at best. I'm not the type to have to see a film to decide wether or not it's for me anymore than I would need try on shoes that are two sizes too small.
 
Geez, calm down, I went outside, had a swim and a beer, fed the dogs, and now I'm back.

So this source material (forgive my ignorance), is it the toys or the comics/TV show? I seriously don't know. If it's the toys, Hasbro succeeded in their goal with this movie. This is why I enjoy not being a huge SW or (apparently) a GI Joe fan, because I can still enjoy what is put out, and if not, not get that upset over it.


And now I'm leaving again.

Uh.... they had to make an all new toy line to coincide with the movie.
 
Cashing in my two cents. I've got zero interest in this movie. To me it's just too far away from what I remember as GI Joe. On top of that it's the same "turn your brain off" action movie that I've seen 1,000 already. I'm tired of this concept that just because things get blown up or there's cool sequence or two that a movie is actually "good" despite the major flaws of both plot and character developement. No, I've publicly given Hasbro two tries at movies and gotten less than great results for it (TF 1 and 2) so I've little interest to sit through yet another, especially one by a mediocre director at best. I'm not the type to have to see a film to decide wether or not it's for me anymore than I would need try on shoes that are two sizes too small.
Hasbro/the movie houses dont just want geek dollars, they want to try to appeal to everyone.
If you need any redone franchise to be totally true to the original, you will be waiting a long time.
I WISH they were more true to the cartoon/comics but ive been waiting 20 years for that, this will have to do...
 
I have a love/hate opinion of Quentin Tarantino but one thing I picked up from him: Never apologize for liking a bad movie.

The change to almost every character's backstory and country of origin was one giant clusterfail. GI Joe as a global peacekeeping force? Tatum and Wayans as Duke and Ripcord? Clusterfails.

But I found a surprising amount of ROC's abject lameness to be pretty easy to ignore. Stormshadow's little hairdryer sidearm and sneakers? I don't think I actually saw either the whole movie. The UN bullcrap? Its mentioned a couple of times and then the story moves on. Scarlett being Canadian, Snake Eyes being whatever, and so on? If I didn't read their bios online I would have assumed they were American.

Tatum and Wayans. Both need a serious ass kicking. But they played fifth and sixth fiddle to Storm Shadow, the Baroness, SE, and Scarlett. They were Tunnel Rat and Big Lob showboating as they worked their way onto the team, not Duke and Ripcord.

If they had to ape the dumb cartoon then this guy should have been Duke:

nathanfillion.jpg


He can pull off the leading man hero and still shrug innocently when something goes hilariously awry. He should have been Duke in this movie. Of course they shouldn't have looked to the cartoon as the primary source of inspiration in the first place but if you're going to go that route for God's sake don't pick a tool like Tatum who wouldn't realize he's in a campy scene if it hit him in the head with a shovel.

I loved the invasion of the Pit. I grinned like an idiot when SS tried to behead Wayans and SE's sword blocks the swing from out of nowhere. I liked the pace and its pumping techno music in spots as the action escalated. The USS Flagg and its glorious giant "99" on the side almost brought a tear to my eye. Much cooler than the reimagined Resolute Flagg. There was tons wrong with this movie from day one of its production and I will NOT defend it or even recommend it to any Joe fans with hangups about its flaws. But I liked enough of it to have a good time.

I pray that Sommers walks and James Cameron has Serpentor stab Duke through the heart in the opening scene of GI Joe 2.
 
:lol :lol :rotfl :lol :lol

Oh, man, that's just too good. You should have a blog with these theories. Seriously.

Like I said, respect comic books and most people write it off as kids stuff.

Create two mediocre movies where a pretentious director acts ashamed of the fact that he's making a comic book movie and the fanboys think it's the second coming of "The Godfather".
 
the comic and the original file cards from the toys.

That's what I thought all along. I collected GI Joe when I was a kid, but I was more into He-Man, then GI Joe came along, then I turned 12 or 13 and toys weren't cool anymore.

I never read the original comics, although I wouldn't mind reading them now.


Spoiler alert!!!
Question for you experts: as I recall "Zartan" turned blue when you put him in cold water for the chameleon effect, yes? So would you prefer that they incorporated that into the movie? So in the movie, the actor/character playing Zartan should have turned blue at some point before becoming president to make it more appealing to the kids who collected the toys and are watching the film some 20 years later??!?

The more you guys make me recall this film, the more I'm beginning to think it was very good. Cobra Commander turned out to be a manipulative and increasingly frightening Bad Ass, Zartan is in like Flynn, and Destro is pissed and ready to take revenge. What more could you ask for? That the outfits match the toys that were released back in the 80's? That the movie had the same dialogue as the comics written years ago and probably outdated by today's standards?


Edit: ^^^^, the movie even incorporated the Water Mocassin turquoise boat I had as a kid, or at least that's what I was reminded of, in the underwater base. I'm sure someone can find specs on exactly how what I remember and what was shown is different, but does it really matter?
 
But I found a surprising amount of ROC's abject lameness to be pretty easy to ignore. Stormshadow's little hairdryer sidearm and sneakers? I don't think I actually saw either the whole movie.

Then you weren't paying attention. There was a close-up shot of his lame sneakers right after "Duke" pretends to try and steal the M.A.R.S. case. Stormshadow picks it up and says "Stupid soldier"... and then there's a shot of his ghey sneakers. I :lol hard.

Besides, the emo hair is bad enough is it not? And sticking out of the ninja mask!!! :duh
 
Back
Top