So, it's been no secret that the upcoming G.I. Joe movie has, up to this point, been getting a near relentless backlash of bad publicity.  Trailers looked hokey, and director Stephen Sommers has more than a few unsightly blemishes on his directing resume.  However, as stated in the District 9 thread, the movie that the entire world was ready to hate has now been receiving surprisingly positive feedback from early test screenings and viewings.  Most of the AICN staff dig it, and at best, critics are calling it the summer popcorn film this year that actually works. 

I myself had little interest in seeing the movie, seeing as how 1) I'm not the biggest fan of Sommers' work, 2) I wasn't at all a fan of G.I. Joe the cartoon (my older bro's a different story), and 3) the trailers looked, well, to be honest, like shit..... But something reviewer Drew McWeeney (who's movie reviews I hold in generally high regard) said suddenly percolated my interest:

"I'm gonna make a scary comparison, but from my point of view, it's a positive one:  it may well turn out to be this year's "Speed Racer."

By that, I mean a pop art accomplishment, digital to a deranged degree, a genuine visual delight that reaches deeper than it has to, plays it with tongue just precisely in cheek, and which has a few flaws that some people will obsess on instead of recognizing just how much fun the package is as a whole."

A lofty statement, but it's enough to get me into the theaters, now with an open mind.  I guess we'll see next weekend.

Wait... are you talking about Speed Racer the movie that was released last year? The one which has garnered a 36% rating at Rotten Tomatoes, and is thus officially "rotten"...

I thought if you are excited about a film, you want to compare it to something "good". Well, if the G.I. Joe movie turns out to be of the same quality as Transformers or Speed Racer, my advice is to stick with the original animated series, which is now out on DVD!

cheers,

-avatar!

Still relying too much on the word of the critics, I see.  Trust your own judgment from time to time.

Or, I guess you weren't paying attention enough to get the subtext of what I meant.

Relying on one or two reviews is bad, I agree, we all have different taste. But when numerous critics slam a film, chances are they collectively have the right idea. As for Speed Racer, I'm going to have to side with the critics... my one word summary of the film is "bleh". But hey, I realize we all have different opinions.

I'm still amazed someone would say that a movie is going to be as "good" as Speed Racer. Maybe it's reverse psychology "hey kids, this movie is going to be as hot as Plan 9 From Outer Space! you better not go see it..."

-avatar!

So is it safe to say you've seen the film, then?

Not to launch a personal attack, but it's kind of hard to take your opinions on certain things (products) seriously sometimes. Time after time, it's usually glowing review after glowing review with a few minor nags. While it may not be as useful to others than the top to bottom critiques you usually give, if you threw out a few "it totally sucked ass and I have nothing more to say" statements every once in a while, it would help the credibility along. Sometimes it feels good to just say something sucks without explanation - for example:

For the most part, Mega Man X6 really freakin' sucked. So did X7.

Dude, that really felt good, I feel really cleansed of the evil within that I subject myself to out of brand loyality.

Now to have fun poking at myself:

For the most part, Mega Man X6 really freakin' sucked. So did X7. Yet I still own them both. I'm a super smart consumer I'm not no sucker.

G.I. Joe is going to be terrible. I am still going to see it.

I dunno, man. I understand your viewpoint, but she has been less than enthusiastic about certain films and such (you weren't big on The Bee Movie, if I recall correctly, right, Angie?). And rather than clogging up STC with reviews about movies even she'd avoid, I'd much rather read about why she enjoyed, say, a movie I otherwise wouldn't go out of my way to see, less so in theaters.

On the topic of movies like Speed Racer, you have to take them in and out of context. These won't be films that will shatter your perceptions of what constitutes art, and it certainly won't have the cultural significance of something like Schindler's List or The Godfather, but a movie doesn't have to be good to be good, if that makes any sense. And as far as my tastes are concerned, I'd rather see one Speed Racer than a hundred 2001: Space Odyssies.

As with Transformers, I expect this film to be nothing more or less than a giant toy advertisement. f--- the critics. If I hear a child say the movie sucks, then I'd be worried.

I don't know how anyone could be "big" on Bee Movie considering how over-zealous Jerry Seinfeld was in mentioning it EVERY SINGLE MOMENT a camera was shoved in his face. Seriously, if for some reason the man was wheeled into a hospital at that point for some reason he STILL would have been plugging that movie.

If so, I'd be curious to hear more of your opinion on the movie, avatar.  I mean, certainly a little more than a blanketed "bleh."  Feel free to post in the Speed Racer thread.

I do recall you saying something similar sometime ago.  Now, where was it.... ah, here!

And it's probably largely true.  I can more vividly remember the few times I actually rag on something more than the times I lavish praise on it; I blame that on my unfortunate habit of trying to see the good side of most things.  But, just to show I'm not all sunshine, lollipops and rainbows:

-Singstar Pop
-Nanostray 2
-Three Worse Games of 2008
-Eagle Eye
-Transformers

As for throwing out one-liners, I'm sorry, I just can't work that way.  I would feel I'd be misrepresenting myself by simply saying "it sucks" or "it's really good", or "my one word summary of so and so is that it's bleh" without anything to substantiate such claims.  I guess I was brought up on the phrases "Mind your Ps and Qs" and "the devil is in the details."

I couldn't care less about GI Joe as a franchise (I was into TMNT at the relevant time, and pretty much only TMNT, and even that not very much).

but I would totally be first in line for a DVD that took the Wizard People, Dear Reader concept and mixed it with Fensler Films.

related: gargle testes, Hasbro

Very true, I did not go into detail about why I think Speed Racer is lame, but why bother?
I figure people at this point have seen it and either like it, or don't. I certainly could explain that I thought it was (like most Hollywood films) a barely-passable story glittered up with special effects and terrible acting (of course, the terrible acting is most likely due to the script)... lots of eye candy for sure (Christina Ricci being my favorite but I'm sick of eye-candy/special effects with nothing real to say. I feel Hollywood in general has little to offer me these days. I don't necessarily enjoy movies that have done really well with critics either. Iron Man has done very well both financially and critically, but I felt it was predictable, shallow, and mostly a plug for Marvel and Burger King. Sometimes Hollywood does send a nice surprise. The first Pirates movie was very well done (except for that elf-actor... pretty boy whatever his name is, I though he sucked), but otherwise Depp was great, good music, and all-around entertaining. Of course then there were the sequels which literally put me to sleep, but anyway...

My original point I think is still valid. Why would you try to advertise a new product with something that did terrible?? "From the creators of Superman 64, comes the next exciting..." yeah, I just don't see how that's supposed to work.

-avatar!

Actually, this kind of ties into what I said about the X games above. X6 was (mostly) a disaster and then Capcom brings out the news that X7 is going to be 3D. Seriously, how was that suppost to make fans feel any better about the series' state of affairs?  When so many series have crashed and burned from such a transition, acting like the third dimension was going to be magical band-aid that solved all the problems that plagued the series was just silly.

Additionally, this reminds me when I started reading press releases for Mega Man X Command Mission and the phrase "being produced by the team that made Breath of Fire Dragon Quarter" reared it's guly head. It's not that Dragon Quarter was bad, but it certainly didn't instill any (positive) faith in me as far as how the game was going to turn out.

You're still not getting the subtext of what I was saying.  McWeeney wasn't advertising; he was making the comparison that G.I. Joe is like Speed Racer, a point of contention important only to the demographic who actually enjoyed Speed Racer.  This has nothing to do with lobbying for a widespread promotion of the film, certainly not with a low critics rating like Speed Racer's.  I figured that was clear enough when he said, "I'm gonna make a scary comparison, but from my point of view, it's a positive one."

I don't think McWeeney "advertising" is the issue avatar is addressing here; I'd say the focus here is more or less taking the quote and turning it into a walking, talking billboard.

Really, it's a lot like asking 100 people "Do you think an adult lion would make a good pet?" Someone is obviously going to say yes despite the obvious dangers common sense would alert you to. God Bless America!

Another good example is DVD themselves. Have you ever seen a DVD not covered with quotes like "Exhilarating," "A Rollercoaster Ride" and, my personal favorite "A Trifecta!" It isn't hard to find some critic from a backwoods puplication that loved some piece of crap. Think about it, what if complete and pure honesty was introduced to the fronts of DVD packaging: "A pathetic excuse for entertainment" cries the Wall Street Journal, "Lowest Common Denominator Special effects porn" bellows the New York Times. "You'd have to braindead to enjoy this dreck!" screams USA Today. A lot like the government, it would completely collapse from any kind of newfound honesty.

So, I went ahead and picked up the Joe score on CD today, despite controversial rumblings that Varese Sarabande dropped the ball for its release by using lossy sources for the master recording.  I'd have to give the score further scrutinizing on my higher end equipment, but as far as the car ride listen home, the mastering was sound.

I've kind of fallen out of grace with Alan Silvestri, not so much from disappointment, but just a general sentiment of disinterest for the films he's scored past 2001.  (Though I've always had half a mind to see The Polar Express, Cradle of Life, Beowulf and The Mummy Returns.)  With the exception of the two Night At The Museum soundtracks, which are fluent if generally forgettable affairs, Rise of Cobra marks the first time in a good while where I've given one of his scores a really in-depth listen.  Having done so, I can at least say that the music is my first pleasant surprise involving the film.

Cobra is an action soundtrack at its core, with a harmoniously mutual understanding between orchestral and modern electronics  -- a balance that can be tricky to nail if one side ever attempts to dominate the other.  Stylistically (and I'm probably admitting this with a tinge of shame), this is one of the few modern scores of its kind I've listened to that sounds, well..... intelligent.  I surmise this has a lot to do with the fact that I've been overindulging way too much on RCP-driven soundtracks over the years, but the difference is palpable; Cobra sounds like the work of someone who's had far more formal musical education and experience than any of the Zimmer guys.  Instruments and percussion are used to smart effect, and the bombast is used for the purpose of punctuation, rather than being the inherent whole.  And then there are the numerous shades of Silvestri that feel comfortably familiar, especially in the dramatic pacing and classic brass bursts.

I'm not quite thematically attached to the thing just yet, but I might be nudged into it contextually after seeing the film.  So far though, the score has been a great listen on its own.

I'm actually kinda looking forward to the film. Pre-reviews have been shockingly positive. The trailer looked terrible... but I've been fooled by them before.

Silvestri's score is okay. It's nothing that he hasn't done before and the album is WAY too long. Once he dumps the electronics in the second half, the action licks entertain (Deploy the Sharcs is especially exciting) but we've heard all this in Van Helsing and The Mummy Returns.

With the first listen, I thought there wasn't much of a thematic foundation... but the fanfare becomes more obvious with the second listen (now that I know what to listen for). It goes without saying that the score is infinitely better than most of the efforts we've gotten in this genre for the past three or so years.

Well, like I said, I missed out on The Mummy, and I've yet to hear the Van Helsing score outside of the movie setting.  Do they get a recommendation from you?  Any thoughts on Cradle of Life or Beowulf too?

Deploy The Sharcs is an excellent track, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised you don't dig the electronics side as much; you were always more about the straight up orchestrations in your movie scores, eh?  Me, I love 'em here, especially in the track The JOEs Mobilize.  It is a long score, I agree, but I actually appreciate the beefy track length layout.

Yeah, even I'm surprised by its current steadfast 91% on RT.  I'm deeply intrigued about the film now.

Out of those scores, The Mummy Returns is the best. Great themes, great action music and very rousing. Van Helsing is fun... but it's basically 40 minutes of non-stop and VERY loud action music. It doesn't have any quieter material (like TMR does) to break things up.

I haven't heard Cradle of Life and I only listened to Beowulf once. It didn't really stand out (but maybe I'm burnt out on this type of Silvestri score).

I don't mind electronics if they're used sparingly... but yeah, this is too much for me. When I listen to the album, I tend to skip the first half altogether and start with Track 13. Although I am thinking of taking the score with me to the gym where I'll see if the first half really pumps up my treadmill work.

Yeah, at first I wasn't going to go. My best friend and I laughed at the trailer and he said, "We're not going to that." But I think we've finally changed our minds.

Well, it looks like the score dropped like a rock, as to be expected.  And that's okay; once again, I say f--- the critics.  After seeing the film, I'm happily whistling "For He's A Jolly Good Fellow" in between chewing bouts of Dubble Bubble.

Joe is the summer popcorn film of the year that works.  It knows how to have a good time; it's got a fun, tongue-in-cheek sensibility to it, not like the overtly-serious Terminator Salvation.  The character development is more numerous, but still nominally better than X-Men Origins: Wolverine, and the story and action beats are far more engaging and easier to swallow than Transformers 2.  Like Speed Racer, I really dug the use of fragmented flashbacks, and the plot twist or two thrown in makes for good measure.

Just lots of cool stuff happening on screen.  The constant skirmishes between the Cobras and the JOEs are always exciting, even amidst the use of heavy CG; the Paris sequence, in particular, was batshit insane, but oh so enjoyable.  The confrontations between Snake Eyes and Storm Shadow, young and old, were superbly choreographed.  The underwater showdown was a tad drawn out, but it doesn't come anywhere close to the ridiculous Egypt battle in Transformers.  The violence is pretty hard-hitting for the PG-13 rating; blows from the close-quarters combat are felt, impalement is handed out regularly, and the several incidents of...... face-melting can get pretty gratuitous.  Oh, and those pulse guns are wicked; in the heat of battle, I'd take one of those badboys over a puny Trek phaser anyday. ;p

I'm not hard-up enough on my "Joe" knowledge to know what's been altered or removed from the original cartoon; I'll be properly schooled on that with my inevitable chat with my brother.  On its own, though, The Rise of Cobra makes for quite the satisfying action flick.  Certainly a neat end-of-season surprise, much like Tropic Thunder was last year.

I didn't. The flashbacks kept popping up in the middle of each scene that they provide relevant backstory to, and the impression I got was that this was done because the audience was not expected to have the attention span to recall the importance of the events if they played out in proper chronological order. I would have preferred to see it that way, with most if not all of the flashbacks sequenced as a prologue of sorts.

The things I expected to like about the movie weren't what I wound up enjoying. For instance, as a big fan of his performance as the Ninth Doctor, I was really looking forward to watching Eccleston, who didn't particularly impress me. On the flipside, I did not have any hopes for Marlon Wayans' performance and was pleasantly surprised.

Probably my biggest gripe about the movie is the voices. I wasn't particularly impressed with Cobra Commander's voice (obviously I didn't expect a replication of Chris Latta's iconic voice, but the voice characterization in the film just didn't really work for me). There were also a lot of mismatched accents - Hugh Laurie can attempt an American accent, so why can't Jonathan Pryce? He's supposed to be the U.S. President for crying out loud! Storm Shadow's lack of any perceivable accent also disappointed me, and would anything have been lost by retaining the Baroness' Russian voice?

Hey Angela, can I ask you a question? Did you see/like Nacho Libre?

I had the feeling that it'd turn out to be like that. The comparisons to my beloved Speed Racer also help it's case.

As I said, as soon as the children start saying movies like these are shitty, that's when you really know. I'd be willing to give proffesional critics more credit if they'd just get their head out of their asses.

But how was the music, Angela?

I hope to see the movie next week. I'm definitely in the mood for nonstop mayhem.

I didn't see it so much as an attention span problem as it was to better place the audience into the gravity of the situation.  The fragmented method, to me, works because it doesn't give everything away in one shot, keeping the character motives and levels of intrigue rolling.  What exactly conspired within that four year time span with The Baroness?  What drives Snake Eyes' and Storm Shadow's intense rivalry with one another?  The bits and teases they feed you throughout is a far cooler way of storytelling.

Nope, I haven't seen it.  But I have a feeling a certain level of importance hinges on my opinion; it'd either lend further validation on your thoughts on my credibility...... or turn it all around. ;)  I'll get back to you once I see it.

Yeah, it's pretty excellent -- but speaking as a fellow aficionado, it's not quite Speed Racer excellent.  It does have the same ballsy visual attitude and flair for fun, but Joe proves to be more of a guilty-pleasure viewing. (I say that, because it doesn't provide the family morals and emotional resonance that managed to push Speed into a higher category.)

It's about the same as the stand-alone listen.  The titles obviously have relevance to me now, but contextually, the score didn't click as much as I thought it would.  This could be the downside to those lengthier track cues; they're all set to the biggest action sequences, where your investment invariably lies more in the chaotic visuals and sound design.  As a result, you kind of forget about the music as it plows along.  I do like the main theme a little more now; it works best when its at its most triumphant, but that really only happens toward the start with the track General Hawk, and the End Credits.  I'd say the most effective track was "The JOEs Mobilize" - I love it even more since it accompanies the crazy-awesome Paris sequence. :)

It's not really a movie to watch for interesting characterization or great dialogue... but I had a BLAST with G.I. Joe. The action just doesn't let up and there's always something happening on the screen. Unlike Michael Bay's jerky cam, Sommers lets the fights breathe. I especially loved the Paris fight (and the underwater climax was greatly entertaining).

When the movie stopped for expositions (or flashbacks), the pace slowed and the seams showed. These aren't inherently interesting characters and I found it hard to care about their angst. Fortunately, these diversions were short and it was back to the explosions (which I'm convinced there are more of than Transformers 2).

The music is wall-to-wall and undermixed, practically hidden underneath the sound effects and dialogue. Even if it were audible, it's not especially inspiring work from Silvestri. The cue for the first part of the underwater battle (Deploy the Sharcs) remains my favorite.

I found the rift between Snake Eyes and Storm Shadow to be fascinating..... but yeah, in retrospect, I do find the interpersonal relationship between Duke, The Baroness and CC to be a tad too manufactured and convenient.  From what my brother was telling me, that was a pretty sharp deviation from the original source material.

See what I mean?  I do think this is one of those cases where the album makes for a better listen outside of the film.  (On that note, I put in an order for the Van Helsing soundtrack.  I'll hold off on The Mummy Returns till I see the film.)

Glad you gave the movie a chance enough to enjoy it.  Lesson for the summer: don't let trailers deceive you.  Just as great-looking trailers can end up churning out shitty films, so too can awful-looking ones turn out decent.  Now you know, and knowing is half the battle.

I forgave a lot of the Duke stuff because I found Channing Tatum to be easy on the eyes. I was less forgiving towards Ripcord and his terrible one-liners. If it's one thing the movie failed on, it's the jokes.

The Baroness was kickass while she was evil... but I was a little disappointed by the mind control plot device. She's a little boring when she's good. We'll see how the inevitable sequel treats the character.

The Mummy Returns isn't a great film (I prefer the first one, with an equally good Jerry Goldsmith score) but the Silvestri score is top-notch. It's worth seeing for the music. This gives you a good idea of the score: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ngYJJr9yuY

Van Helsing is just non-stop machismo. Not even remotely subtle but good fun.

I find it funny to see the guy (Tatum) getting big movie roles now, being an acquaintance of one of his ex-girlfriends.  Haven't seen the movie itself but so long as the guy has some acting chops I can't complain.

I never said he was a good actor. He's okay in G.I. Joe. It's not really an actor's movie. All they have to do is look good while firing various weapons.

That kinda did hold true, both were mindless boring ultrashitty pieces of wasted time.

Watched this recently and oh boy, I can't even start to decipher how shitty this was. But then, seems that Hollywood can't anymore produce a proper action film even if they would have the best script, best cast, best director etc.. And now I'm wasting my time watching yet another overproduced / raped Hollywood action (or should I say boring) movie; Terminator: Salvation. Really what in the hell has happened to plain good old hollywood action movies.

These movies might be nice to eyes on screen, but then it's just like eating cardboard. And this is coming from someone who usually enjoys action movies.

Rejoice...Avatar is coming...Can't wait for that one.

Inb4 Shitstorm.

If you're going to pummel it so mercilessly it probably wouldn't hurt to try.

Also I'm curious what action movies you normally like that you're comparing it to.  It's rare that I find a flat-out action movie that I really enjoy.

For me the fact that the director is Stephen Sommers, the man behind the first two Mummy movies and Van Helsing, was enough to make me avoid the movie.  The man has no feel for drama, a sense of humor that's adolescent at best, and is apparently completely oblivious to awful special effects.  If you're gonna make a dumb big-budget action movie it better at least have decent action and effects, and just judging by the trailers, Joe lacks the latter.

And yet you readily gave Bay's Transformers 2 a chance?  Baffled be I.