It just hit me all of a sudden...damned nostalgia! I don't think Snowjob and his tricked-out snowmobile are in the movie, though.

...and I liked Nth Man better than the Joe comics in the 80s...

Views: 120

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I've heard lots of people complain about the exo-skeletons. (Even when I tell them I'm not a Joe fan. All part of the job, I guess...)

What I've countered with is this:

When the GI Joe cartoons aired in the 1980's, the Joes used tech that was pretty far advanced of what was available at the time. It's now 25 years later, and a good chunk of that tech is now either available, or within sight. They needed to advance the Joes to match the advances in the real world.

Unless they were going to set the movie during the 80's, but I doubt anyone wants to see that.
.
I wouldn't have minded the movie being set in the '80s, so there's one...

My biggest problem with the exo-skeletons is how much they look like the Halo character. It seems like they were designed just to appeal to that audience. I'm not sure that I mind so much otherwise.
I loved G.I. Joe as a kid. I had a bunch of the action figures and watched the cartoon religiously. The movie previews remind me a lot of the cartoon. The only thing I don't like is Channing Tatum, who plays Duke. I think he is a horrible actor. They did make a good move by casting Ray Park as Snake Eyes. Snake Eyes looks very cool except for the lips on his costume. I'll be there next weekend. I'm looking forward to it.
Jeff Alan "Cavalier" Polier said:
I wouldn't have minded the movie being set in the '80s, so there's one...

My biggest problem with the exo-skeletons is how much they look like the Halo character. It seems like they were designed just to appeal to that audience. I'm not sure that I mind so much otherwise.

I actually didn't think of Halo at all...but, then, I'm not really a gamer...
The Associated Press sent out a note this morning that said that "G.I. Joe" won't be screened in advance for professional critics. The option to not screen a movie for pro-film critics is generally a sign that the producers don't expect good reviews and have little faith in the film. Alternatively, they could also expect a large general appeal for the film and an extremely poor critical response in the same vein of "Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen."
Some writers for blog sites/fan sites have seen it though, and those reviews are fairly positive, but framed in such a way as "for its source material, it's pretty good" or as Doc said that it's best enjoyed when you "turn off my brain, and have a good end-of-summer time!"
Ya know, honestly, if they were in their original outfits I'd feel better about the movie. I'm open to most changes from page to screen or even from screen to page to screen (in Duke's case), but this time I'm disappointed in the costuming. Still, here's hoping that it's a fun movie.
Quote from a tangentially-related article on the Mr. Satanism website:

"...so in honor of the new G.I. Joe movie (which apparently had the worst test screening in the history of Paramount Pictures...)"

This comes from a pretty reliable source. Think I'll pass on this one.
Personally, I think if they went with the original costuming, it would come off like the Brady Bunch Movie. I'm happy that they've updated things.
JeffCarter said:
Personally, I think if they went with the original costuming, it would come off like the Brady Bunch Movie. I'm happy that they've updated things.

Original costuming, no. Original colors, concepts and motifs -- yes! Part of the appeal of Joes to me is their mix-n-match factor. It lends to the idea that they're pulled from a variety of specialties, services and squads. It lends to the idea that they're the best of the best, not a single unit.

However, the latest action figure line certainly shows a diversity in styles. Maybe the black, full body exoskeleton is for an eliter squad within the Joes. That I can buy. But please, not 2.5 hours of six different generic guys in matching uniforms.
Dagwan said:
I've heard lots of people complain about the exo-skeletons. (Even when I tell them I'm not a Joe fan. All part of the job, I guess...)
What I've countered with is this:
When the GI Joe cartoons aired in the 1980's, the Joes used tech that was pretty far advanced of what was available at the time. It's now 25 years later, and a good chunk of that tech is now either available, or within sight. They needed to advance the Joes to match the advances in the real world.

Unless they were going to set the movie during the 80's, but I doubt anyone wants to see that.
.

I certainly agree with you. We have advanced ... but we certainly haven't advanced to Joe level yet. At least not in "common" warfare. We don't have rockets mounted on skis. We don't use laser pistols & rifles. No personal flight pods. Not even a lousy Weather Dominator.
And you certainly have to admire the Joes and Cobra for their safety record! Not a single casualty in three years.
At Rotten Tomatoes...so far...11 reviews...all but ONE is positive.
I'm not a Joe fan, either...but my son is. Guess who's taking him to see the movie?

I have seen the trailers, and I'm not really all that impressed. Still, it may be a good way to waste a couple of hours scarfing down some popcorn.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Welcome!

No flame wars. No trolls. But a lot of really smart people.The Captain Comics Round Table tries to be the friendliest and most accurate comics website on the Internet.

SOME ESSENTIALS:

RULES OF THE ROUND TABLE

MODERATORS

SMILIES FOLDER

TIPS ON USING THE BOARD

FOLLOW US:

OUR COLUMNISTS:

Groups

© 2020   Captain Comics, board content ©2013 Andrew Smith   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service