Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
G.I. Jingo!
G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra is unconvincing imperial American propaganda.
One of the special effects set-pieces in the middle of G. I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra involves a terrorist attack in a major city upon one of the most famous buildings in the world. Said building is struck in its center, and then catastrophically collapses, killing, presumably, thousands. The whole scenario is played, not for pathos or drama, but for slam-bang action thrills; the fall of the building is greeted with a surprised disappointment that actually verges on joviality.
Granted, it's been a few years now since the 9/11 attacks. Still, you wouldn't think you could get away with gratuitously digging up its memory, pissing on it, and then filming the results. And yet, G.I. Joe does exactly that, and, honestly, it doesn't even seem all that offensive. Partially the film manages this because the world city in question is Paris, and the building is the Eiffel Tower. Dead Americans are tragic, dead Arabs are un-P.C., but dead Frenchmen? That's funny.
Even beyond the natural amusement value of massacred Parisians, however, G.I. Joe avoids potential controversy through a bland stupidity so determined that it almost seems like insouciance. One tragic backstory substituting for characterization is irritating, but more or less what I expect from Hollywood. But...two? Four? With at least a couple of them not even interconnected? That really starts to look like parodic bravado last seen in Team America. As, for that matter, does the choice of human mannequin Channing Tatum to play a character based on a toy. Fill in your own "responsive as a hunk of plastic" joke here.
The really impressive bit, though, involves not the characters, but the geopolitics. You'd think, with a name like G.I. Joe, that this movie might be about American military heroes kicking ass, taking names, waving the flag for truth and freedom. But, apparently, that was considered too retro. Or perhaps the creators just figured that nobody really wants to think about the handful of wars we've actually got going. So, instead, the G.I. Joes in this movie are a kind of elite force drawing the best from all over the world. Like Star Trek, but with a higher body count.
The thing about Star Trek, of course, was that its creator Gene Rodenberry actually had a vision; he was a liberal One Worlder, praying for the Cold War to end and the UN to take over. Joe Director Stephen Sommers has a vision of a sort, too, but it's less UN and more aphasiac American hegemony. Sometime, in the near future, the movie posits that soldiers from every nation will gladly leave their home countries to serve in a "multi-national" force named after American soldiers, led by an American general, and apparently answering more-or-less to the American president (who personally works to get the Joes out of jail after that whole destroying Paris thing. Silly excitable French people.)
Even those formerly troublesome Middle Eastern countries appear to be on board; Egypt, at least, allows the Joes to build their secret base under its territory. Of course, the base is targeted by the bad guys, resulting in violation of airspace, massive destruction, and the death of the one actual Egyptian we ever see (he's leading a camel, naturally.) But really, who wouldn't trade all their sovereignty in a second for the adrenaline rush of hearing some random foreign national stand tall on your land and shout "Good luck, Joes!"
This knee-jerk deference to all things American isn't just a transient, incidental bonus. It's integral to what I suppose we must refer to as the plot. The evil arms dealer McCullen—clearly labeled with a safely uncontroversial ethnicity—builds his entire plan around the presumption that if several major cities are blown up, everyone on earth will instantly rally to support the American president. The world loves a strong leader, McCullen figures, and in this near future, America is strong, rather than, I don't know, crushed by debt, or involved in various disastrous military ventures. Nor indeed, is American predominance threatened by China, a country which is conspicuously ignored throughout the film. Instead, when McCullen has an extra missile to play around with, he points it at Moscow, of all places. I guess he didn't get the memo that the Cold War is over and nobody cares about Russia anymore.
The movie ends with the requisite flurry of twisty surprise identity flips. The evil villainess is actually good! The goody-goody dead pal is alive and evil! American president: replaced by scheming twin double! Though it's hard to tell the difference, honestly. Good or bad, everyone seems indifferent to killing large numbers of civilians, and everyone loves America, or at least American-led coalitions. But, really, I shouldn't kick. If I'm to have American imperial propaganda, I couldn't ask for it to be any more shoddily made or any more unconvincing than this.
Noah Berlatsky is a Chicago-based writer whose work appears in Comics Journal, The Chicago Reader, and other outlets. He blogs at The Hooded Utilitarian.
|8.8.09 @ 2:01PM|#
This is the only review that made me think the movie might be ok. Sounded like post-American stuff everywhere else. Now, its obviously a lousy movie but the premise of the review that people being glad America is around when troubl shows up is hooey is not borne out by actual events, see WWII, the Balkans, Indonesian Tsunami etc..
|8.8.09 @ 2:13PM|#
I didn't think anyone could care about having "G.I. JOE" spoiled for them. It's like complaining about being told the ending to "Catwoman."
Naga Sadow|8.8.09 @ 2:21PM|#
Brotherben, you fool!!! How will you learn to impress people with your killer moves with the kung fu grip if you don't RTFA on G.I. Joe?
|8.8.09 @ 2:21PM|#
As this is obviously supposed to be an action movie themed
weekend open thread, I shall post my recent action movie reviews
for your (brief) reading pleasure.
Extreme Prejudice. Extremely enjoyable
Water Hill 80's action flick. Kind of a modern western. Nick Nolte
and Powers Boothe are great value. The whole CIA/special forces sub
plot doesn't make much sense (John Millius script), and the end
doesn't live up to the excellent first hour. 8/10.
Driver. Another Walter Hill flick. Not bad,
definitely watchable, under-developed story. Good car chases.
7/10.
Southern Comfort. Yet more Walter Hill ...
Louisiana national guard jack-offs get on the wrong side of the
local mutants in the bayou. Powers Boothe and Keith Carradine are
sympathetic, but the rest of the retards deserve to die. Pretty
average. 6.5/10.
Taken. Bloody good fun. Swarthy scumbags
get slaughtered by Liam Neeson in super soldier mode. Neeson is
awesome and is a ruthless bastard. Love it when he shoots the
innocent woman in the arm. Plot is ridiculous etc. It's basically
the greatest Steven Seagal movie you could ever imagine, but with a
good actor kicking ass. And his habit of cutting people off
mid-sentence by shooting them in the head f*cking rules.
8.5/10.
Punisher: War Zone. Despite the shitty
plot, characters, etc etc etc there is some enjoyable slaughter of
bad guys to be had here. 5/10.
BTW, can someone please cast Charlyne Yi as asian peasant who
gets decapitated by a Barrett M107 0.50 cal snipers rifle in
the next Rambo film. That is all.
Cobra Commander|8.8.09 @ 2:24PM|#
Go ahead. Make me the scape-goat. My loyal subordinates could testify to my superb stewardship of Cobra. But you don't have the courage to let them speak!
|8.8.09 @ 2:24PM|#
I hear that "Rambo 5" is going to take place in Mexico, so it looks like your wish about Charlyne Yi will have to wait...unless he can double as a Mexican.
|8.8.09 @ 2:26PM|#
I hear that "Rambo 5" is going to take place in
Mexico, so it looks like your wish about Charlyne Yi will
have to wait...unless he can double as a Mexican.
Bodes well for the decapitations though. :)
|8.8.09 @ 2:32PM|#
Naga Sadow, methinks you misunderestimate the my 'batin wisdom and mad skilz with my kung-fu grip:}
|8.8.09 @ 2:36PM|#
There's a little gun shop nearby with a Barret .50 for sale. I'm thinking it might be fun to have when we move back out west in a couple years.
pantera|8.8.09 @ 2:48PM|#
After watching the trailer for this movie, it took my brain
almost FIVE seconds to realize it was completely retarded.
Sadly, the trailer for Transformers 2 masked it's stupidity and I
wasted 10 bucks on it. How can Orion's belt point to anything if
it's constantly moving?
Naga Sadow|8.8.09 @ 2:50PM|#
brotherben,
Well try a diet rich in meth. I hear the pounds just melt away.
|8.8.09 @ 3:01PM|#
Naga Sadow. Ummm. No.
Meth is not made from organic ingredients. Shrooms, in small
quantities, turn me into Speedy Gonzales. (STFU Whackalone) Totally
Organic Too.
|8.8.09 @ 3:11PM|#
Wow, that review was as generic and knee-jerk as anything that I'd expect from the VILLAGE VOICE! Keep up the mediocre work!
anarch|8.8.09 @ 3:13PM|#
Feh.
Why anyone would want to see a movie about a gastrointestinal
parasite, I'll never understand.
TallDave|8.8.09 @ 3:14PM|#
dbcooper,
Absolutely agree on the last two. Both pretty good movies, though
Taken is better.
OTOH Punisher lets us see Titus Pullo again, and was clearly rated
down for being non-PC. An underrated movie imo.
pantera,
FFS, what did you expect? It's a movie about giant transforming
robots.
MNG|8.8.09 @ 3:27PM|#
"I hear that "Rambo 5" is going to take place in Mexico"
Boy, Lonewacko must love the possibilities there...
|8.8.09 @ 3:31PM|#
MNG, I wonder if a buncha 'Mericans went down to shoot the movie and took jobs from the Metsicans?
|8.8.09 @ 3:31PM|#
"Partially the film manages this because the world city in
question is Paris, and the building is the Eiffel Tower. Dead
Americans are tragic, dead Arabs are un-P.C., but dead Frenchmen?
That's funny."
Why am I reminded of "Team America: World Police"?
Plant Immigration Rights Suppo|8.8.09 @ 3:34PM|#
"That really starts to look like parodic bravado last seen in
Team America. As, for that matter, does the choice of human
mannequin "
Good, I am not the only one
Randolph Bourne|8.8.09 @ 3:40PM|#
"builds his entire plan around the presumption that if several
major cities are blown up, everyone on earth will instantly rally
to support the American president."
War is the health of the state.
|8.8.09 @ 3:45PM|#
"If I'm to have American imperial propaganda, I couldn't ask for
it to be any more shoddily made or any more unconvincing than
this."
This movie sounds almost as cheesy as the Underworld vampire
series.
|8.8.09 @ 3:50PM|#
"I'll take 'Joes' over the UN blue-helmet mass-murder abetting
pansies." -
they're not pansies, they rape people.
that's so macho cool.
i love the UN.
SIV|8.8.09 @ 3:52PM|#
Southern Comfort. Yet more Walter Hill ... Louisiana
national guard jack-offs get on the wrong side of the local mutants
in the bayou. Powers Boothe and Keith Carradine are sympathetic,
but the rest of the retards deserve to die. Pretty average.
6.5/10.
Fuck that. Southern Comfort is an easy 9/10.The
ending is intense.
Best "bargain DVD" action movie I've seen since
Ronin
4th grade joke|8.8.09 @ 3:54PM|#
"Why does Barbie have red tits?"
"'Cause G.I. Joe has kung-fu grip"
|8.8.09 @ 3:54PM|#
Will you see
this G.I. Joe?
I will not see
this G.I. Joe
I will not watch it
This I know.
Would you watch it
Here or there?
I would not watch it
here or there.
I would not watch it
anywhere.
I do not like
this G.I. Joe.
I will not watch it,
This I know.
Would you watch it
in a house?
Would you view it
with a mouse?
I will not watch this
in a house
I will not view it
with a mouse.
I will not watch this
here or there.
I will not view it
anywhere.
I do not like this G.I. Joe.
I will not watch it
This I know.
Would you watch it
in a box?
Would you watch it
with a fox?
Not in a box.
Not with a fox.
Not in a house.
Not with a mouse.
I will not watch this here or there.
I will not view this anywhere.
I would not watch this G.I. Joe
I will not view it,
This I know.
Would you? Could you?
in a car?
Watch it! View it!
With the star.
I would not,
could not,
in a car
I will not
view it
with the star.
You may like it.
You will see.
You may like it
in a tree?
I would not, could not in a tree.
Not in a car! You let me be.
I will not watch it in a box.
I will not view it with a fox
I will not watch it in a house
I will not view it with a mouse
I will not watch it here or there.
I will not view it this anywhere.
I will not watch this G.I. Joe
I will not like it, this I know.
A train! A train!
A train! A train!
Could you, would you
on a train?
Not on a train! Not in a tree!
Not in a car! Sam! Let me be!
I would not, could not, in a box.
I could not, would not, with a fox.
I will not watch it with a mouse
I will not view it in a house.
I will not watch it here or there.
I will not view it anywhere.
I do not like
this G.I. Joe.
I will not see it
This I know
Say!
In the dark?
Here in the dark!
Would you, could you, in the dark?
I would not, could not,
in the dark.
Would you, could you,
in the rain?
I would not, could not, in the rain.
Not in the dark. Not on a train,
Not in a car, Not in a tree.
I will no watch this, Sam, you see.
Not in a house. Not in a box.
Not with a mouse. Not with a fox.
I will not watch this here or there.
I will not watch thia anywhere!
You do not like
This G.I. Joe?
I will not
watch it,
This I know.
Could you, would you,
with a goat?
I would not,
could not.
with a goat!
Would you, could you,
on a boat?
I could not, would not, on a boat.
I will not, will not, with a goat.
I will not watch it in the rain.
I will not view it on a train.
Not in the dark! Not in a tree!
Not in a car! You let me be!
I will not watch it in a box.
I will not view it with a fox.
I will not watch it in a house.
I will not view it with a mouse.
I will not watch this here or there
I will not view it ANYWHERE!
I will not watch this piece of shit!
I will not view this, you little twit.
You will not it.
SO you say.
Watch it! View it!
If you may.
See it through,
I'll go away.
Douche!
If you will let me be,
I will watch it.
You will see.
Say!
I hate this movie, G.I. Joe
You made me view it, this I know.
I sucks a weenie so says I
And now it's time
For you to die!
|8.8.09 @ 4:19PM|#
Fuck that. Southern Comfort is an easy 9/10.The ending is
intense.
True, the ending was good. Had a spot of the 'flu when I was
watching it, which may have tempered my enjoyment.
|8.8.09 @ 4:26PM|#
pantera | August 8, 2009, 2:48pm | #
After watching the trailer for this movie, it took my brain almost FIVE seconds to realize it was completely retarded.
You must be slow on the uptake. The title told me that.
|8.8.09 @ 5:07PM|#
You know? Lots of big words and some spoilers does NOT make for a good article. You obviously don't appreciate a popcorn flick. Stick to your Woody Allen movies you goofball...
|8.8.09 @ 5:47PM|#
The thing about Star Trek, of course, was that its creator
Gene Rodenberry actually had a vision; he was a liberal One
Worlder, praying for the Cold War to end and the UN to take over.
Joe Director Stephen Sommers has a vision of a sort, too, but it's
less UN and more aphasiac American hegemony.
Why is the UN taking over the world good and the US taking over the
world bad?
Wouldn't a one world order be bad in either case?
|8.8.09 @ 5:53PM|#
it took my brain almost FIVE seconds to realize it was
completely retarded.
Pretty damn quick for a retard IMO.
hmm|8.8.09 @ 6:31PM|#
It's GI Joe. I'm gonna go see it. It has guns and shit going
boom. Like Transformers it is going to leave me pissed off and
ready to strangle a small furry creature, but I have to go.
Bumblebee is not a fucking Camero. I'm just sayin'
Franklin Harris|8.8.09 @ 7:35PM|#
I will say this about G.I. Joe: It's better than Transformers. As for Berlatsky's analysis, he obviously didn't pick up on the fact that one of the three missiles at the end was aimed at Beijing. So, China is just as much as target as Moscow. And if you don't think the film's ending is slyly subversive of the whole idea of trusting American power, you must have stepped out to get some Raisinettes.
MonkeeHeadinSouth|8.8.09 @ 8:32PM|#
first comic strip i read
so I'll be watchin just for the nostalgia
and the inevitable chick in latex
|8.8.09 @ 8:33PM|#
Somebody might want to tell the Georgians and Ukranians that since the Soviets lost the cold war Russia doesn't matter anymore. Yep, just slowly fading away...
|8.8.09 @ 9:57PM|#
I always get a kick out of reading movie reviews, because it's fun to try and figure out exactly how much of the reviewers psychosis are being projected into the movie they're watching. This one is a doozy.
|8.8.09 @ 10:01PM|#
Cobra Commander's Day Off:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCAvMgGzkpc&feature=related
The Bearded Hobbit|8.8.09 @ 11:46PM|#
J sub D, you remain one of my favorite posters here. "Green GI
Joe and Ham" was brilliant.
Thanks.
.. Hobbit
|8.9.09 @ 12:56AM|#
Well, I think we all can agree that Sienna Miller looks thermonuclear with the dark hair and the glasses. She has sort of a Sarah Palin dominatrix thing going on. Lord knows she's easier to look at than the plot or the CG effects.
Art-P.O.G.|8.9.09 @ 2:29AM|#
Naga Sadow, sadly, they don't make em in XXfat that only move left.
I smell a frivolous lawsuit!
|8.9.09 @ 3:44AM|#
God damn it....Just make a snake eyes movie already. All the
other joes suck anyway.
My proof?
Bazooka
and that is all that needs to be said
|8.9.09 @ 7:24AM|#
"You know? Lots of big words and some spoilers does NOT make for
a good article. You obviously don't appreciate a popcorn flick.
Stick to your Woody Allen movies you goofball..."
You can tell a great comment when it uses all caps though. And the
words "popcorn flick." Also "Woody Allen." I bet you cut and paste
this comment when replying to all the reviews, don't you?
"As for Berlatsky's analysis, he obviously didn't pick up on the
fact that one of the three missiles at the end was aimed at
Beijing. So, China is just as much as target as Moscow. And if you
don't think the film's ending is slyly subversive of the whole idea
of trusting American power, you must have stepped out to get some
Raisinettes."
Thank God someone was paying such rapt attention to the clever
plot. I guess it is slyly subversive to suggest that the American
president has been replaced by an evil clone, because, it's like, a
metaphor for...birther propaganda? Help me out, here.
"Well, I think we all can agree that Sienna Miller looks
thermonuclear with the dark hair and the glasses."
Even this sort of disappointed. Her acting was so thoroughly lousy
that it kept distracting me from the movie's only charm.
"Why is the UN taking over the world good and the US taking over
the world bad?"
It's the same thing.
"Is Dr. Mindbender at least cool in the film?"
Nothing in the film is cool, no.
"Thanks for the spoilers, jerk."
You're welcome.
Art-P.O.G.|8.9.09 @ 7:34AM|#
So what would be convincing imperial American propaganda?
The last Rambo, even though I'm pretty sure it mirrored the plot
to Casablanca.
Nothing in the film is cool, no.
Damn. And I really liked the cast. And that character name.
Art-P.O.G.|8.9.09 @ 7:36AM|#
Well, this is why I like the internet, though. It's unlikely that the author of a print article would respond directly to the comments on his or her article.
|8.9.09 @ 8:57AM|#
"So what would be convincing imperial American
propaganda?"
Rudyard Kipling's imperial propaganda is fairly convincing, as
these things go. More recently, the James Bond films make a good
case (or at least a coherent one) for having the British take care
of the world.
"It's unlikely that the author of a print article would respond
directly to the comments on his or her article."
Though I could just be a clone....
|8.9.09 @ 12:47PM|#
"As for Berlatsky's analysis, he obviously didn't pick up on the
fact that one of the three missiles at the end was aimed at
Beijing. So, China is just as much as target as Moscow. And if you
don't think the film's ending is slyly subversive of the whole idea
of trusting American power, you must have stepped out to get some
Raisinettes."
Thank God someone was paying such rapt attention to the clever
plot."
Because heaven knows that asking Berlatsky to do something as hard
as remember where the third missile is pointed is completely
unreasonable; big number, there, three. One, too, many....
"I guess it is slyly subversive to suggest that the American
president has been replaced by an evil clone, because, it's like, a
metaphor for...birther propaganda? Help me out, here."
No moreso than the Manchurian Candidate was, no; this really is too
hard for you, isn't it?
Naga Sadow|8.9.09 @ 12:48PM|#
Well, this is why I like the internet, though. It's unlikely
that the author of a print article would respond directly to the
comments on his or her article.
A conundrum isn't it . . .
!|8.9.09 @ 12:49PM|#
It's like complaining about being told the ending to
"Catwoman."
Anyone who makes it to the end of that MTV video deserves a medal.
Or is very easy to please. Or is a retard.
Richard|8.9.09 @ 1:21PM|#
I was dragged to the movie yesterday and I'm here to tell you
that, politics aside, it just sucks, as you might expect from a
movie based on a toy.
Except for the woman who plays
Scarlett (who also played the Orion girl who was Uhura's
roommate in the Star Trek reboot). Truly world-class tits.
Nazilla vs. the |8.9.09 @ 1:22PM|#
ransom147 | August 8, 2009, 3:50pm | #
"I'll take 'Joes' over the UN blue-helmet mass-murder abetting pansies." -
they're not pansies, they rape people.
that's so macho cool.
i love the UN.
Little boys, specifically; they rape little boys. They're
mass-murder abetting pederast pansies.
Nazilla|8.9.09 @ 1:24PM|#
My name was supposed to be Nazilla vs. the "un" by the way; Idiocracy reference; somehow everything in quotes got dropped.
|8.9.09 @ 1:26PM|#
"Because heaven knows that asking Berlatsky to do something as
hard as remember where the third missile is pointed is completely
unreasonable; big number, there, three. One, too, many...."
But...why are you memorizing where the missiles are pointing, is
the question? Who cares? So great, they remembered that China
existed. Yay for them. I guess that means the movie didn't suck
after all.
"No moreso than the Manchurian Candidate was, no; this really is
too hard for you, isn't it?"
But the Manchurian Candidate is cold war paranoia; not slyly
subversive, maybe, but at least it's about something. The twisty
end of G. I. Joe is just there because Hollywood likes twisty ends;
it's not intended to call American power into question, as far as I
can tell. In fact, since bad guys and good guys alike are happy
with a strong America leading the world, it's unclear why it
matters practically whether the president is good or evil.
"Anyone who makes it to the end of that MTV video deserves a medal.
Or is very easy to please. Or is a retard."
Some of us were paid, which helped...but, yeah, not really
enough.
Also, I think you're being overly harsh to MTV videos in comparing
them to this movie.
Franklin Harris|8.9.09 @ 1:53PM|#
Noah, you apparently can't count to three, and you failed to notice that the bad guys actually win in the end. Give it up.
Nihixul|8.9.09 @ 2:05PM|#
I expected to not like the movie, as I generally am not big into
action films, but I actually enjoyed it. The love subplot was goofy
as hell, but other than that, I had a good time.
I hardly saw the politics as proselytizing; they were just there,
part of the story. The various particular nationalities were
greatly inconsequential. Nobody came out of the theater discussing
politics, and although that might be a sign of well-crafted
propaganda, it is also the sign of non-propaganda. Anyhow, that's
just my two cents.
"MTV videos" no longer exist, by the way.
|8.9.09 @ 2:22PM|#
Noah Berlatsky quite obviously has no knowledge of the canon
behind this movie. If he did he would realize that the canon G.I.
Joe is an elite secret organization of good guys who are working
hard to save humanity from the evil terrorist organization Cobra.
If it sounds like cartoon simplicity, well, that is because the
canon consists of a cartoon TV show, a comic book and and line of
action figures.
I suggest treating G.I. Joe as seriously as it deserves to be
treated; basically not at all. It is shallow entertainment.
jpocali|8.9.09 @ 2:24PM|#
Remember Zartan? Is he in the movie? He changed colors in the sun and went crazy in battle. You needed to send in proofs of purchase to buy him, but sadly he was pulled from the market because he offended crazy people. I think he was Australian.......
Franklin Harris|8.9.09 @ 2:47PM|#
The twisty end of G. I. Joe is just there because Hollywood likes twisty ends; it's not intended to call American power into question, as far as I can tell.
That's exactly what is subversive about it. It's not actually a
twist ending in the traditional sense; it just looks like one. The
ending was the plan all along. G.I. Joe actually failed. That's
more than just the typical "oh, look, the bad guy secretly escaped
to fight another day" twist ending. The terrorists win, and no
one is the wiser.
|8.9.09 @ 4:21PM|#
Agree with dbcooper on Taken. There's at least a couple moments
where it seems a villain is about to monologue and Liam just takes
them out.
Fat Sheik Evil Guy: "We can make a..."
Liam Neeson's Gun: BANG!
Me: Sweet!
G.I. Joe sounds like a Netflix rental based purely on the the boner
inducing prowess of Sienna Miller as The Baroness. Anyone taken a
reading with their, um, probe?
(reads further) Ah!
Well, I think we all can agree that Sienna Miller looks
thermonuclear with the dark hair and the glasses. She has sort of a
Sarah Palin dominatrix thing going on.
As much as I hate Palin, this dippy country deserves her, so I'd
love to run her presidential bid to victory. Black leather outfits,
boots and a whip would only be the start.
Noah Berlatsky quite obviously has no knowledge of the canon
behind this movie.
That's considered a good, healthy thing in many circles. I'm
guessing he also can't name more than one spell taught at Hogworts
or the evolved form of a Pikachu.
|8.9.09 @ 4:59PM|#
I grew up with G.I. Joe, both the toy and the comic book. (Never
much cared for the cartoon.) Having the action figures there with
me helped me during several long lonely stays at Johns Hopkins
Hospital while undergoing open heart surgery. This may sound sappy,
but I really wanted to be a G.I. Joe.
And while Mr. Bertlasky's review is both factually incorrect, reads
far too much into the geo-political commentary of the film and
reminiscent of the pretentious "If it's not boring, foreign or
starring Sean Penn then it's crap." attitude that pervades the
current community of movie critics; his overall opinion is sound.
This movie sucks!
I have been literally waiting over twenty years for a live-action
G.I. Joe movie. Pathetic, Yes, but if it has taken this long to do
you would thing it'd be done right. Well it wasn't. Not only were
the back stories of pretty much all the major characters mangled
beyond recognition, but the CGI looked like it came out of a made
for SciFi Channel Saturday Night movie.
I thought Transforms(both movies) were fun, but I guess that's
because I didn't have the emotional attachment to them that I have
to G.I. Joe. This movie had a bad plot, bad acting, bad special
effects, and even Scarlett wasn't a natural red-head. Perhaps
Sommers is actually Zartan.
Benjamin
|8.9.09 @ 5:03PM|#
"But...why are you memorizing where the missiles are pointing,
is the question?"
No, that's really not the question. How could a so-called reviewer
forget such a basic and important plot point, and then complain
about it's lack? That's a good question.
"Who cares? So great, they remembered that China existed. Yay for
them. I guess that means the movie didn't suck after all."
No, that's not what it means. It does mean, of course, in that
specific case, that you sucked much worse than they did; but these
clear intellectual superiors of yours had arctic ice raining down
through arctic salt water ocean. Hint: ice is lighter than water.
It's not that they aren't egregious morons, it's just that you're
worse.
Also, Scarlet was definitely a redeeming feature, wooo.
Squint|8.9.09 @ 7:51PM|#
@Scott
So you judge a person's entire intellect based on their remembering
one minor plot point in a dumb movie. Wow. Just fucking wow. Could
you be a bigger loser?
Sean W. Malone|8.9.09 @ 7:53PM|#
I just saw the film... And was interviewed by Reuters
afterwards, fwiw... which isn't much. But here are a few choice
moments:
1. Oh my god. [deadpan] *BOOOM!* when an expendable helicopter
pilot dies, apparently not concerned enough for his own life (or
the actor's career) to muster up some enthusiasm.
2. They had to "weaponize" a warhead in order for it to work. Not
that it wasn't a weapon already, or had a clearly labeled
activation switch... no... they had to re-"weaponize" it.
WTF.
3. "The more you know".
4. The main villain is a.... "Businessman"!?? No! I don't believe
it! He even makes it a point to make the ubiquitous line: "I'm a
businessman"...ugh!
Arms-dealers, of course, are the ones who start wars, send
thousands of troops to die and cause the deaths of many more
thousands of civilians. It's not you know... Presidents or anything
like that. *Shock*
5. Polar ice... umm... sinks?
That's right kids. Oh, and General Hawk was a well-quaffed &
ineffectual pussy. Made me sad.
Steve B|8.9.09 @ 8:41PM|#
I normally can't stand yahoos who proclaim, "Relax, it's just a
movie, dude," but in this case, I have to join the chorus against
Mr. Berlatsky. Seriously, you're applying a level of critical
analysis to movie that doesn't warrant it. Do you also look for
geopolitical subtext in "G-Force" or "Honey I Blew Up the Kids"?
Because G. I. Joe has no aspirations beyond those films.
I haven't seen the film, but here's an example of a review that
takes the film at it's own merits:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escape-to-the-movies/866-G-I-Joe-The-Rise-of-Cobra
. Some choice quotes:
"The only things missing from any of the action scenes are the
omnipotent hands of a massive kindergartener moving all the players
around and a booming voice sagely intoning 'Batteries not
included'."
"It understands there are basically two audiences for a movie like
G. I. Joe: Seven-year-old kids, and guys in their late 20s who
remember being seven-year-old kids."
"An exuberant romanticism of nationalism and the armed services, in
the form of a narrative infomercial, primarily designed to
encourage the conspicuous consumption of mass-produced plastic
playthings by impressionable children, it almost always plays out
as something that was designed to give an aneurysm to Howard
Zinn."
And he liked it: "I'll say it upfront: G.I. Joe is a better James
Bond movie than the last twelve James Bond movies."
His review touches on the geopolitics, for one or two sentences,
but that's how much should be applied to a feature-length toy
commercial.
|8.9.09 @ 10:26PM|#
"I normally can't stand yahoos who proclaim, "Relax, it's just a
movie, dude," but in this case, I have to join the chorus against
Mr. Berlatsky. Seriously, you're applying a level of critical
analysis to movie that doesn't warrant it"
I'm taking it too seriously because I make jokes about massacring
the French and suggest that the film is such an egregious piece of
crap that it's imperialist overtones are for the best? Are you sure
you're reading the review I wrote?
I guess some people feel like if something is really bad, then it
doesn't mean anything. I don't get that; it seems to me like
political or philosophical meaning and aesthetic quality are
actually fairly independent variables. Little Nemo, for
example...one of the greatest comics ever, with (I'd argue) very
little in the way of political meaning to speak of. Star Trek, on
the other hand; fairly mediocre, (especially after the first
series) but lots of (fairly obvious) political and social content.
So the argument that G.I. Joe is really stupid and based on toy
commercials, and therefore it must not have any political content
-- I don't really see how the second bit follows from the
first.
(I talk about little Nemo here if anyone's interested:
http://hoodedutilitarian.blogspot.com/2008/08/butt-of-dream.html.)
But, hey, it's just a review. If you didn't like it, more power to
you. Maybe the next one will be more to your taste, presuming I'm
lucky enough to get a chance to write one.
I do have to say, though...the last couple James Bond films were
superior to this one in every way...including cheesecake. Those
movies were filled with women who put Sienna Miller to shame.
" I'm guessing he also can't name more than one spell taught at
Hogworts or the evolved form of a Pikachu."
It's true! I don't know either of these things. I do know a fair
amount of useless comic book trivia, though. (What super-heroes
live on Earth C?)
|8.9.09 @ 10:34PM|#
""If it's not boring, foreign or starring Sean Penn then it's
crap."
But...I hate Sean Penn movies.
Believe me, all this movie had to do was to be as good as Tomb
Raider, and I would have been happy.
Jeff|8.10.09 @ 12:30AM|#
The idea of examining at the jingoistic properties of G.I Joe is a ridiculous at the movie itself.
Art-P.O.G.|8.10.09 @ 12:59AM|#
Believe me, all this movie had to do was to be as good as Tomb Raider, and I would have been happy.
Ouch. I hated Tomb Raider.
B|8.10.09 @ 1:29AM|#
"G.I. Jingo-G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra is unconvincing imperial
American propaganda."
"This knee-jerk deference to all things American isn't just a
transient, incidental bonus."
Shit, I must have gotten wasted and gone to www.motherjones.com
again.
B|8.10.09 @ 1:40AM|#
Christ, is it possible, at all, for a movie to portray soldiers as something other than the redneck, undereducated, teenage girl-raping, baby killing, bloodthirsty carpet bombers they obviously are without someone using jingo or jingoism or some other similar word in a fucking review?
B|8.10.09 @ 1:43AM|#
And Southern Comfort totally fucking rocks. I remember when that movie first came to the premium cable channels over 20 years ago and they fucking showed it more often than TBS plays "Roadhouse".
|8.10.09 @ 2:14AM|#
Just saw the movie. It is a action packed thriller with fully
developed characters and a strong, unpredictable plot....for cinema
goers with braim danage....for anyone with 85+ IQ it sucks.
No attention to detail at all, in the dramatic finale ice sinks
rather than floats, but the producer was too focused on FX to put
any effort toward quality.
BTW...Noah Berlatsky review sucked worse than the movie
Art-P.O.G.|8.10.09 @ 2:51AM|#
B,
I don't really think it's supposed to be a realistic war movie. And
I don't even mean magical realism like Apocalypse Now or
Catch-22 (well, the book had magical realist moments, but
I don't remember if the movie did as much).
How was The Hurt Locker, BTW? I haven't had the
opportunity to see it yet.
Frankly, I think Hollywood portrays servicemembers fairly, most of
the time (based on what I've seen). I'd recommend Jarhead
or The Lucky Ones as far as fairly recently made "war"
movies.
Steve B|8.10.09 @ 7:51AM|#
Mr Berlatsky:
I didn't really have a problem with the conclusions you reached in
your review, and I don't believe in giving shitty movies a pass
because they try to be shitty. But I reallyl don't see how G.I. Joe
is the kind of movie that warrants this analysis.
I guess what I'm trying to say is: It's G.I. Joe. Was there any way
for them to have made the movie and not have it be a jingo-fest?
G.I. Joe? It ends up sounding like your review is critiquing the
IDEA of a Joe movie, rather than the movie itself; your review
would have applied to any Joe movie that was passingly familiar to
the source material, regardless of quality, nuance or
director.
Sure, someone could have made a more savvy action thriller that had
something to say, but why would you call it G.I. Joe?
bill|8.10.09 @ 9:46AM|#
Who cares if the movie ignores the rise of China. ITS A MOVIE
BASED OF A FRIGGING COMIC BOOK. Stop reading into it for what it
isnt.
Reviewers did the same nonsense with transformers which was another
comic book based movie. T2 was based on hot chicks and GIANT
robots.
GI JOe is apparently based on explosions and who knows what else.
If you dont like it fine but its not valid to say that it ignores
aspects of history when its a summer popcorn movie not schindlers
list.
|8.10.09 @ 10:29AM|#
Hold on, the Eiffel Tower falls into the Seine and thousands of
frogs die?
Error. It's a few tourists and a couple of Bateaux Mouches that
bite the bullet.
Two fifty dead. Tops.
|8.10.09 @ 10:45AM|#
"Noah Berlatsky quite obviously has no knowledge of the canon
behind this movie."
Remember your great-grandfather, the one that worked to build the
railroads and raised 8 children in a cabin? He just read this line
from beyond the grave and wept at the kind of man you are.
coyote1284|8.10.09 @ 10:54AM|#
It's GI Joe (AKA THE REAL AMERICAN HERO), four fox ache. What did you fucking expect, Citizen Kane? Did you really expect it NOT to be "America, Fuck Yeah"? It's a stupid, "turn off mind and enjoy" kind of film, not a geo-political statment a la Syriana. Look at the source material... WITHOUT the nostalgia glazed filter. It was a simple "good-guys stop bad-guys plan, bad-guys slip away to return next week" toy commercial. Why does the movie need to be anylized any more critically?
|8.10.09 @ 11:17AM|#
As much as I hate Palin, this dippy country deserves her, so
I'd love to run her presidential bid to victory. Black leather
outfits, boots and a whip would only be the start.
She'd win in a landslide.
TallDave|8.10.09 @ 12:48PM|#
It's a fun romp. They even worked in "Knowing is half the
battle!"
Also, Syriana was extremely stupid.
DADIODADDY|8.10.09 @ 2:04PM|#
Class: Team America; World Police versus G.I. Joe; Rise of Cobra...compare and contrast. You have 45 minutes and may use up to 2 blue books.
|8.10.09 @ 5:30PM|#
This is a movie based on a comic book series. I read the comic books as a kid. They were cheesy then, the movie's cheesy now. It's an action flick, not a Michael Moore bizarro movie.
St. Vee|8.10.09 @ 5:49PM|#
Hey ART,
The Hurt Locker - fantastic film. One of the best I've seen this
year. I would suggest checking it out asap.
|8.11.09 @ 9:00AM|#
"Who cares if the movie ignores the rise of China. ITS A MOVIE
BASED OF A FRIGGING COMIC BOOK. "
Dark Knight was based on a comic book. I'm not a big fan of that
movie either, but it was pretty canny in the way it used politics
and morality.
"Was there any way for them to have made the movie and not have it
be a jingo-fest? G.I. Joe?"
It was always going to be a jingo-fest, of course. But just because
you're pro-American doesn't mean you have to be stupid. They could
have dealt with terrorism, or anti-American sentiment, or even the
rise of China in a clever way (or a marginally more clever way) --
again, just as Dark Knight, or the last couple of James Bond films
manage to be action shoot em ups while retaining a hold on
something that looks like a brain.
Or, you know, they could just have had marginally better
characterization, plotting, and effects, like Tomb Raider. Or even
the Mummy, honestly.
"GI JOe is apparently based on explosions and who knows what else.
If you dont like it fine but its not valid to say that it ignores
aspects of history when its a summer popcorn movie not schindlers
list."
Thank God it's not Schindler's List. That's a truly crappy movie.
Of the two, I think I'd rather sit through G.I. Joe again.
Sun Stealer|8.12.09 @ 5:32PM|#
I wasn't originally going to see it, but now I'm definitely going to see it just to piss you off, Noah. USA! USA! USA!
|8.18.09 @ 1:53PM|#
And the really funny thing is that the Joes make a point of
calling in the threat to the Eiffel Tower once it's identified, so
that it can be evacuated before the missile hits. Several scenes
make a point of the screaming evacuation.
Since everyone escapes and no one is killed (only a rebuildable
historical landmark is destroyed) Noah's entire review is made
pointless.
Leave a Comment
More Articles by Noah Berlatsky
- Vampire Family Values, Noah Berlatsky, November 20, 2009
- The White Goat's Burden, Noah Berlatsky, October 30, 2009
Related Articles (Foreign Policy, Film)
- Vampire Family Values, Noah Berlatsky, November 20, 2009
- Baby Barnum, Jesse Walker, November 5, 2009
- The White Goat's Burden, Noah Berlatsky, October 30, 2009
- Hollywood Comrades, Tim Cavanaugh, October 30, 2009
- The Cold War Never Ended, Michael C. Moynihan, October 21, 2009
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245