It has almost as much special effects as "Transformers", a less complicated story, and worse acting, but G.I. has captured everything that "Transformers 2" lost, but adding a whole new list of problems to an increasingly popular genre that will more than likely continue for years to come.
I think the best action-sci-fi movies are the ones that combine creative writing, solid dialogue, and good acting. G.I. Joe is not the worst acted film in the world by no means, but it could have been alot better. There are alot of similarities between the upcoming "G.I. Joe" franchise and the "Transformers" franchise, but Joe rids itself of the slow, sentimental moments, takes all the moments with depth and makes it just as action-packed as the rest of the film. That almost makes the bad acting bearable...almost.
PLOT:
Alter being attacked delivering warheads, Duke (Channing Tatum) and Ripcord (Marlon Wayans) join an elite, secret government Army unit, the G.I. Joes, who's goal is to take down an organization attempting to steal the warhead.
PROS:
I love the special effects. Just when you think you've seen it all, you get surprised. I enjoyed the humor in this film as much as i did the original "Transformers". The storyline wasn't complicated and even if you are avid fan who knows the story, all of it is delivered in a way that enables an actual element of surprise. The best casting move, to me at least, was Dennis Quaid as Hawk. He was perfect as the leader of the Joes, and he found a way deliver what were corny cartoon sayings and catchphrases and make them work. The flow of the movie was good as well. The pace was frantic, but it needed to be. We don't need slow, deep scenes in a movie like this.
CONS:
I had a serious issue with the dialogue. At times it ran dry and lacked actual depth. I hate when great action movies neglect storylines and character development. The plot wasn't complicated and it didn't need to be, but making the characters real would have worked when there were scenes void of action, mainly the flashbacks.
Now I've always liked Channing Tatum, but honestly he's not that good of an actor and I think he's a little out of his league in this one. He's low-toned, and at times emotionless. This movie may not seem like one that requires a great actor at the reins, but it really did. I'm not looking for an Oscar winner, but a Golden Globe nominee would do. That's my main problem with this genre of movies, ignoring acting and writing and relying on special effects and computer generation.
Recommendation:
Rent it.
Written by:
Stuart Beattie
David Elliot
Paul Lovett
Directed by:
Stephen Sommers
Main Cast:
Channing Tatum ("Coach Carter", "Fighting")
Marlon Wayans ("White Chicks", "Scary Movie")
Sienna Miller ("Alfie", "Stardust")
Dennis Quaid ("The Rookie", "Vantage Point")
Adewale Akinnouye-Agbaje ("Bourne Identity", "Get Rich or Die Tryin'")
Rachel Nichols ("Charlie Wilson's War", "Star Trek")
Byung-hin Lee ("Hero")
Ray Park ("Mortal Combat: Annihilation", "X-Men")
Christopher Eccleston ("28 Days Later")
Joeseph Gordon-Levitt ("Angels in the Outfield", "Stop-loss")
Saiid Taghmaoui ("Kite Runner", "Vantage Point")
Arnold Vosloo ("The Mummy", "Blood Diamond")
Jonathan Pryce ("Pirates of the Carribean", "Bedtime Stories")
Similar Titles:
Transformers, G.I. Joe: The Movie
Next Review:
Accidental Husband -Trailer
No comments:
Post a Comment