Let's get one thing out of the way before I get too far into this review: "G.I. Joe: Rise of the Cobra" makes me want to punch myself in the balls. I don't know why director Stephen Sommers decided to stop making good movies. "The Mummy" is one of the best American action movies of the 90s. But while Y2K may have not affected our computers, it short circuited Sommers' brain. He then gave us "The Mummy Returns" and the soul-crushing abomination that is "Van Helsing." So when I heard that he would not be back to make another unwatchable "G.I. Joe," I was relieved. But who would they hire to save this franchise? Some up and coming action director? A director seasoned in mega-budget, Hollywood blockbusters? Or maybe a guy who directed two "Step Up" movies and a Justine Bieber documentary? I'm sorry to say the answer is John Chu, director of "Justin Bieber: Never Say Never."
It should be stated that "Retaliation" is better than "Rise of the Cobra." That is feint praise. "Retaliation" is barely watchable and had it exceeded two hours (it comes close), I may have attempted to disembowel myself with my remote control. But what makes "G.I. Joe: Retaliation" so bad?
1) My biggest issue is that the G.I. Joes are terrible at their job. For a team that is comprised of super soldiers, a ninja, and a foxy lady that are then given James Bond-ian, high tech gadgets and enough firepower to destroy a mid-size city, one would expect them to be more efficient than regular soldiers. That is not at all the case. If the government had sent in Rangers or Special Forces or Navy Seals instead, this movie would've been 30 minutes long and actually exciting. A great example of the supreme incompetence of the G.I. Joes is the opening. They are sent to Pakistan to steal Pakistan's nuclear warheads. They sneak up to the simple, chain-link fence that protects the nuclear missile facility (step up your security, Pakistan!) and use some sort of palm-mounted torches to cut through the fence. This is the middle of the night and they're trying to be sneaky. So the obvious way to get through a fence is to use bright red torches that throw sparks when in contact with metal and leave behind glowing, red hot holes in fences. Those lame Navy Seals would've probably used wire cutters which make no sound, don't throw off sparks, or light up. But the G.I. Joes are lucky enough to not be noticed. Once inside, one team must signal to the other. In the name of G.I. Joe stealth, they proceed to flash red lights at each other. Those dumb Rangers would've probably used infrared lights which can't be seen by the naked eye, but are visible to night-vision goggles which dumb Rangers might use in a stealth night raid. But the Pakistani guards are apparently blind and/or unconscious. So, G.I. Joes decide they need a distraction. A distraction is a thing that happens in one place so you can do something elsewhere. I figured the G.I. Joes would throw a grenade somewhere so that the guards would investigate, then sneak in the weapons facility. Instead, a G.I. Joe shoots the teacup out of a guard's hand (not shot the actual guard). A full scale firefight ensues and the G.I. Joes have to punch and shoot their way in. Those idiot Special Forces guys would've probably silently disposed of the guards before casually walking in the front door. After stealing Pakistan's nukes, the G.I. Joes are accused of stealing Pakistan's nukes. They are shocked by this. This is G.I. Joe? The Real American Hero? I'll take Special Forces.
2) This movie tries really hard to be funny. Lots of attempts at one-liners. Lots of attempts at zingers. Yet, not one funny thing is said in the entire film. Have you ever met one of those people who think everything they say should be funny (if not, you may be that person)? But as a result of always striving to be funny, nothing they say is funny. It'll drive you crazy. I blame this behavior on bad sitcoms. People have watched enough of these that they feel like that's how life should be. It's not. "G.I. Joe: Retaliation" is a bad sitcom with no laugh track to try to trick you into laughing. Give me nails on a chalkboard. Give me a room full of kindergarteners with violins. It's be less painful to hear than these "jokes."
3) Poorly filmed action. I complain a lot about this. It's especially bad when martial arts are involved, and a movie who's best characters are rival ninjas has plenty of martial arts. If I can't see what's happening, how can I care about what's happening?
4) Everybody's acting is terrible with the exception of two people. The Rock (sorry, Dwayne Johnson) has maybe never been worse. Bruce Willis is sleepwalking through this movie. Channing Tatum returns to the acting of his early films. It's like a church play. It feels like a bunch of non-actors who barely know their lines.
But no movie is purely bad. Every film has something good. For example, "Retaliation" has real explosions. This is a big deal in big budget movies. Instead of CGI, there are several real explosions that throw real stunt people around real locations. It's a nice touch that helped me get through this ordeal. Also, I said two people weren't terrible actors in this movie. Those two are Jonathon Pryce and Byung-hun Lee. Pryce plays the double role of the president and the disguised Zartan. As Zartan, he goes way over the top. Then as the president, he is just repulsed by himself. It's fun to watch. Byung-hun Lee reprises his role as Storm Shadow and actually gives some weight to his conflicted feelings. He's a great actor and I highly recommend you check out some of the movies he's made in South Korea (especially "Ride With the Devil").
That's it though. "G.I. Joe: Retaliation" is terrible. I can't say that it's boring though. Rather, "Retaliation" is like cleaning out the cat's litter box. It may not be boring, but it's still an unpleasant chore.
3.5 out of 10
No comments:
Post a Comment