G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra (2009)
Director: Stephen Sommers
Writer: Stuart Beattie, David Elliot, Paul Lovett
Starring: Channing Tatum, Marlon Wayans, Sienna Miller, Christopher Eccleston, Byung-hun Lee, Rachel Nichols
Language: English
Runtime: 118 Minutes approx.
Age Rating: 12A
Genre: Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi
Reviewed by Ross Miller
With a summer of letdowns almost over, G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra is like a breath of fresh air, a hyperactive, fast-paced, silly-as-hell motion picture that's one of this year's most fun movies (in the purest sense of the word). It ain't going to be dominating the Oscars come early next year, but is that really what this movie should be? There are serious, adult, dramatic, technically brilliant films and then there are the silly big blockbusters, and G.I. Joe is a fine example of what the latter should be.
Set in the not-too-distant future, G.I. Joe follows an elite group of operatives known as the G.I. Joe (an acronym for Global Integrated Joint Operating Entity). They must team together to try and take down an organization bent on taking over the world, headed by an evil arms dealer.
Much like the Transformers franchise, G.I. Joe is based on a toy line and cartoon shows from more than two decades ago, one that was beloved (and still is) by fans around the world. It was inevitable Hollywood would have a pop at turning it into a big budget movie for the big screen one day, and for the fun and silly movie that it aims to be in equal measure, the film succeeds at its purpose admirably.
Many G.I. Joe purists out there will be mad at some of the changes director Stephen Sommers (The Mummy trilogy) has decided to employ. And it's not just the odd hair colour there, or the odd location change there, G.I. Joe has gone from the "Real American Hero" with the red, white, and blue flag, to metallic silver armour and with patriotism far from the line of sight. Heck, they've even turned the whole name into an acronym when it was just a name before and nothing else.
But is that really a problem when it comes down to enjoying the movie? Perhaps for those who are absolute purists who don't want Duke (the "leader" of the G.I. Joe) to have a hair out of place from what they recognise as the original version it might be a problem. But for today's modern movie-going context, and for those those (your truly included) who don't know a thing about G.I. Joe to start with (which the studio has to keep in mind above everything else), what G.I. Joe used to be wouldn't fly. Things needed to be changed (as they almost always do with any adaptation), and what they've converted G.I. Joe into works absolutely fine, not least because it allows all sort of gadgets and gizmos to come out and play.
One of the staples of summer blockbusters is blowing stuff up. It's almost a rule, in a way, that if there are guns and large vehicles and buildings in the vicinity, things needs to start getting lit the hell up. Michael Bay is one of the kings of this (as he proved recently with the fun, if overblown, Transformers 2), but Sommers has a firm grasp on it it here, too. But not only does he just blow stuff up, but he makes it make sense within the context of what's going on.
Almost all of the action sequences have a frenetic pace to them, often with a time-limited goal put in place that the characters need to accomplish (whether it be stop this from blowing up, get to this location before that happens, and so forth). Although it could be argued that every scene is pushed into full-on action mode left, right, and centre just for the sake of it, I ask — isn't that the point of this kind of movie?
Much of the action centres around fancy gadgets and high-tech equipment that, of course, in real life don't exist. Camouflage suits, accelerate suits ("What does it accelerate? You!"), nano weaponry, pulse guns, on and on. If this were the grittier Terminator Salvation, for example, these ideas would have an audience roaring with laughter at the stupidity and lack of believability. At least with the cheesy way the gadgets are spoken of and used, it works within the context of this movie.
One of the key aspects of G.I. Joe that makes it work so well is the fact that it's silly but also very much knows it. Many big blockbusters are silly as hell, but they don't seem to realize it. They seem to think what they're doing is smart or insightful or what have you, and the fact that they're really just dumb and silly when it comes down to it makes them fail at what they're setting out to do. Not so with G.I. Joe.
The often cheesy dialogue is what adds to the silliness of the whole thing, but again it feels very much like this is on purpose. The inclusion of Damon Wayans — amongst an odd ensemble that includes the likes of Christopher Eccleston, Sienna Miller, and Korean actor Byung-hun Lee, sporting dramatically blunt and hokey names like the Baroness, Storm Shadow, and Snake Eyes — was just one of the many things that from the ads looked like a bad idea. But within the context they actually work very well along with the silliness aim. There are perhaps a bit too many one-liners and joking around for my liking, but when you're in the middle of enjoying the film it's hard to care all that much.
Who'd have thought that with a summer that had giant destructive robots, a new, grittier Terminator movie, and Wolverine showing off his life pre-X-Men, that G.I. Joe would come out on top in terms of enjoyability? Will it endure as one of the best summer action movies? Probably not, but I don't think it needs to. To children aged 12 and under this may be the greatest thing since action figures, but in reality it's definitely not. However, it's one heck of a fun movie. Period.
