[The News Bot]

Reviewed by Cas Harlow, 14th November 2009
G.I. Joe is a silly, effects-laden big budget extravaganza, a no-brain summer blockbuster in the extreme, insulting audience members with its inane antics, poor plotting, terrible characters, worse script, acting and dialogue delivery, and – frankly – flawed effects. Still, even if it will probably have fans of the 80s franchise protesting on the streets, it has been far from unsuccessful, proving that there are still plenty of people out there who can literally switch their brains off to watch this kind of popcorn flick. The video and audio for this US Region Free Blu-ray release are very good indeed, and we get a couple of nice extras, but strangely none of it is as good as you would expect from a $175 Million Dollar movie, and that pretty-much sums this all up. Perhaps they’ll replace Channing Tatum with Matt Damon for the sequel and have it directed by Chris Nolan, but more than likely we’ll just get more of the same because nobody can be bothered to give us something decent. Glossy and shiny but disappointingly thin, rent it but leave your brain as deposit at the video store.
Read the full review...

[namuk]

Class film , loved it .

[xit2050]

Originally Posted by namuk

Class film

Great joke.

[namuk]

Originally Posted by xit2050

Great joke.

Not really i liked it .. each to there own i Guess .

[Miss Chief]

I think Cas may have been taking the film a little too seriously! I've watched it on DVD and it's pure brain-off popcorn. Anyone who does take their movies seriously either won't watch it/buy it or will deride it as Cas has, but anyone who sees Summer Blockbusters as effects heavy, plot light films won't be disappointed.

[casharlow]

Summer blockbusters can still have decent acting and effects that do not look so jarringly like effects. Iron Man is a decent summer blockbuster, as is the first Transformers movie. T4 landed somewhere in between, a decent summer blockbuster but marginally disappointing for a Terminator franchise film. Van Helsing, imo, is at the opposite end of the spectrum. Ditto for Joe. You can't take the film that seriously because it's not that kind of film, and it does have a fraction of that Showgirls-style so-bad-that-its-unintentionally-funny quality to it that makes it at least watchable for the duration. But for $175 Million they can and should have done better than an effects-laden Streetfighter movie.

[xit2050]

Originally Posted by casharlow

Summer blockbusters can still have decent acting and effects that do not look so jarringly like effects. Iron Man is a decent summer blockbuster, as is the first Transformers movie. T4 landed somewhere in between, a decent summer blockbuster but marginally disappointing for a Terminator franchise film. Van Helsing, imo, is at the opposite end of the spectrum. Ditto for Joe. You can't take the film that seriously because it's not that kind of film, and it does have a fraction of that Showgirls-style so-bad-that-its-unintentionally-funny quality to it that makes it at least watchable for the duration. But for $175 Million they can and should have done better than an effects-laden Streetfighter movie.

Agreed on all points.

[CALLMENUJAK]

Originally Posted by namuk

Not really i liked it .. each to there own i Guess .

I enjoyed it too.