The Energon Pub

News Credits: 349 · Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:58 am

http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/take5.html

At first there was doubt that this Hasbro toy line could make the jump to the big screen as successfully as the Transformers did. Paramount Pictures, the studio releasing the movie, has been fighting mixed reactions to the trailers from fans of the original cartoon, along with false rumors of creative disputes and bad reactions from test screenings.

Now Paramount is causing a stir by not screening the movie for critics before it goes into theaters. According to the Associated Press, the studio doesn't want a repeat of the unfavorable reviews that "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" received earlier this summer.
On the surface, this negative buzz does not bode well for "G.I. Joe" But the few online journalists invited to screen the movie last week say that these "real American heroes" deliver a fun, exciting popcorn flick that gives those giant robots a run for their money.
"'G.I. Joe' is the superior film to 'Transformers' in every way," proclaims LatinoReview.com. "It is, hands down, the most action packed movie of the summer." HitFix.com says the movie is "big, ridiculous, and way more fun than I would have thought possible." AintItCool.com sums it up this way: "You will be thoroughly entertained by this movie that simply never lets up on the action."
"G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra" opens on Friday.

News Credits: 5 · Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:29 pm

Well that settles it....

If the few critics that did see liked it.....

That means its goin to suck!

Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:03 pm

5150 Cruiser wrote:Well that settles it....

If the few critics that did see liked it.....

That means its goin to suck!

More than likely. Critics said Harry Potter 5 was the best one yet. I beg to differ. It was the worst Harry Potter I've seen.

Nonetheless, I'm still going to see GI Joe. Maybe Channing Tatum will have a shot of him in his Calvin Kleins.

Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:25 pm

I bet Roger Ebert is kicking himself right now. He went so far out of his way to criticize RotF and everyone who liked it that Paramount doesn't want to hear his opinion anymore. Serves him right.

News Credits: 1 · Mon Aug 10, 2009 4:15 am

Paramount sucks anyway. They did nothing to promote Joe at any Joe cons or comic cons prior to the movie's opening. Not even this year! No panels, footage or anything. Such p***ies. (Same for TF2 too, I believe, besides the Paramount party at Botcon -too expensive to get into anyway)

Thu Aug 13, 2009 5:01 pm

Quoting Ebert ...

G. I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra" is a 118-minute animated film with sequences involving the faces and other body parts of human beings. It is sure to be enjoyed by those whose movie appreciation is defined by the ability to discern that moving pictures and sound are being employed to depict violence. Nevertheless, it is better than "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

The entire article ...
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbc ... /908079997

News Credits: 7 · Thu Aug 13, 2009 9:45 pm

I think that was already established that ROFT wasnt popular with some people,but why keep rubbing the wound,saying that over and over again,making comparisons with freaking everthing!This doesnt seems to stop...
If you didint liked the movie,dont ruin it for those who liked

Thu Aug 13, 2009 10:58 pm

TulioDude wrote:I think that was already established that ROFT wasnt popular with some people,but why keep rubbing the wound,saying that over and over again,making comparisons with freaking everthing!This doesnt seems to stop...
If you didint liked the movie,dont ruin it for those who liked

He sure is making an ass of himself isn't he?

News Credits: 1 · Fri Aug 14, 2009 6:24 am

I didint likeded the movie :-P

-that was too easy to pass up

I haven't read Ebert's review, but ROTF and G.I. Joe aren't arthouse/indie fare and weren't meant to be, so we shouldn't care wtf Ebert thinks.

News Credits: 104 · Fri Aug 14, 2009 6:47 am

I have never been a fan of Ebert or his reviews.
The only reviews I EVER take into consideration is those from fans and actual unpaid people that attend movies.

News Credits: 5 · Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:32 pm

Cyber Bishop wrote:I have never been a fan of Ebert or his reviews.
The only reviews I EVER take into consideration is those from fans and actual unpaid people that attend movies.

Agreed. Speaking od Ebert, a quate from his Review of G.I. Joe..

Yet I say this movie is certainly better than "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen." How so? Admittedly, it doesn't have as much cleavage. But the high-tech hardware is more fun to look at than the transforming robots, the plot is as preposterous, and although the noise is just as loud, it's more the deep bass rumbles of explosions than the ear-piercing bang of steel robots pounding on each other.

So he likes the Joes better cause he favors the aceleroator suits and the transformers transforming sounds hurts his ears. :-?

Lame. Nuff said about ebert and his "Review". :roll:

News Credits: 1 · Fri Aug 14, 2009 5:13 pm

5150 Cruiser wrote: Agreed. Speaking od Ebert, a quate from his Review of G.I. Joe..

Admittedly, it doesn't have as much cleavage.

So he likes the Joes better cause he favors the aceleroator suits and the transformers transforming sounds hurts his ears. Lame. Nuff said about ebert and his "Review".

Sorry, just had to clip your quote down to Ebert's pathetic attempt to sound like a red-blooded heterosexual American dude's dude. Pilsbury Doughboy don't get to weigh in on anyone's cleavage. His boobs are probably bigger, anyway.

Nothing is worse than a pretentious ponce trying to be 'just one of the guys'.

HK, btw, 5150, LOVE your lego stuff!

Fri Aug 14, 2009 5:53 pm

Cyber Bishop wrote:I have never been a fan of Ebert or his reviews.
The only reviews I EVER take into consideration is those from fans and actual unpaid people that attend movies.

I think everybody does, which makes me wonder why we still have film critics.