G.I. Joe

Originally posted by Darth Martin
PIS stands for Plot Induced Stupidity.

There are plot holes in every film. Some just have more or less than others. Star Trek didn't require you to have been a huge trekkie to understand it. All of the characters and actors portrayals were great IMO. It was a great time. Loads better than Wolverine, TFs2, or G.I. Joe.

I disagree on Star Trek. It had such HUGE plotholes that it was stupid.

However, in the movie's defense, the jokes were better than in T2, and Wolverine's movie. It was also...I dunno...it had a better feel about it.

It's just that, the story was RE....TARD....ED. lol 😆

I give it props for introducing the alternate timeline so they could get away with differences. However, it still failed. Failed at science, simple plot continuity, and simple reasoning for plot points. It was THE worst film this year, as far as plot goes.

You're stupid.

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
You're stupid.

No, you're a towel.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I disagree on Star Trek. It had such HUGE plotholes that it was stupid.

However, in the movie's defense, the jokes were better than in T2, and Wolverine's movie. It was also...I dunno...it had a better feel about it.

It's just that, the story was RE....TARD....ED. lol 😆

I give it props for introducing the alternate timeline so they could get away with differences. However, it still failed. Failed at science, simple plot continuity, and simple reasoning for plot points. It was THE worst film this year, as far as plot goes.

Lots of great movies fail at science, simply because if they didn't, they wouldn't be able to exist.

Do you have beef with any movie that has explosions in space? Sound in space?

Somewhere along the line you just have to let it go.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Lots of great movies fail at science, simply because if they didn't, they wouldn't be able to exist.

Star Trek is one of the few genres that failing at basic science is a big no-no.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Do you have beef with any movie that has explosions in space? Sound in space?

Explosions in space work just fine. They just won't be burning oxygen.

So, really..it depends.

Sound. Yes. 😐

That's utterly retarded to have sound in space. But I overlook it almost every time because I know that there are lots of scientifically ignorant people in the entertainment business.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Somewhere along the line you just have to let it go.

-AC

Great.

If I let go of all the science, I'm still left with a pile of plot rubbish. (For Star Trek.)

Originally posted by dadudemon
Star Trek is one of the few genres that failing at basic science is a big no-no.

Explosions in space work just fine. They just won't be burning oxygen.

So, really..it depends.

Sound. Yes. 😐

That's utterly retarded to have sound in space. But I overlook it almost every time because I know that there are lots of scientifically ignorant people in the entertainment business.

Great.

If I let go of all the science, I'm still left with a pile of plot rubbish. (For Star Trek.)

ummm, star trek and other science fiction movies have always failed at basic science.
First off the movie would be incredably boring if it didn't have any sound in space, I couldn't even imagine watching star trek, or star wars or any scifi without sound in space.

as for the explosions, isn't it the oxygen that is inside the ship that is fueling the fire for a while?
Mythbusters should do a show on that.

Originally posted by darthmaul1

First off the movie would be incredably boring if it didn't have any sound in space,

Star Trek did have no sound in space..........watch it again.

Originally posted by darthmaul1
ummm, star trek and other science fiction movies have always failed at basic science.

Not all of the time and much of the science or technology put into the shows has background or a theoretical base.

If you were just slightly a fan of Star Trek, you'd know that. That's one of the very basic appeals of Star Trek is science that can almost be real.

Originally posted by darthmaul1
First off the movie would be incredably boring if it didn't have any sound in space,

I cite Space Odessy. Very nicely done film. Had some excellently scientific accuracies. Suck on that. 😄

Originally posted by darthmaul1
I couldn't even imagine watching star trek, or star wars or any scifi without sound in space.

No offense dude, but that means you've accepted stupidity as cool.

Originally posted by darthmaul1
as for the explosions, isn't it the oxygen that is inside the ship that is fueling the fire for a while?

Yes. Exactly.

However, explosions can still occur WITHOUT oxygen. A nuke is a prime example.

Originally posted by darthmaul1
Mythbusters should do a show on that.

I would f**ing watch that shit, bro.

But, no, they couldn't do that. They have no way of testing this shit in space.

And creating a virtual vacuum large enough for a controlled explosion would be tough as hell...and extremely expensive.

Thankfully, the US and Russia DID blow up Nukes in pace. They blow up in the shape of a sphere, for the most part.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Star Trek did have no sound in space..........watch it again.

Really?

I could have sworn it had a shit ton of sound in space.

If it didn't, kudos to them for being intelligent for once.

Originally posted by dadudemon
It was THE worst film this year, as far as plot goes.

Or Terminator. Or G.I. Joe. etc.

Originally posted by Darth Martin
I hope your not implying that this film was worse than, say, X-Men Origins: Wolverine. 🙁

Plot-wise?

Yes, it was.

As far as which film I enjoyed more, I enjoyed Star Trek more.

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
Or Terminator. Or G.I. Joe. etc.

Plot-wise? Yes.

I haven't seen GI Joe yet, so I can't say, there.

I just got back from seeing GI JOE for the 2nd time and i went with my wife this time, and she really enjoyed it, and so did i again. it was still very entertaining and a lot of fun.
And i still can't fault it on anything.
IMO it was great

Originally posted by darthmaul1

And i still can't fault it on anything.
IMO it was great

You really do have a shitty taste in movies.

Originally posted by The Nuul
You really do have a shitty taste in movies.

Anyone who lists porn as an intrest/hobby should really watch what they say.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Plot-wise? Yes, it was.

Why are people so wound up on plots in essentially action movies and scifis?
I was going to see wolverine not the shawshank redemption, the plot was pretty much what i expected and not that bad. Not every film can be like the dark knight.
Same thing with star trek it was a good but it was no wrath of khan, the same thing goes for terminator and GI JOE. the plots were pretty much what i expected, but it has to be put together well, and presented on screen well, which all of the movies IMO did. With the exception of TF2, the plot wasn't good and the way it was put together was terrible.

Genius brother who turns into evil genius, evil ex-lover who really isn't evil, just under mind control from evil brother, yeah, sparkling plot lines.

BTW, it would have been easier to conquer the world by mindcontrolling key world leaders and business giants, than by threats. Since they already had the mindcontrol technology in place.

Originally posted by Robtard
Genius brother who turns into evil genius, evil ex-lover who really isn't evil, just under mind control from evil brother, yeah, sparkling plot lines.

BTW, it would have been easier to conquer the world by mindcontrolling key world leaders and business giants, than by threats. Since they already had the mindcontrol technology in place.

Yes and if every movie did that, then the movie would be lame or there wouldn't be any movie at all.

Take star trek first contact... if the Borg can time travel why don't they just do it in their own space without any interfance, and then travel to earth and assimilate it?

In pretty much all the bond movies when the villan has bond why doesn't he just pull the ruddy trigger?
Cause there wouldn't be any movie if they did tat stuff that is why.

Originally posted by darthmaul1
Why are people so wound up on plots in essentially action movies and scifis?
I was going to see wolverine not the shawshank redemption, the plot was pretty much what i expected and not that bad. Not every film can be like the dark knight.
Same thing with star trek it was a good but it was no wrath of khan, the same thing goes for terminator and GI JOE. the plots were pretty much what i expected, but it has to be put together well, and presented on screen well, which all of the movies IMO did. With the exception of TF2, the plot wasn't good and the way it was put together was terrible.

I fully agree.

As i wrote in a another thread, G.I.Joe wasn't meant to be rocket science. It was meant to be a ton of fun. And it was. My expectations were fulfilled thanks to reviews, interviews, a cool cast (and their enthusiam about the film), and most importantly honest trailers.

The movie clearly wasn't meant to be taken absolutely serious.Sure it had some cheese in it but didn't the cartoons cheese too? We still watch 'em. With glee and everything. It almost seemed as if viewers were suppose to take it as seriously as typical G.I.Joe cartoons. Which were good too. (and fun)

One of the things that stood out the most to me was the movies' flamboyant style that it had to it. Accompanied by some of the sickest editing i've ever seen in any action film ever.

The story was an origin story, as well. I think people wanted to see a Joe movie with the Force already establish with years of conflict with Cobra. Chill out, it'll come soon, in the sequel that's already been confirmed.

A little while back I read something AC wrote and i think he was complaining about how C.C. and Destro weren't in it enough, (meaning as the costumed villains). Well what do you expect. Don't you want to know how they came to be? And that's what the movies about, the title says so itself. "The RISE of Cobra"

Man, G.I. Joe was the best action popcorn blockbuster flick i've seen this summer of 2009.