Movie Review: G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra

[AvanteRedGarde]

Movie Review: G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra


by the Revolutionary Anti-Imperialist Movement


http://raimd.wordpress.com

G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra is a Hollywood action movie packed with CGI-enhanced martial arts; explosions; sci-fi hi-tech weapons; chase scenes and topped off with near superhuman ‘good’ and ‘bad guys.’ Typical of Hollywood-type action movies, the plot centers around preventing the bad guys from attaining global dominance. G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra, like another summer blockbuster, Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen, is one of many movies that promotes militarism and by extension imperialism.


The story opens with a weapons dealer, McCullen (later revealed as bad guy, Destro), showing off a new high-tech weapon, the Nanomite warhead. The weapon, loosely based on emerging technologies, is said to be able to destroy “any and all material in its path.” The first to procure this new weapon is the United States. The main protagonist, Duke, is charged with leading a NATO force to deliver four of the warheads. The audience is never challenged to ask why the U.S. wants or gets this weapon, let alone four of them, nor what would happen once it gets them. Instead the plot predictably begins when the warheads are stolen by the ‘bad guy’ Cobra force.


Unlike the G.I. Joe toys and cartoons, the new live-action G.I. Joe force is multinational, consisting of the “top men and women of the best military units of the world.” Prior to the theft of the Nanomite warheads, it is unclear what purpose such an elite military force might serve. The two male protagonists who join the G.I. Joe force after the start of the movie, Duke and Ripchord, seem more interested in running around in suits which give them superhuman strength and speed than serving any humanitarian or even patriotic ends. At the beginning of the movie, Ripchord expresses interest in joining the U.S. Airforce simply so he can pilot military jets.


As the movie develops, the G.I. Joe force must stop the Cobra from destroying Washington D.C., Bejing and Moscow. The leader of the Cobra force is the Cobra Commander, a former friend of Duke’s who wants to use the Nanomite technology to attain global power. The Cobra Commander is aided by Destro the weapons dealer, a small army of mind-controlled fearless soldiers, and the Baroness, a former love interest of Duke’s who is also mind-controlled throughout most of the movie.


In the real world, where both high-tech weapons capable of small and vast destruction and various elite, multinational, sometimes private military units exist, bad guys like the Cobras don’t. In the real world, millions of people die from starvation and malnutrition, not violent conspiracies to usurp global power. The system responsible for these deaths, imperialism, also creates conditions whereby oppressors join the military for the ‘thrill’ of using destructive weapons, flying fast and blowing things up. However, these people are not heroes.


Today, in the real world, most state militaries and elite multinational forces serve to maintain the imperialist system which starves millions. Taken out of the context of imperialism and global class systems, there is no need for elite military units. Action movies such as G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra and Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen create ridiculous fictional stories in which imperialist militaries are portrayed not as the protectors of global class structure, but as playing a positive role for humanity. ‘Ordinary,’ relatable characters such as Duke and Ripchord, who, in real life would play a mundane role in a profoundly awful system, are seen as both more significant and depoliticized: they’re “in the middle of the action” and supposedly saving the world. Amerikan and First World audiences, who are not routinely subjected to imperialist threats and aggression, might find themselves envious of such adventures and abilities. And whereas First World movie-goers, people who economically benefit from imperialist militarism, can’t join or cheer for the G.I. Joe force in real life, they conveniently can the U.S. military, NATO, Blackwater (now called Xe), the IDF and various other imperialist military organizations.

[Invader Zim]

I'm sorry but it is physically impossible for me to accept a negative review of a film with Christopher Eccleston in it. Even when watching Gone in 60 Seconds, which all my senses told me was a bad film, I knew it to be good because Christopher Eccleston played the bad guy.

[GPDP]

I've learned not to criticize movies due to their shit politics. It is pretty much a given in this day and age for Hollywood to promote the status quo, or at least not question it seriously.

If it sucks, it's because it's boring.

[KC]

Movies like this are a dime a dozen; I rarely go to the theaters anymore because of the terrible acting, terrible plot/character development, heavy reliance on CGI and explosions and probably a million other things I could think of. Movies and network television is pretty much just a series of stimulating images, whose plot only serves to link these scenes into a "comprehensible" whole.

However, I'm not against movies that have all of this stuff; when it's taken to the point where it's just cheesy it's pretty entertaining (off the top of my head Cronenberg's Scanners is a good example, primarily for the comically stiff acting of the protagonist). But when they try to implement it into a serious "action film" as they have done here I pretty much know it's going to be bad.


I've learned not to criticize movies due to their shit politics. It is pretty much a given in this day and age for Hollywood to promote the status quo, or at least not question it seriously.

Well, that's always how Hollywood has been. They are essentially a factory that produces films as commodities. Sure, every once in a while a good movie (political or not) will come out of Hollywood, but they're pretty few and far between. Moreover, you have these directors and screenwriters who have absolutely no political education and who are simply concerned with writing a story and producing a film that sells and/or entertains. In cases like that you are bound to get "non-political" movies that "promote imperialism" or whatever nonsense the OP is claiming. The problem isn't necessarily in the fact that these people were consciously attempting to "promote imperialism" but that they have absolutely no knowledge of the matter on which they are writing. This is evident from other perspectives as well; for example, I am an engineer and can point out engineering flaws in films that anyone with a hint of engineering knowledge would have never dreamed of putting in a film. The most popular example, though, is in medicine. The misrepresentation in proper procedure, or even the capabilities, of modern medicine in films is mindblowing.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Sounds like a fun movie. :D

[Agrippa]

It's actually a very colorful, cleverly written review. The only problem is the obvious "anti-imperialist" / "Third Worldist" ideological bias of the authors.

For example, Blackwater (leftie America's favorite whipping boy since Enron, Nike, and Wal-Mart) and the (evil Jewish) I.D.F. are mentioned as forces of imperialism, but not the PLA, the FSB, etc., despite the author's (correctly placed) emphasis on how G.I. Joe has been updated to reflect a neo-colonial co-operation between old and new imperial powers.

Furthermore, while even workers in the "first world" have indeed received social privileges, this commentary becomes less and less relevant as the neo-colonial era of capitalist imperialism marches forward. In what urban areas in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin America are the masses not clamoring for bootlegged G.I. Joe DVDs, so they can cheer for the "good guys" just like the spoiled first world workers?

The "third worldism" of groups like MIM (before it became a joke) and now RAIM (which seems to have borrowed all of MIM's half-sane members) has always reeked of self-loathing.

[Pogue]

Its good to see the Revolutionary Anti-Imperialist Movement is doing things so pivotal for the defeat of imperialism such as criticising films.

Top show, Mao would be proud!

[GPDP]

The most popular example, though, is in medicine. The misrepresentation in proper procedure, or even the capabilities, of modern medicine in films is mindblowing.

Also, technology and computers. Apparently, according to the latest Die Hard, you can blow up any gas pipeline in the country by hacking.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Also, technology and computers. Apparently, according to the latest Die Hard, you can blow up any gas pipeline in the country by hacking.

Seriously?! I don't remember that bit. Although it has been a while since I saw the film.

[More Fire for the People]

I didn't like GI Joe as a kid. Now whenever I see the commercial for this film and here the lyric "I am an American badass" in the backgorund, I lol.

[Kronos]

G. I. Joe was my shit, ya'll. I had all of them when I was a kid. I used to take them apart and reassemble them with different body parts. Then I would rewrite their profiles. Like I would put Snake Eyes head on Swamp Rat's torso with Gun-Hoe's legs. Shit like that.

I even have the cartoon intro memorized:

[ ahem ]

"G.I. Joe is the code name for America's highly trained, special mission force. Its purpose, to defend freedom from the evil forces of Cobra.....a ruthless terrorist organization DETERMINED TO RULE THE WORLD!"

Good times.

[danyboy27]

seen the movie, its was good but i found the storyline relatively weak.

movie are for entertainement, if you take it seriously its your problem.

[Plagueround]

movie are for entertainement, if you take it seriously its your problem.

Yes, but at the same time, do you not think that movies reflect the attitudes of the times they are written in? Consciously or subconsciously, movies can push an agenda and persuade people to behave in ways they may not realize, or at the very least reinforce cultural attitudes (especially in a movie like this aimed at a large audience which relies on pro-america/capitalist democracy rhetoric, "sexy"/sexist portrayals of women, and gigantic explosions abound).

I've never been one to buy into to the idea of "the movie/video game/book made me do it", but I cannot deny they have some level of influence.

[danyboy27]

Yes, but at the same time, do you not think that movies reflect the attitudes of the times they are written in? Consciously or subconsciously, movies can push an agenda and persuade people to behave in ways they may not realize, or at the very least reinforce cultural attitudes (especially in a movie like this aimed at a large audience which relies on pro-america/capitalist democracy rhetoric, "sexy"/sexist portrayals of women, and gigantic explosions abound).

I've never been one to buy into to the idea of "the movie/video game/book made me do it", but I cannot deny they have some level of influence.

yes but the influance they have is proportional with the number of people watching them, and a movie wont be a success if a lot of people hate it.

filmmaker are influanced a lot by what people love to watch.

if people accept the values or simply dont care about the values displayed in a movie you cant blame the film maker or the film for that.

Personally i found the movie quite entertaining, loved the fictionnal technology displayed in it, and seriously, i couldnt care less if that technology was created by multinational company or a collective of imperialist nation.

[Plagueround]

if people accept the values or simply dont care about the values displayed in a movie you cant blame the film maker or the film for that.


And I agree with that to an extent. It's not as if these filmmakers are sitting in secret rooms discussing how they can inject propaganda into their films. However, what they put into their films gives us an idea of the culture and values of the society it was produced in.
What I get from it, in the case of G.I. Joe, is that the public is largely okay with the idea of manufacturing new and terrible weapons of mass destruction, so long as they're in the hands of the "good guys". If they weren't, there would probably be a lot more discussion and backlash against a movie like G.I. Joe. (And by this I mean I don't expect mass boycotts or proletarian revolution over a stupid movie, but that opinions of the movie would highlight this a bit more and people would express dissatisfaction).

The other thing I find amusing about the plot summary is it presents the idea that the world's superpowers, regardless of ideology, should band together to fight "terrorists", a very common sentiment coming from political leaders these days. Had the movie been made pre-1991, Cobra would probably be in the employ of the USSR. ;)

[danyboy27]

And I agree with that to an extent. It's not as if these filmmakers are sitting in secret rooms discussing how they can inject propaganda into their films. However, what they put into their films gives us an idea of the culture and values of the society it was produced in.
What I get from it, in the case of G.I. Joe, is that the public is largely okay with the idea of manufacturing new and terrible weapons of mass destruction, so long as they're in the hands of the "good guys". If they weren't, there would probably be a lot more discussion and backlash against a movie like G.I. Joe. (And by this I mean I don't expect mass boycotts or proletarian revolution over a stupid movie, but that opinions of the movie would highlight this a bit more and people would express dissatisfaction).

The other thing I find amusing about the plot summary is it presents the idea that the world's superpowers, regardless of ideology, should band together to fight "terrorists", a very common sentiment coming from political leaders these days. Had the movie been made pre-1991, Cobra would probably be in the employ of the USSR. ;)
well, maybe i got it all wrong, but to me the film just showed us how wrong it was to believe that for a second that a weapon could be secured in the hand of the good guys.

btw there is some episodes of the original GI joes series where the GI joes meet the russian and their counterpart, the Oktober guard.
eve tho they are at odd they both fight against their cvommon ennemies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oktober_Guard

enjoy.

[KC]

yes but the influance they have is proportional with the number of people watching them, and a movie wont be a success if a lot of people hate it.

filmmaker are influanced a lot by what people love to watch.

Mediocre filmmakers create films based on the desires of their audience. Great filmmakers create films based on desires not yet realized.

[danyboy27]

Mediocre filmmakers create films based on the desires of their audience. Great filmmakers create films based on desires not yet realized.

you need both.

[Killfacer]

wow good to know these lefties have alot of time on their hands. I assume they've had the revolution and have decided to spend their spare time writing reveiws for us to read.

Seriously? I mean the film looks crap and i used to liek the cartoon so it's always gonna be a bit of a kick in the teeth. Stop whinging.

[Dimentio]

To have the energy to review G.I Joe...

[RGacky3]

I'm sorry, but why in hell are leftist organizations writing freaking moview reviews?

[LOLseph Stalin]

Not that I'm entirely interested in seeing this movie, but I'm slightly sick of the fact that people here won't watch a movie due to the particular views portrayed. Sure, maybe it is about Imperialism and Militarism which as we all know are bad concepts but keep in mind it's a movie and isn't meant to be taken seriously. That's like a leftist not wanting to watch a particular movie because it's about a monarchy.


I'm sorry, but why in hell are leftist organizations writing freaking moview reviews?

Because apperently a fictional movie is meant to be taken seriously now. :rollseyes: It's quite sad what politics can do to some people.

[Plagueround]

Not that I'm entirely interested in seeing this movie, but I'm slightly sick of the fact that people here won't watch a movie due to the particular views portrayed. Sure, maybe it is about Imperialism and Militarism which as we all know are bad concepts but keep in mind it's a movie and isn't meant to be taken seriously. That's like a leftist not wanting to watch a particular movie because it's about a monarchy.



Because apperently a fictional movie is meant to be taken seriously now. :rollseyes: It's quite sad what politics can do to some people.

I don't think very many people are saying that. I won't go watch it because it looks like a shitty movie and its not worth the ticket price. :lol:

[RGacky3]

Fine, post in the chatter.

[LOLseph Stalin]

I don't think very many people are saying that. I won't go watch it because it looks like a shitty movie and its not worth the ticket price. :lol:

Yep. Exactly why I don't want to see it. You can't exactly call toys(or at least characters based off toys) blowing each other up for two hours entertainment. They should have stopped at Transformers. These movies seem like an attempt at consumerism to sell more G.I Joe and Transformer toys. They died out years ago and I'm sure there was a reason. :lol:

[Richard Nixon]

What a fucking idiotic and retarded review. I'm pretty sure commie movie reviews are churned out in this format:

The new movie [[Insert name]] is an evil capitalist propaganda piece. It portrays [[Insert evil capitalistic profession]] like the characters [[Insert name]] as good guys and heroes. In reality these [[Insert evil capitalistic profession]] are imperalist bigot racists who enjoy oppressing people and raping women.

[RGacky3]

What a fucking idiotic and retarded review. I'm pretty sure commie movie reviews are churned out in this format:

The new movie [[Insert name]] is an evil capitalist propaganda piece. It portrays [[Insert evil capitalistic profession]] like the characters [[Insert name]] as good guys and heroes. In reality these [[Insert evil capitalistic profession]] are imperalist bigot racists who enjoy oppressing people and raping women.
__________________

You could do the exact same thing with most Corporate news networks, just changing the words a little bit.

[LOLseph Stalin]

You could do the exact same thing with most Corporate news networks, just changing the words a little bit.

Like Fox News. :laugh:

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Fox News is a joke even by bourgeois standards.