Three possible "Joe 2" directors named? [Archive]

Timstuff

02-11-2011, 03:11 PM

OK, according to Latino Review, they've learned the names of 3 possible directorial candidates who might be taking the helm on the sequel to GI Joe: Rise of Cobra. One of these names has me very excited, one has me yawning, and the last one has me cringing. So let's take a look see, shall we?

1.) F. Gary Gray - Of the three candidates, he's the one I'd trust to do the movie right. His director creds include The Italian Job (remake), Man Apart and Law Abiding Citizen. He has experience with action and thriller movies, and he's got the range that he could bring some real character drama to the Joe 2 which the first one was lacking. He's a definite upgrade from Sommers, and I'd say if he gets the gig the movie is in good hands.

2.) Jaume Collet-Serra - This gets a big "meh" from me. He's done a couple of horror movies that were met with lukewarm to mediocre reviews like House of Wax (remake) and Orphan. I honestly don't know what to expect if for some reason got the gig. He could be worse, better, or about the same as Sommers, but there's no real way to tell which. I haven't seen any of his work, but he's nothing to get excited about.

3.) John Chu - Three words: "AW HELL NAW!" If F. Gary Gray was the gold trophy in this lot, John Chu would be a big steamy dookie wrapped up in aluminum foil. Seriously, this guy is such a horrible suggestion that I hope to goodness that he was put in there as a joke. He is basically a music video director who makes feature films targeted at tasteless tweens. His major credits include the Step Up sequels, and (brace yourselves) Justin Bieber's new concert movie. Seriously, they might as well just have the movie directed by Aids if they're going to pick this clown.

No idea how accurate LR's source is, but if there's any truth in it, I hope F. Gary Gray is the one who gets the gig. We could actually get a very solid action film with him at the helm. As for the other two... Eh, if he doesn't get the gig, I hope Paramount digs a might bit deeper before they settle on a choice.

http://www.latinoreview.com/news/exclusive-g-i-joe-sequel-shortlist-directors-12563

tamron

02-11-2011, 11:20 PM

I agree, F. Gary Gray would be the choice if it were up to me.

The Italian Job was solid popcorn fare. And I've always thought The Negotiator is an underrated gem. Really solid thriller. Also, TIJ and Set It Off in particular show a solid ability to handle ensemble casts, another plus in a franchise like Joe.

TheVileOne

02-11-2011, 11:42 PM

Of those 3 F. Gary Gray is the only legit choice.

The Step Up sequels are ****ing horrendous.

cronosred

02-12-2011, 02:23 AM

Out of that list it's not hard to choose which one should get the job.

Timstuff

02-13-2011, 02:59 AM

I know, right? I can't help but wonder if the producers had already decided that they wanted Gray and just threw in the other two names for canon fodder during the selection process, just so they can say they looked at more than one director. :p

tamron

02-17-2011, 08:34 PM

The Hollywood Reporter saying it's down to Gray and Chu now.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/blogs/heat-vision/f-gary-gray-two-others-99696

Philly Phanboy

02-18-2011, 10:01 AM

Out of all the possible replacements this shortlist is truly awful.

I thought the whole idea of getting a replacement director was be an improvement on Sommers version. These guys are just hacks that will work cheap. :dry:

Timstuff

02-19-2011, 12:55 AM

The Hollywood Reporter saying it's down to Gray and Chu now.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/blogs/heat-vision/f-gary-gray-two-others-99696

So the middle option is gone. He recently got hired to another project, so that's probably the explanation. I just hope Paramount doesn't do a bunch of drugs and then choose Chu.

FilmNerdJamie

02-21-2011, 09:18 AM

Of the three, I'd pick Gray. But it's not a big deal if Chu gets the gig.

It's not like The Rise of the Cobra was some cinematic masterpiece and Chu would pull a Schumacher. It was a ridiculous movie; albeit enjoyable as Hell or "retardedly awesome" as I prefer to call it.

Timstuff

02-21-2011, 09:29 AM

FilmNerdJamie

02-21-2011, 09:56 AM

I have seen no evidence that Chu is good at doing action scenes. So far he's proven very proficient at making movies that teenage girls diddle themselves to, but that is not the kind of franchise that GI Joe is.

Same argument applies to Nolan before Batman, Favreau before Iron Man, Singer before X-Men, etc.

Timstuff

02-21-2011, 04:41 PM

The difference is that all of them were good at directing characters. People were willing to give them a chance because they knew that even if the action was meh, they could still expect good performances from the actors and an engaging story. Chu-- not so much. He makes obnoxious, noisy things that teenagers find pretty, and if he can't direct action then he has nothing going for him. I would rather they not take chances with this one.

Nathan

02-21-2011, 04:45 PM

They should get Bay away from Transformers and have him do G.I. Joe instead.

Timstuff

02-21-2011, 05:23 PM

GI Joe would have actually been a great property for Bay. However, I liked what Bay did with the first Transformers movie. ROTF was a disappointment even for me (normally I'm quite forgiving of a film for being loud and dumb, but ROTF took it too far), but I'm willing to give Bay another chance with #3 since I recognize that ROTF's script was affected by the WGA strike, so I remain cautiously optimistic about TF3.

GI Joe 2, with F. Gary Gray's direction and the writing of Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick could be one of the most surprising turnarounds for a franchise since Batman Begins, though. As long as they can either wrangle an acceptable performance out of Channing Tatum or recast him outright, my expectations are going to be quite a bit higher this time.

Gray's direction style has a lot more thought and nuance than Sommers', and since I expect that the script will be an improvement over the first one's beyond comparison, I think we could have a very solid blockuster on our hands. They've spent a lot more time in the writing phase on this one, which is certainly a good start, and as long as the production is not rushed and they hire Gray I think the movie will be in good hands. Even though I greatly enjoyed the first one in spite of its flaws, I'd get a great deal of satasfaction if the sequel managed to redeem the franchise in a lot of peoples' eyes. Bigger, funner, and smarter is what I'm hoping to see this time around.

Green Day

02-21-2011, 09:51 PM

I have not seen the first movie but on the list Paramount should hire Gray. I have not seen any of his films but from what I have heard most people have enjoyed them. John Chu is very unknown since he never made a true film just music videos and concert films. Paramount should play it smart gray most likely cost more but he should make a better movie which in results equal a better box office, and high dvd/blu ray sales.

cronosred

02-22-2011, 03:38 PM

They should get Bay away from Transformers and have him do G.I. Joe instead.

I don't think he would have done any better then Sommers, except I'm sure he would have added alot of unnecessary childish humor to the script. I'd take Rise Of Cobra over Revenge Of The Fallen any day of the week.

TheVileOne

02-24-2011, 06:03 PM

Chu is a terrible director. He makes lame ****ing dancing movies that have no plot and **** characters. No one even saw Step Up 3D.

It would be an absolute joke if he directed a GI JOE movie.

Rise of Cobra had stupid humor in it too.

cronosred

02-24-2011, 09:51 PM

Rise of Cobra had stupid humor in it too.

I don't dispute that but it was no way near Transformer levels which is why I find it funny when people think Bay would have made a better movie.

Project862006

02-25-2011, 08:56 PM

poor timstuff gonna be mad lol

Jon Chu chosen for Sequel

yes the man has given us such timeless classics as

Step Up 2:The Streets
Step Up:3D
Justin Bieber:Never Say Never

http://www.deadline.com/2011/02/paramount-drafts-jon-chu-for-g-i-joe-2/
(http://www.deadline.com/2011/02/paramount-drafts-jon-chu-for-g-i-joe-2/)

tamron

02-25-2011, 09:06 PM

Another crappy GI Joe movie coming right up. The property deserves better. A lot better.

FilmNerdJamie

02-25-2011, 09:16 PM

http://cdn1.gamepro.com/blogfaction/images/Indiana-Jones-2.jpg
(http://cdn1.gamepro.com/blogfaction/images/Indiana-Jones-2.jpg)

Boom

02-25-2011, 09:40 PM

FilmNerdJamie

02-25-2011, 09:46 PM

It's not like The Rise of the Cobra was some cinematic masterpiece and Chu would pull a Schumacher. It was a ridiculous movie; albeit enjoyable as Hell or "retardedly awesome" as I prefer to call it.

^What he said.

Project862006

02-25-2011, 09:57 PM

yeah but i actually think we got a worst director lol

cronosred

02-25-2011, 10:59 PM

This has got to be a joke, I mean really they chose the worst person from the list. If this film turns out bad Paramount will only have themselves to blame.

FilmNerdJamie

02-25-2011, 11:36 PM

Bad like you mean the first G.I. Joe movie? Seriously this isn't a franchise to put up on a pedestal especially after Rise of Cobra and the old cartoons from the 80s.

Project862006

02-25-2011, 11:44 PM

still it has it's fans just like any comic property

it deserves respect

not asking for an oscar caliber director but there were better directors on the short list

Sawyer

02-26-2011, 12:19 AM

Wow. You really traded up from Sommers didn't you, Paramount? You really-- *loses interest*

LostSon88

02-26-2011, 02:10 AM

Seriously.

I mean as one of the few people that actually enjoyed the first one...what the hell Paramount?

This guy? This is the best you could come up with? There's nothing about this guys resume that suggests he could deliver a quality sequel...even with the bar set low.

The guys got a background in directing ****ing dance movies!!! :doh:

cronosred

02-26-2011, 02:53 AM

Bad like you mean the first G.I. Joe movie? Seriously this isn't a franchise to put up on a pedestal especially after Rise of Cobra and the old cartoons from the 80s.

I liked Rise Of Cobra and would have liked an even better sequel but with this announcement I have little hope of getting it.

bapi

02-26-2011, 03:02 AM

The first movie was good, enjoyable but now with Chu and without Sienna and JGL... Romania and 50% of Rise of Cobra budget screams on me! Sad.

gkokujin

02-26-2011, 10:17 AM

This AMAZES ME. they had a choice between someone who directed decent action before and THIS GUY, and just like the ****** first movie, they pick the WRONG GUY...AGAIN

I give up on ANY HOPE in this franchise and will stick with GI JOE: RESOLUTE being the only new GIJOE movie.
Just like Transformers 86 was the ONLY Transformers movie

Project862006

02-26-2011, 12:45 PM

to be fair chu seems to be very passionate about the material

The one thing I felt was missing from the last Joe movie was the power of the punch. You want Joe to be tough. They are fun, but they are tough. I feel that you don’t want to make Joe too kidsie.

[G.I.] Joe, to me, is iconic. It is as American as Coke and the Boy Scouts. To have that kind of history in a brand is so rare these days. And that is so powerful. So you can’t treat Joe like its just another action movie. You can’t treat Joe as just another petty commercial movie. Joe has history. Joe has always been a part of what America is, and now the world. What it means to be a leader and a hero. For me, it is about the fun stuff like Storm Shadow and Snake Eyes, and all the gadgets. All of that stuff. But it has heart. Its heart is what America, and what heroes and leaders around the world, strive to be. I think that is what the brand needs. It needs the respect to be treated in that way.

LostSon88

02-26-2011, 01:59 PM

You know who else was passionate about their work?

Mark Steven Johnson of Daredevil and Ghost Rider "fame"...

Its nice that he has the passion. Doesn't necessarily mean he's the right man for this gig.

Oh and there was definitely no way they were gonna get JGL again to hide behind a mask...his career's really starting to take off since Inception.

Silvermoth

02-26-2011, 09:14 PM

Ha! You gotta laugh don't you? The director of Justin Beiber: Never say never directing G.I Joe 2. Well, that's what you get when you have people in charge who don't care about the subject matter but control everything.

In a way it makes me concerned Disney will pull something like this with something that's possibly interesting like a Marvel property. When you have people who control everything but don't care about it at all, a catrastrophe occurs.

Honestly I'm not too concerned about G.I Joe 2 anyway. I was never gonna see it and it was never gonna be art.

Crockett

02-27-2011, 04:47 AM

Why Paramount went with him I don't know, the only thing that keeps me interested as for now in the project is that the script is written by the writers of Zombieland.

Spider-Fan

02-28-2011, 07:13 AM

Wow. This choice is shocking. Not in a good way :csad:

Timstuff

02-28-2011, 08:35 AM

Well, it's official: this franchise has gone tits up. :(

Seriously, WHY Paramount!? You couldn't find ANYONE who was as desperate for a paycheck as Chu, but more talented? The only possible explanation I can come up with for why they chose Chu and not F. Gary Gray is that the strong box office for the first film in spite of the mixed-to-negative reviews sent the signal to Paramount that "people will watch pretty much anything these days," so now they're not even going to try. It's a darned shame because I really thought that this had potential as a series if they raised the bar for the sequel, but apparently Paramount has dropped all pretenses of pleasing the fans and is hoping people will watch this just because they saw the first one. As a GI Joe fan who actually enjoyed one, it pains me greatly to see that of all the candidates Paramount was considering, they chose the absolute worst. After The Last Airbender though, I should have known better than to expect anything more from them than to do the exact opposite of what they should.

I might occasionally check up on this project out of sheer morbid curiousity, but I am by no means expecting it to be an improvement over the first one-- or even of equal quality, for that matter. As far as I'm concerned if this movie turns out decent it will be a fluke that will take me completely by surprise.

cronosred

02-28-2011, 04:14 PM

I wonder if Paramount chose Chu or if the other directors passed on the film and he was all they had left. I do hope Paramount realizes it's not as hard to make a profit on a low budget documentary of a popular teen idol as it is on a big budget action movie based on an 80's property

Sawyer

02-28-2011, 04:26 PM

It's almost like Paramount is trying to make Transformers look better by compairison. :csad:

Well, guess what, Paramount? Mission accomplished. :o

Timstuff

02-28-2011, 05:10 PM

You know what this is? This is Paramount rebelling against the idea that they need the support of the fans to make money. They are out to prove that it doesn't matter who they choose as director, because the drooling masses are all going to watch it anyway. They're taking GI Joe, which is the ULTIMATE testosterone-fueled fantasy for boys, and they are giving it to a director who ONLY MAKES MOVIES FOR GIRLS.

NO fan is supporting this, and if they have I have not seen any evidence of it. The closest thing to support I've seen is "eh, he might not be too bad." Paramount could not possibly have assumed that the fans would get behind a director who made a Justin Bieber movie, which tells me that they've concluded that statistically, fan reactions do not matter, and therefore they have a free hand to do whatever they want.

This is BS. I saw Rise of Cobra in theaters TWICE and defended it relentlessly online in spite of the vocal criticisms of some fans. I was convinced that GI Joe 2 would be an improvement over the first one thanks to an improved script and a better director, but I do not think that any script is good enough to save this project from the direction Paramount wants to move it in. Apparently, Paramount thinks it's more important to get tweenage girls who diddle themselves to Justin Bieber posters to watch this movie than it is for the fans to back it.

Well to Paramount, I say screw you. You'll be lucky enough if you can get me to watch Transformers 3 this summer, but if this is the amount of "respect" you have for these franchises, then don't count on even that much. Even someone who is as forgiving as me is not going to give my blind loyalty to a project that is this ass-hatted from the outset. After The Last Airbender, I've gotten a lot harder to fool. If they can't even get a good director for this movie then there is no hope.

cronosred

02-28-2011, 09:35 PM

Philly Phanboy

03-01-2011, 02:03 PM

Has there been any mention if they are going to film G.I. Joe 2 in 3D? Other than Chu having worked on his last dance movie in 3D, I can't for the life of me understand (based on his resume) how this guy could have been chosen as the best candidate. :huh::up:

Timstuff

03-02-2011, 09:21 PM

They probably picked him because he is cheap and he will not fight with the studio. The only possible reason they would have picked him due to his resume is because Paramount is so worried that this movie will not appeal to girls that they are completely overcompensating. They picked Channing Tatum as Duke because he's essentially the distaff counterpart to Megan Fox, and now they are picking a director who makes movies for girls because they are more worried about gaining the female demographic than they are about keeping the male demographic.

I keep waking up in the morning hoping to find out that this was all a bad dream, or an April Fools' joke that got out early. And then, reality kicks me in the nads again. :(

S. Grundy

03-03-2011, 06:22 PM

CelticPredator

03-03-2011, 08:07 PM

Hey guys, it's ok. He's a HUGE fan of GI-JOE! Paul WS Anderson is a HUGE fan of Aliens and Predators....and so were The Strause Brothers! It's going to be OK people! Big Fans = Quailty movies!

:o

FilmNerdJamie

03-03-2011, 09:13 PM

CelticPredator

03-03-2011, 10:05 PM

I wouldnt give this guy a chance if you paid me.

Timstuff

03-04-2011, 03:59 AM

I'll gladly give him a shot-- if it means they'll have to find a new director. :twisted:

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/3373/3966131madscientistwith.jpg

LostSon88

03-04-2011, 04:32 AM

I think some of you guys are blowing the choice of director way out of proportion. He's not my first choice but I'm willing to give him a shot.

He was probably chosen because he was cheap and the studio probably thinks he'll stay within the budget of the film, something Sommers didn't do. The thought that he was brought in to wrangle to tween girl demographic is ridiculous.

He was brought in because he just made Paramount some serious money with that freakin' Bieber movie "Never Say Never,"...and of course by the logic of Hollywood, he can most definitely do it again.

:doh:

Timstuff

03-04-2011, 12:00 PM

Jackass 3D made nearly 200 million dollars. Clearly, Jeff Tremaine would have been the perfect guy to direct The Hobbit. You snooze you lose, Hollywood!

cronosred

03-04-2011, 05:40 PM

Jackass 3D made nearly 200 million dollars. Clearly, Jeff Tremaine would have been the perfect guy to direct The Hobbit. You snooze you lose, Hollywood!

Maybe WB will get him to replace Nolan for future Batman movies.

LostSon88

03-05-2011, 12:57 AM

So first the underwhelming director is announced, followed by the rumor that only 3 characters are returning...this sequel really is sounding better by the day!!

:o

Donut

03-05-2011, 06:35 AM

I guess most of the budget went into hiring that amazing director they have

Silvermoth

03-05-2011, 05:07 PM

well, at least now we know that with a studio that really doesn't care this much for a franchise they're putting $150 million dollars in we know Sommers never really had a chance.

Hopefully people go a bit easier on him now and don't blame him as much for G.I Joe 1. I for one still love 'The Mummy'

Timstuff

03-05-2011, 07:25 PM

They're releasing it on August 10, a week after Jason Bourne 4 and the Total Recall remake that no-one wanted. There's pretty much no hope of this movie making money, so I'm guessing it will have a pretty small budget so that Paramount can bury the costs in merchandising royalties. This could very well be the most half-assed sequels of the decade. Barely any returning cast, a completely mismatched director, a unenviable release date... The only thing that could make this movie worse is if the script royally sucks, but even if the script doesn't suck it won't be enough to save the film. The only thing that I liked from the first film that still has even a chance of being in the new movie will be Snake Eyes and Storm Shadow, and even then, they might re-cast Snake Eyes just to spite us. They have no reason not to at this point, judging by all the mistakes they're making so far.

This is almost surreal... This movie sounded so promising at first, I was convinced that this would win back a lot of the fans who turned their noses up at the first movie. We were going to get a script from the Zombieland guys, and it looked almost certain that F. Gary Gray was going to direct it. Now, it's all fallen apart. As much as I like Zombieland, it's the only movie those guys have written that we've actually seen. If Paramount believes their GI Joe 2 script was trashy enough that it wasn't worthy a director better than Jon Chu directing, then all bets are off as to whether or not they are one-hit-wonders.

CelticPredator

03-05-2011, 08:28 PM

Well, i'm sure they'll butcher the script. But let it be known, their Deadpool script is amazing. So, dont blame them for this movie sucking.

Timstuff

03-05-2011, 10:37 PM

I won't blame them if the movie sucks. However, no matter how good, once it enters Paramount's hands there's nothing to stop it from being wrecked. I'm sure once the studio head's wife has read it and their little son jimmy looks over the storyboards it's going to be awful. However good it is, they're going to bring it down to the quality of everything else. Also, I'd be surprised if they had been mandated that early not to use characters like Scarlett in the movie, so chances are there will be re-writes from a ghost writer or some other such person to write her out of the film and / or replace her with another female character (in that example).

Hotwire

03-06-2011, 03:39 PM

Some of you amy know, I'm not one to usually jump on the, "This is gonna suck!" bandwagon, but....

A guy who has directed nothing but 2 lame dance movies and a bio-pic on Justin Beiber? Was Uwe Boll busy? I normally give movies, especially comic/TV adaptations the benefit of the doubt, and reserve judgment until I see the finished product, but I have almost no faith in this project now. I actually kind of enjoyed the first one, in spite of it's flaws. Oh, well.

If anyone knows of some work he's done that could change my mind, please share.

Timstuff

03-06-2011, 06:43 PM

^ It's amazing how little support this project is getting, even from people who liked the first one (like me). Hiring Jon Chu was the kiss of death for this project, and it's been nothing but bad news ever since. :(

LostSon88

03-06-2011, 08:38 PM

For me its the lack of returning characters that officially killed it. The director is lame but a part of me still had a tiny sliver of hope that maybe he could produce something watchable.

But with the announcement that only 3 main characters are returning? That did it. It's like, what's the point if you're seemingly going to half ass it from the get go?

Spider-Fan

03-07-2011, 08:40 AM

Only Duke, Snake Eyes, and Storm Shadow are coming back? Why even bother sequeling it :dry:

cronosred

03-07-2011, 12:15 PM

I wonder if they will even follow the story set up in the first movie.

I SEE SPIDEY

03-07-2011, 02:00 PM

Bug-Eyed Earl

03-07-2011, 02:02 PM

I'm pretty sure she meant "returning ACTORS." You can't do a GI Joe movie without Cobra Commander

FilmNerdJamie

03-07-2011, 02:45 PM

The reason the studio is cutting costs is because they'd be stupid not to. The first movie overpreformed it's low expectations but it still underperformed in relation to it's budget and marketing and it wasn't greatly received either. It couldn't even make back that 175mil it cost to make in the states and although overseas is important to the stuidos they get a bigger piece of the pie from U.S/Canada.

This series never had any serious franchise potential and Paramount was smart enough to know that once the haze of the first bigscreen GI: JOE movie wore off the second one wouldn't do as well.

More like $200+ million, and yeah it didn't do awesome - OK at best.

If Paramount didn't lose The Avengers to the Mouse, then we wouldn't be talking about a G.I. Joe sequel for next August. They can't just have Star Trek 2 next summer even though it'll be one of the monster hits of 2012. Gotta have more than merely one big genre tentpole and thus Joe 2 suddenly got fast-tracked after months of dead-silence upon the Zombieland writers (hiring them was the easiest and cheapest part of the process - just because they were hired, didn't mean the sequel was for sure a go) turned their stuff in.

I'd say be grateful that a sequel is happening.

TheVileOne

03-08-2011, 02:27 AM

I'm not grateful at all. Cheap director. None of the main cast coming back. This screams B movie here. This is going to be a cheapo lame-o sequel no one is going to see.

I don't see how Chu can service even an awesome script by the ZOMBIELAND guys. I'm sure the trailer might have some cool WHIZ BANG STUFF in it but this movie is DOA. They should basically wipe the entire slate clean and just start over again in several years.

I'm going to have some serious questions for Hasbro reps when I see them again.

CelticPredator

03-08-2011, 02:45 AM

Bringing back Tatum was a huge turnoff. The Chu guy only adds fuel. I hate Tatum.

Spider-Fan

03-08-2011, 01:10 PM

I wasn't even a big fan of the last film (had entertaining parts). But, my already low interest in this sequel only gets lower when you have no one coming back. Tatum sucks, and he is one of the only ones. I mean, no Cobra Commander in a GI Joe film? Huh?

This is going to suck hard core. Prob make Revenge of the Fallen look like Citizen Kane by comparison.

CelticPredator

03-08-2011, 10:02 PM

There wasnt a Cobra Commander in the last movie....just some dude with a clear vagina face mask. :hehe:

UltimateJustin

03-09-2011, 04:17 AM

Maybe, just maybe, this will have a 'Mortal Kombat Annihilation' edge to it. In that it's soo bad that you vomit.

AVEITWITHJAMON

03-10-2011, 09:54 AM

Yeah, I actually found the first movie quite entertaining and was actually looking forward to a sequel, not so much now. this all just sounds terrible. SS and SE were easily the best characters in the last movie, but I dont want JUST them and Duke to be the movie, we need some other characters as well, this just sounds ****!

Timstuff

03-10-2011, 12:01 PM

Maybe, just maybe, this will have a 'Mortal Kombat Annihilation' edge to it. In that it's soo bad that you vomit.

That's a cruel thing to say to MKA. MKA was actually more entertaining than the first one just because it was so stupid that it was a great unintentional comedy. I have no reason to believe there will be anything funny about what Paramount is going to do to GI Joe.

TheVileOne

03-10-2011, 04:51 PM

MKA is most likely a good comparison to what is happening here.

Timstuff

03-10-2011, 10:06 PM

Pretty much.

Movie 1: Silly but enjoyable popcorn fun.
Movie 2: Retardation beyond belief-- may funny with the addition of alcohol.

The Overlord

03-12-2011, 11:52 PM

More like $200+ million, and yeah it didn't do awesome - OK at best.

If Paramount didn't lose The Avengers to the Mouse, then we wouldn't be talking about a G.I. Joe sequel for next August. They can't just have Star Trek 2 next summer even though it'll be one of the monster hits of 2012. Gotta have more than merely one big genre tentpole and thus Joe 2 suddenly got fast-tracked after months of dead-silence upon the Zombieland writers (hiring them was the easiest and cheapest part of the process - just because they were hired, didn't mean the sequel was for sure a go) turned their stuff in.

I'd say be grateful that a sequel is happening.

I see no reason to grateful, I would rather have no sequel then a bad sequel.

Timstuff

03-13-2011, 02:52 PM

^ Same here. They shouldn't get to spit in my eye and expect me to say "thanks for the spit!"

FilmNerdJamie

03-13-2011, 04:05 PM

That would be a valid point if the first movie wasn't so terrible; albeit in an entertaining manner. It's still a bad movie made by a director who's made some pretty bad movies and in fact was fired off it during post-production for awhile.

This isn't a franchise worthy of putting up so high on a pedestal, and these whiny reactions to Chu is laughable frankly.

TheVileOne

03-13-2011, 09:13 PM

FilmNerdJamie

03-14-2011, 06:16 AM

They aren't laughable at all FilmNerdJamie. To me it just reinforces that there is no hope for the sequel at all. Some hoped maybe for a fresh start but that definitely won't happen now.

I think its more laughable to say we should be GRATEFUL for a sequel. I honestly would've rather they just let the franchise go for now and maybe revisit it in a couple of years. The first movie IMHO did not do well enough to justify a sequel. And now they are going with this cheap B-movie approach for a sequel that will barely have any of the actors back anyway. Seems pointless to do.

The only remarks pertaining to this movie here were "If they hire Chu, then ****.THIS.MOVIE!" prior to his hiring. Followed by the loud whining about how the sequel was suddenly "doomed" and "THEY DON'T CAAAAAAAARE!"

All without a single frame being shot, not knowing the full details (such as what new characters are showing up), simply not giving the dude a chance and once again this franchise (especially after Rise of Cobra and that animated series, which I loved as a kid, but is also very bad) being treated as something prestigious.

Rise of Cobra was a pure B-movie with an incredibly high (read: $200 million+) budget. So just because the sequel is having a considerably tighter budget (hence why Sommers was left go because his price-tag was too high and people like Chu, F. Gary Gray and Jaume Collet-Serra were up to replace him) doesn't make it any less of a B-movie than the first.

So yes, these reactions are laughable.

TheVileOne

03-15-2011, 06:09 PM

I've seen Chu's work, I don't think he deserves a chance. And the only reason the first movie cost so much was because it was rushed into production during a strike period. That's why the movie cost so much yet looked so cheap and ridiculous on screen. Visuals looked terrible and half-finished.

Dr. Evil

03-15-2011, 07:16 PM

There is only one true GI Joe Movie:

DN034sBeF4c&feature=related

That other one is a fabrication.

Timstuff

03-18-2011, 12:32 AM

All movies are a fabrication. The old movie was even crappier than ROC.

Spider-Fan

03-19-2011, 05:51 PM

The cartoon GI Joe film was TERRIBLE! And I do mean, TERRIBLE!!! In every way.

Zanham

03-22-2011, 08:35 AM

Jon Chu chosen for Sequel

yes the man has given us such timeless classics as

Step Up 2:The Streets
Step Up:3D
Justin Bieber:Never Say Never

http://www.deadline.com/2011/02/paramount-drafts-jon-chu-for-g-i-joe-2/
(http://www.deadline.com/2011/02/paramount-drafts-jon-chu-for-g-i-joe-2/)
:dry:

:angry:

:argh:

G.I. Joe IS NOT ABOUT DANCING AND CHOREOGRAPHY!!!

WHAT THE HELL!?!?!

CAN SOMEONE PLEASE GET THE GODDAMNED KIDS OFF THE TELEVISION SCREENS AND OUT OF THE MOVIES!!!