G.I Joe 2 moved to March 2013 - film conversion to 3D

[Warhammer]

Goodness, this is a huge mess. I think it's safe to assume that if anything, they will re-film the whole scene where the Joes get ambushed near the beginning. Duke will be in critical condition and near the end of the movie, they'll throw in another scene with Duke recovering. That's the only scenario I see because honestly, they'd have to re-film the whole entire thing if Duke becomes involved in the plot.

Horrible. I was so excited to see this movie too, but I'm sure the film we will see next March will at least a bit better than the one we would have seen next month if the reports are true. MY only concern is...if they actually do end up making Duke integral to the plot, they will practically be making a whole new film. One has to wonder how much the budget will increase, not even including the already wasted marketing and the NEW marketing for next year.

[Snikt]

I really can't believ how messed up this is. Who would've thought one actor could hold such authority without really doing anything

Honestly, I hope no one holds this against Tatum. He didn't ask for this.

He's not my favorite actor, but he is growing on me.

[Miken Ayers]

My guess would be Duke goes on either a solo mission or is given a small team of Joes who are little more than extras, and through extra scenes with The Rock or Flint talking to him on a radio his mission is "assisting" the overall conflict.

[Snikt]

That would be kinda cool. But it makes me wonder what they're actually going to add.

Duke's death was actually one of the things that had me curious about this film. I guess I didnt need to see it to. Find out that he died .

Tatum may not be my fav actor, but Duke was always my favorite Joe

[Miken Ayers]

Originally Posted by Snikt

That would be kinda cool. But it makes me wonder what they're actually going to add.

Duke's death was actually one of the things that had me curious about this film. I guess I didnt need to see it to. Find out that he died .

Tatum may not be my fav actor, but Duke was always my favorite Joe

The article mentioning this was the first I learned of him dying. From the trailers it seemed he survived the massacre.

[TheVileOne]

The idea of people going, "You know what this movie needs more of? Channing Tatum," is hilarious in itself.

No offense but the dude is still not a legitimate draw. 21 Jump Street and The Vow were successful but you know what? So was the first Step Up and also Dear John. Doesn't mean the guy is the next Tom Cruise.

I don't see how making Tatum the new star is going to save the flick. But whatever.

[Snikt]

I agree that adding tatum may or may not make a better movie, it's nice to not have the character killed off so quickly

[Balthus Dire]

Originally Posted by RakuMon

Looks like Picard's got some facepalming to do:

http://www.avclub.com/articles/gi-jo...dress-i,75820/

When Paramount let slip last week that it was moving G.I. Joe: Let's Try This Again from its plum June 29 première all the way to March 29, 2013, the official explanation was that the studio needed that nine-month delay to add the 3-D that makes films visible to the modern eye. But surprisingly, there may be more to it than that suspicious, rash last-minute decision to undergo a costly conversion that has not necessarily been proven to contribute to a movie's success. Deadline did some typically self-congratulatory investigative reporting and discovered that, actually, the real reason is that test screenings for the film were "mediocre to bad," not least because the sequel chooses to [SPOILER FOR ANYONE WHO CANNOT INFER THINGS FROM TRAILERS OR GENERAL PLOT SUMMARIES] kill off Channing Tatum's character, a decision made well before Channing Tatum became among Hollywood's most marketable stars (though this was an outcome that, to be fair, only the most sophisticated crowd-sourced algorithms could have predicted).

Therefore, the film has now reportedly been "reworked" to increase its overall quotient of Tatum—in particular, to go with its added dimensions, some additional depth to Tatum's character's relationship to Dwayne Johnson's, which is the sort of thing that means the difference between a worthwhile G.I. Joe film and a hollow franchise sequel that treats its actors as living action figures to be posed holding various guns before being exploded, apparently. Now that last part may not even happen, as Deadline suggests a more ambiguous fate for Tatum's character, one that could provide the amount of Channing Tatum necessary to ensure this and any future G.I. Joe film's success. "But how will this affect the integrity of the sequel's already-promised, heavily marketed storyline?" asked no one.

Oh, God.....


...I just.......

[S. Grundy]

I like Tatum, so I'm fine with him not dying. But if the movie is a stinker, having more of his character isn't gonna save it.

[TheVileOne]

Originally Posted by Snikt

I agree that adding tatum may or may not make a better movie, it's nice to not have the character killed off so quickly

Then why did they set it up that way in the first place?

[Lencho01]

If that question was really asked at the test screening, it sounds like the executives are putting too much stock in Tatum's popularity and the problems with the film go way beyond the fate of Duke.

I still feel they'll have it that Duke was taken away instead of killed for whatever reason Cobra Commander has.

[CoreyIAN]

Wow, personally I can't stand Channing Tatum. I think he sucks as an actor. Don't understand why he is getting so many roles.

I really wanted to see GI Joe 2 badly just to see Duke gets killed, ............

If the rumours are true, and they're trying to bring Duke back to life and give him more screentime, I will be pissed......

They should just follow FOX, people complain about cyclops, professor x and jean dying in x3 the last stand but luckily FOX didn't reshoots and made changes......and I was one of those that enjoy watching x3 the last stand.

[Snikt]

Originally Posted by TheVileOne

Then why did they set it up that way in the first place?

From what I've heard and read (and I have no links to this) was that Tatum wanted a smaller role in the film...so they decided to kill him off; and I'm sure it was for shock value too. What other way to set a different tone for the film than to kill off one of your leading characters from the first movie (although it's not like they were killing off Hicks in Alien 3).

It seemed like many, including myself, thought Duke got killed off early in the film just from what we saw in the trailers.

Was I upset? No...I was intrigued. However, I was hoping they didn't kill him off. But again, him dying would not have been a make or break point for me. I was looking forward to seeing the movie anyway.

[Art Damage]

Wow this whole thing sounds like a mess.

[Octoberist]

Originally Posted by CoreyIAN

Wow, personally I can't stand Channing Tatum. I think he sucks as an actor. Don't understand why he is getting so many roles.

I really wanted to see GI Joe 2 badly just to see Duke gets killed, ............

If the rumours are true, and they're trying to bring Duke back to life and give him more screentime, I will be pissed......

They should just follow FOX, people complain about cyclops, professor x and jean dying in x3 the last stand but luckily FOX didn't reshoots and made changes......and I was one of those that enjoy watching x3 the last stand.

I think your hate is misguided.

[Balthus Dire]

I don't even hate Tatum as much as others (though I still think he's a dreadful actor) but seriously killing off Duke (not just Tatum) was the main thing that peaked my interest in this movie because it seemed like such an awesome departure from the lukewarm first film. Going back on that just makes me not care about this movie whatsoever. It's like Paramount went with a risky idea, then backed out because they were too scared to do something different...a month before release.

It's just a gong show, brah. I can only hope that the extra Tatum scenes are just a few minor scenes before his death so he can "bond" with The Rock like the audience was apparently complaining about. If he's full-on shoehorned back into the movie as a main character, this movie can suck it.

[Miken Ayers]

After putting some thought in it here's what I think happens. Duke and Roadblock being BFFs is either expanded upon earlier in the film or through flashbacks. Duke dies as planned and the movie progresses and ends.

Then we get an after credits scene of Cobra Commander talking to someone explaining that he's not getting off that easy, and the camera pans over to Duke in that tube we see a revived Storm Shadow coming out of in the trailer.

[Lencho01]

Originally Posted by Miken Ayers

After putting some thought in it here's what I think happens. Duke and Roadblock being BFFs is either expanded upon earlier in the film or through flashbacks. Duke dies as planned and the movie progresses and ends.

Then we get an after credits scene of Cobra Commander talking to someone explaining that he's not getting off that easy, and the camera pans over to Duke in that tube we see a revived Storm Shadow coming out of in the trailer.

That's the impression I get from that Deadline article. I'm still surprised they really killed him off since Duke was the main character. So whatever extra scenes they give for this bromance and the potential money from 3D in the international market must be worth it. Don't know about the rest of the film and how that can be fixed.

[Octoberist]

It's funny if Duke gets all the attention for his death, but the other members of the GI Joe from the first film (assumingly) all die like cannon fodder. I just hope they didn't kill Scarlett.

[TheVileOne]

There's nothing to suggest the other characters would even appear in the film to be "killed." It looked like Duke was the only one from the first movie. No Mainframe. No Heavy Duty. No Scarlett. And no Ripcord.

[Avenger]

It's too bad, I liked all of the group from the first movie, except for Ripcord. But if they're not specifically stated to be dead, and if we don't see their bodies, we all know that in the world of cinema, that means they can come back at any time.

[Octoberist]

Originally Posted by TheVileOne

There's nothing to suggest the other characters would even appear in the film to be "killed." It looked like Duke was the only one from the first movie. No Mainframe. No Heavy Duty. No Scarlett. And no Ripcord.

Which doesn't explain much. What, did they quit or got retcon out? Lame if soo. Especially with Scarlett being an important member of the team. But I guess it's better than killing her off..offscreen.

[Lencho01]

Has anyone outright asked Chu if everyone else was really dead? Wayons pretty much hinted his character was so and Nichols just said she was sad about not being in the sequel I think.

[Matt312]

Does anyone else think they should bring some new characters since their going to do major rewrite anyway? I think they should get shipwreck, quick-kick, and spirit. They should have Duke with the new Joe's on a separate mission and meet up with roadblock later on. And also have xamot and tomax aswell. Considering how poorly retaliation was reviewed, I think major write and reshoots are going to happen. 9 months is a bit much for just a couple of dukes not dead scenes.

[RakuMon]

Originally Posted by Matt312

Does anyone else think they should bring some new characters since their going to do major rewrite anyway? I think they should get shipwreck, quick-kick, and spirit. They should have Duke with the new Joe's on a separate mission and meet up with roadblock later on. And also have xamot and tomax aswell. Considering how poorly retaliation was reviewed, I think major write and reshoots are going to happen. 9 months is a bit much for just a couple of dukes not dead scenes.

I'm on board for a Quick Kick inclusion!!

Harry Shum, Jr. (Mike Chang from "Glee") would be perfect!

Check out this short film he did last year called 3 Minutes:

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

Plus, Chu and Shum have a history together with Chu's involvement with the League of Extraordinary Dancers: