G.I. JOE getting its own forum now that director is official?

[toddly6666]

G.I. JOE getting its own forum now that director is official?

 

[OptimusCannabis]

I don't think it's official yet.

 

[3dman27]

that would be cool

 

[OptimusCannabis]

Now he's not going to direct it, good news that is.

 

[Timstuff]

Now he's not going to direct it, good news that is.

I'd rather have Stephen Sommers as a director than see Action Man in there!

 

[OptimusCannabis]

My understanding was that Action Man was, and still is, going to be in it, regardless of director.

 

[Timstuff]

Not if we, the fans, threaten the producers with bodily harm!

 

[Octoberist]

Hollywood is a vicious circle, ain't it?

They never ever learn.

Paramont struck gold with Transformers. Despite some of the changes made, it was still (to me) Transformers. Was it perfect? No. Was it fun? Yes.

With GI JOE, it seems like they're going down the Catwoman route of making weird decisions.

What does Action Man has to do with GI JOE? I don't know? If there's no COBRA, this movie will stink. I promise to you.

 

[3dman27]

Hollywood is a vicious circle, ain't it?

They never ever learn.

Paramont struck gold with Transformers. Despite some of the changes made, it was still (to me) Transformers. Was it perfect? No. Was it fun? Yes.

With GI JOE, it seems like they're going down the Catwoman route of making weird decisions.

What does Action Man has to do with GI JOE? I don't know? If there's no COBRA, this movie will stink. I promise to you.

maybe a composite of cobra and SKAR from gi joe extreme would work?

 

[rdh007]

G.I. JOE getting its own forum now that director is official?

If that was the case, Superman would've had four or five different forums. With two different McG forums.

 

[Peyton Westlake]

1st of all, from what I read the powers that be already seem to have ruined this possible blockbuster by trying to incorporate many different heroes from GI Joe thru out the years. The reason for this was money. If they used a broad range of characters , the movie would appeal to a wider audience meaning more money. It makes sense from a business standpoint. The movie in general will suffer from trying to hard to incorporate too much, being watered down. But when they said they were including 'Action Man' , a British character and Jason Statham was rumored to play him, that did it for me. Anyone agree?
__________________

 

[3dman27]

afraid so peyton

 

[OptimusCannabis]

1st of all, from what I read the powers that be already seem to have ruined this possible blockbuster by trying to incorporate many different heroes from GI Joe thru out the years. The reason for this was money. If they used a broad range of characters , the movie would appeal to a wider audience meaning more money. It makes sense from a business standpoint. The movie in general will suffer from trying to hard to incorporate too much, being watered down. But when they said they were including 'Action Man' , a British character and Jason Statham was rumored to play him, that did it for me. Anyone agree?
__________________

I would like to add on to the topic of 'the amount of characters.' If this proposed G.I. JOE/War movie is going to be at all realistic it will have to have more characters. For the movie to 'seem real' it should be a reflection of the military and war itself. Overcrowded, raw grittiness is the best way to achieve this and the best way to achieve that is by including all the characters.

 

[toddly6666]

own forum or what?

 

[Still A ThorFan]

Cool Dude, my god. And they don't care one bit about our anger toward this f'n nonsense.

 

[Peyton Westlake]

Hollywood is a vicious circle, ain't it?

They never ever learn.

Paramont struck gold with Transformers. Despite some of the changes made, it was still (to me) Transformers. Was it perfect? No. Was it fun? Yes.

With GI JOE, it seems like they're going down the Catwoman route of making weird decisions.

What does Action Man has to do with GI JOE? I don't know? If there's no COBRA, this movie will stink. I promise to you.

Well said.