Film Review: GI Joe

Growing up with some of the biggest toys and cartoons of all time, it is only natural that when Hollywood announces a film based on an infamous cartoon or toy line, my first instinct is to back into a corner, pull my shirt up over my eyes and pray for some good luck to strike down upon the scriptwriters, actors, and directors. Unfortunately, Lady Luck doesn't kiss them often enough, leaving true fans wanting more than what is delivered. GI Joe is kind of like that... only far worse.

The basic premise of GI Joe is this: Number 1 weapons designer McCullen has built four high-tech Nanomite warheads which he plans to sell to NATO. However, McCullen has a hidden motive, and he sends his own militia to attack the convoy assigned to transport the case of missiles. Conveniently, Ripcord and Duke (Marlon Wayanes and Channing Tatum, respectively) are in charge of leading the convoy, and fight to protect the warheads just as the GI Joe team arrives. As they succeed in protecting their precious cargo, they decide they want in on the covert operations led by General Hawk (Dennis Quaid). What follows is a mess of action flick, filled with predictable cliches and some of the worst special effects I've seen in a long time.

The first thing that must be noted is that the story is very weak and follows an extremely predictable path leading to a couple of "plot twists" that can be seen coming a mile away. Throughout the movie, there are flashbacks that are obviously supposed to be an attempt at character development as well as a way to explain little details, though they only focus on a couple of characters: Duke and Snake Eyes. I was hoping that there would be a flashback for each member of GI Joe so that we could see their individual backgrounds and their reasons for joining the elite group, but was disappointed. The flashbacks focusing on Snake Eyes' past, including his rivalry with his brother and why he chooses not to talk, are very well done, and are actually very engaging. However, the rest of the story is lacking, and it ultimately feels like an early 90's straight-to-video action movie.

Unfortunately, this feeling is not only caused by the weak plot. While GI Joe is nothing more than an all-out action film, the action is greatly hindered by the horrible, and largely inconsistent special effects. There are many, many computer generated scenes and objects in the movie, and all of them, yes, all of them, are very noticeable and poorly done. In fact, to make this more clear to everyone, one scene takes place in a wide expanse of snow. Nothing but snow. As a computer-generated polar bear runs across the surface, the special effects geniuses (I use this term loosely) didn't even take the time to show footprints in the snow, making the arctic circle have the appearance of a giant piece of white paper. Even the cartoon did a better job at special effects.

I would love to say that part of this film, aside from the excellent Snake Eyes flashbacks, was actually good, but I can't. The last thing that I would like to talk about is the acting. Channing Tatum's performance was terrible and completely unbelievable. It was impossible to sympathize with or care about his character, and unfortunately this is the same with every character in the film. In fact, the best acting was done by Ray Park who played Snake Eyes, and this was because he had absolutely no lines at all.

GI Joe was disappointing in just about every way possible. Films like this are the reason why fans like me, upon hearing that a movie based on our favorite franchises and series is being planned, run and hide instead of jumping with joy and excitement.

I give this film 1 Skull, only because the Snake Eyes flashbacks were so damn good.

Movie Review: The Collector

Love it or hate it, the Saw series has brought in a damn good amount of money and won over quite a few horror movie enthusiasts. While the first three films provided something fresh in the world of storytelling, giving us a killer with morals, and some of the most clever and unexpected twists along the way, the last two films have generally lacked the creativity and complexity that made the series so great. This is obviously due to the change in writers between the third and fourth Saw films. As the final film approaches, one can only be wary of how the film will hold up, and how it will complete the saga. If The Collector is a sign of what's to come, there may be a little bit of light at the end of the tunnel.

Written by the writers of Saw IV, V, and the upcoming VI, The Collector is a horror film that mixes a classic slasher-film formula with the traps and torture of Saw. The film begins with Arkin, a man who was hired as a handyman for a number of odd-jobs by a fairly wealthy family. However, Arkin holds some hidden motifs. Not only have the odd-jobs helped him earn some money in an attempt to save his wife and daughter from loan sharks, Arkin has been scoping out the place to plan for a break in. When Arkin takes his information to his crime boss, however, he is denied any help for the job and Arkin must go in alone to steal a precious stone from the family's safe. While in the house, he discovers that he is not alone, and that he may never escape.
Horror films tend to follow the same basic formula: The Set-Up, The Killing, The Survival, and The Reveal/Twist. The Collector is no different, but it does some of these things really well. Beginning with the set-up, the film gets off to a nice start with some great character development. After the characters are introduced (though only a few are key-players), the movie moves seamlessly into its second phase, and it puts Arkin in a much different situation than what we are used to seeing in horror films.

The killing phase of the film is done nicely, with some fairly creative things thrown into the mix. As Arkin is attempting to flee the house after realizing someone is there, he discovers the house littered with traps that would make Saw fans proud. While the traps are not high-tech pieces of heavy machinery, they are quite creative and seem much more like a human could have put them together. The film stays intense, using honest fear as it's engine rather than cheap jump-out-at-you scares that wannabe horror films use constantly. The Collector also does a good job at utilizing torture scenes and gore only when needed, and leaving many things up to the imagination. While much of the film works, there is still quite a bit that doesn't, especially toward the end, which ultimately leads to a "yeah, I totally saw that coming" sort of ending. The main problem that I found with the character of the killer is that you never really learn anything about the motivation behind everything. Even killers like Jason and Michael Myers has their reasons for doing what they did.

Throughout the film, however, Josh Stewart's (Arkin) performance is a little lacking, making it hard to care about his character and it tends to take away the feeling of urgency that the movie does so well. This is generally the same with the rest of the cast, though they aren't seen as much in the film. Aside from the acting, director Marcus Dunstan gets creative with his camera shots, and overall does a good a job making suspenseful scenes without ruining them with cheesy angles.

The Collector's soundtrack is filled with some truly dark electronic music, which seems to fit the movie well. However, at times it feels like the soundtrack is far to loud and chaotic, especially when there is music playing behind dialogue, as it drowns out the actors far too much. Still, after seeing the film, the first thing I thought about was wanting to purchase (or download, ahem) the soundtrack.

All-in-all, The Collector is a great horror film, though it felt a little lacking. Why is the killer committing these murders? Why choose this particular house? What does he do with his collection? These are just a few of the important questions that are left unanswered, with little to no information to allow the audience to decided for itself. The film is a breath of fresh air in a time where horror films offer no new scares or creative ideas, but still doesn't quite have what it takes to be the next big thing.

Allow Me to Introduce Myself...

I am ArCynic, author of this blog and friend to every reader. (Or foe, depending on how much you tend to disagree with my opinion). Let's get started with a simple exercise. I hated Juno. I loved the Dragonball movie.

Are you still reading? Well, then, congratulations, you managed to keep your cool in a very tense moment. How many objects did you hit? 1-2: Not bad, just enough to get the anger out. 3-4: Buy yourself a new keyboard, you earned it. 5-6: Who the hell are you, Gary Busey? You go ape-shit over me saying that I liked or disliked a certain film? Medication, my friend, may be your only answer to succeeding in life.

Anyway, I'm sorry to say that we got off on a bad start. I've already lied to you. I hated the Dragonball movie. As a fan of the series, it was a swift kick to the dragonballs. As a stand-alone film, well... It was still terrible. So don't worry, people, I'm not that kind of person that likes every film that comes along. In fact, I give every film equal chance walking in, and when I walk out (or press stop on the DVD player) I rate the film on a number of different factors, including acting, story, direction, yadda yadda yadda. I'm rambling. Time to move on to the reviews, or whatever else.

Oh... and I honestly did hate Juno.