Jump to content

Paramount Already Having To Do Damage Control For GIJoe Movie???


JayC

Recommended Posts

However I still don't like the idea of them changing Ripcord's race when there are actual black characters for them to choose from (Stalker?

 

With most of the public being militarily-illiterate, what do you think they would make of a character whose name is "Stalker"?? To actually have that character named as per his "function" and not be miscontrued, you'd need to call him "Tracker", "Point" or "Pathfinder"--which are actually OTHER characters.

Ripcord is a easy code-name to visualize with a character.

 

Ask Hama if he thinks its cool for Ripcord to be the team screw-up and the assclown of GiJoe? He'll say no!

In fact, there is no room for such a member on the team.

 

Charlie Sheen's character in Navy SEALS was just such an animal. His character provided one of the main driving threads in that film.

 

I'm behind Ccav. Hire hama! or one of us! i'm sure lots of fans could crank out better than what i'm seeing.

 

One of us? Man, I shudder to think of what any of "us" would do, even myself--I'd never want to tackle writing this movie.

I don't think Larry Hama is in exactly high-demand as a writer these days.....and his credentials for screenplays........I just dunno. He knows the mechanics of writing for sure, but is his stuff topical for feature-film audience?

Writing for feature films is a very different thing than a lot of other writing. Besides, the script is in hand for this thing, and they don't get a green-light unless Hasbro has signed off on it (which they doubtlessly have already).....they are not going to do major changes right now.

 

This movie will define GI Joe to the mass audience for a long time to come.

 

Its a movie based on a toy-line--what do you think the mass audience will think of it right now???

Last summer's Transformers made the robots cool and visually interesting, its definitions certainly didn't hurt sales at the boox office, video store, or toy store.

All they need to do is make it cool and hip to the modern audience and this movie can do well. The actual relationship to the toys is less important, because a lot of the people that see this movie will never buy the toys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 141
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I don't mind having an all new Joe, I just don't like the idea of taking a known character and completely spinning him into a different one and to top it off, changing his race

 

Well, Joe, keep in mind that this sort of thing has been done well in the past:

 

"Starbuck" from the new Battlestar Galactica series. A VERY different character than the original, but far more interesting the second time around.

 

 

Lets not forget casting Michael Clarke Duncan as The Kingpin in the Daredevil movie. The fans were at a uproar .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last summer's Transformers made the robots cool and visually interesting, its definitions certainly didn't hurt sales at the boox office, video store, or toy store.

All they need to do is make it cool and hip to the modern audience and this movie can do well. The actual relationship to the toys is less important, because a lot of the people that see this movie will never buy the toys.

 

 

I agree with Arrow, unfortunately it is true, this movie that should be for the fans, is in fact

for the General Audience. Which means it must be dumbed down and simplified for the common folk.

However, if your making a Movie FROM a toyline, it needs to represent it. Who gives a crap whether the non-toy buying fans buy toys, its supposed to be for the FANS.

 

However im still 100% sure that a Independent Studio with Hasbro's support could do better

then firmly implanted Hollywood people. Sommers directed the Mummy, Mummy Returns and Van Helsing. The only one i liked was Returns, otherwise the other two were top 10 contenders and made just enough to pay the bill. At least Micheal Bay can say he got them Double the money from Transformers.

 

Hasbro's own Money is at stake, the recent Success of Transformers may cloud thier judgement, If this Movie Bombs, it may be the final... and Real... " DEtH of Teh Lin3!1!!!" or in real terms, The franchise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last summer's Transformers made the robots cool and visually interesting, its definitions certainly didn't hurt sales at the boox office, video store, or toy store.

All they need to do is make it cool and hip to the modern audience and this movie can do well. The actual relationship to the toys is less important, because a lot of the people that see this movie will never buy the toys.

 

 

I agree with Arrow, unfortunately it is true, this movie that should be for the fans, is in fact

for the General Audience. Which means it must be dumbed down and simplified for the common folk.

However, if your making a Movie FROM a toyline, it needs to represent it. Who gives a crap whether the non-toy buying fans buy toys, its supposed to be for the FANS.

 

However im still 100% sure that a Independent Studio with Hasbro's support could do better

then firmly implanted Hollywood people. Sommers directed the Mummy, Mummy Returns and Van Helsing. The only one i liked was Returns, otherwise the other two were top 10 contenders and made just enough to pay the bill. At least Micheal Bay can say he got them Double the money from Transformers.

 

Hasbro's own Money is at stake, the recent Success of Transformers may cloud thier judgement, If this Movie Bombs, it may be the final... and Real... " DEtH of Teh Lin3!1!!!" or in real terms, The franchise.

 

okay... so the movie is made for the general audience, that is a cetainty.

 

but who the hell thinks that audiences wouldn't have been interested in seeing G1 characters on the screen?

 

 

picture a movei trailer with the G1 Transformers brought to life... autobots and decepticons jumping all over the screen.. fighting.. explosions... etc. You thnk anybody watching that would have said, "well.. I wish they would look like butt-ugly alien insects instead"

 

Do you think anybody who would have seen Green Goblin on the screen would have said, "I wish Green Goblin looked more like a cheesy power ranger villain"

 

"I wish Bullseye was bald and had a target branded onto his forehead"

 

"I wish Superman had a superbaby"

 

"I wish the X-men wore S&M black leather outfits"

 

"man, I wish Marlon Wayans was playing Ripcord and was hella funny"

 

 

uh no.. nobody is going to say those things. So why does Hollywood do it?

 

There is absolutely NO reason for many of the changes Hollywood makes to licensed material for its films.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No kidding..

 

Eh well. I think I kinda lost the fight with the TFs movie. Guess I'll be prepared to not see this movie either. At this stage in the game, all most of us can do is hope that whatever vision they okayed for this movie isn't gonna be too wretched. The problem with the "wait and see" approach is that if it turns out horrible, what is gonna be done about it after the fact?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They should have used hama if not to write the script then at least as a go to guy, are to over see the the writers and even to help in casting. Ripcord was one of my fav. figures growing up because he had good camo and bio now hes a screw up #yuk@# . They could have used falcon for that since he was allready a screw up in the last movie. I still dont understand this whole destro running cobra thing either, you whould think it was a givein that the leader should be cobra commander. Anyway i still think(wishfully and hopefully) that this is all crap put out by hasbro and paramont to throw us and the truth will come out at toy fair. Kinda like suprise we got ya @joker@ (dout it but maybe).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hama didn't need to write it... but he should have been a consultant... thats just how you make a good movie.. you go to somebody that knows something about what you are trying to portray.

 

check any good military film, they all have military consultants.

 

 

Hama should have been the GiJoe movie consultant.

 

 

and right.. Falcon could have been the screw up.. he is Duke's little brother afterall... haha

 

no need for Ripcord the goofball

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets not forget casting Michael Clarke Duncan as The Kingpin in the Daredevil movie. The fans were at a uproar .

 

And fans were quite justified in their outrage, as MCD totally sucked in that role. I'm sure that's what you were implying anyway, so I guess I'm agreeing with you.

 

Having thoughts about the production and those cast is fine I guess. What I original took issue with were the people already threatening to boycott the movie w/out having seen these various aspects in play- via a trailer or production photos. Hating the idea of a comedic actor (and a black actor to boot) as Ripcord seems superfilous to the overall potential quality of a Joe movie, even though I certainly empathize with the fan community uproar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you talk about defining GI Joe to the mass audience perfect example.........

 

A while back I was wearing a DareDevil T-shirt....this was back in like 2002 or whenever the movie came out. I ran into some casual friends and they all started giving me crap for wearing a DD shirt cause the movie was awful. They didn't really know much about DD but they KNEW the movie and what came along with it. Thats what I mean......I remember reading in the newspaper about Transformer collectors and fans before the movie came out and how the movie will spotlight collectors and fans of the series from Day 1. If this movie tanks and is pure crap when you tell people you collect GI Joe you will get crap......or people will say "Oh that movie was awful" Your hobby will be directly linked to whatever crapfest is on screen.......Transformers was liked overall by almost everyone....except hardcore GEEEWUNNNNers. (I can somewhat see what they were bitchin about, but at least you got Peter Cullen)

 

I don't hide the fact that I'm a Joe collector.......but this movie will define GI Joe to the mass audience in that way.

 

(Oh and I had to educate my friends on DD for a while after that)

 

This is also why Frank Miller will let no one touch his movies unless he has almost final say on everything.

 

Alan Moore completley disassociated himself with "V for Vendetta" and "League for Extradinary Gentlemen" because they butchered his stuff so bad.

 

I give props to both of them for doing comic movies the right way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't mind having an all new Joe, I just don't like the idea of taking a known character and completely spinning him into a different one and to top it off, changing his race

 

Well, Joe, keep in mind that this sort of thing has been done well in the past:

 

"Starbuck" from the new Battlestar Galactica series. A VERY different character than the original, but far more interesting the second time around.

 

That is a VERY good point that I think needs to be reiterated. The only problem is that I'm not sure I have as much faith in the creators of the GI Joe film... The people behind the new Galactica series seem intent on making "more" than a series. I have to admit that, like Transformers, I'm getting the impression that this is a money-making machine with little effort being put in to make it, I don't know, something MORE. I mean, take the X-Men movies - they cast Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellan. We're getting Marlon Wayans...

 

So are we getting "good" changes or just changes for change's sake?

 

 

This movie will define GI Joe to the mass audience for a long time to come.

 

Its a movie based on a toy-line--what do you think the mass audience will think of it right now???

Last summer's Transformers made the robots cool and visually interesting, its definitions certainly didn't hurt sales at the boox office, video store, or toy store.

All they need to do is make it cool and hip to the modern audience and this movie can do well. The actual relationship to the toys is less important, because a lot of the people that see this movie will never buy the toys.

 

To add to that, I'm not sure the TF movie has "defined" Transformers for anyone. Even the upcoming animated series is looking a lot more like G1 than the movie, so... I guess we'll see.

 

 

okay... so the movie is made for the general audience, that is a cetainty.

 

but who the hell thinks that audiences wouldn't have been interested in seeing G1 characters on the screen?

 

picture a movie trailer with the G1 Transformers brought to life... autobots and decepticons jumping all over the screen.. fighting.. explosions... etc. You think anybody watching that would have said, "well.. I wish they would look like butt-ugly alien insects instead"

 

Do you think anybody who would have seen Green Goblin on the screen would have said, "I wish Green Goblin looked more like a cheesy power ranger villain"

 

"I wish Bullseye was bald and had a target branded onto his forehead"

 

"I wish Superman had a superbaby"

 

"I wish the X-men wore S&M black leather outfits"

 

"man, I wish Marlon Wayans was playing Ripcord and was hella funny"

 

 

uh no.. nobody is going to say those things. So why does Hollywood do it?

 

There is absolutely NO reason for many of the changes Hollywood makes to licensed material for its films.

 

This is also a very, very good point! Again, changes for change's sake? I agree agree with CLAM on everything but the X-Men, because I can see why blue and yellow spandex may not work on camera. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What was once a great idea is quickly going south.

 

One positive I thought was the idea of maybe having George Clooney as Hawk. Hawk struck me as older, wiser, and a natural leader, and I think Clooney could have fit that bill perfect. Don't know if this will happen, but it would have been a positive.

 

Idea for people making the movie: DO SOME RESEARCH. Take a week and read the comics and watch the episodes. You have a chance to do something great, and you are blowing it.

 

The Transformers I can understand taking liberties on, but this? The characters should look like the characters. Bazooka should have a red football jersey. Gung Ho a blue vest and giant tattoo. Even if we see these characters briefly, they should look the part.

 

As for the characters who need to be focused on, Duke, Scarlett, Flint, Snake Eyes (and why they need a real actor and not just a stunt man if beyond me), Roadblock, maybe Stalker, Gung Ho, Hawk, Shipwreck, and a few other classics. The whole Marlon/Ripcord bit is just plain bad.

 

I have a very bad feeling what could have been a very big & profitable franchise will peter out after one bad first film. Hope I'm wrong, but so far, my interest in this has diminished greatly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So are we getting "good" changes or just changes for change's sake?

 

How do you take a boys-toy property about army guys fighting strange bad guys, and make it both serious and cool? How do you make it true to its roots without making it silly, or make it "realistic" without making it derivative of another film and not stray from the base concept at the same time??

 

That's the thing here, there's no faith in the process, because Hollywood does churn out flics like Starsky and Hutch with Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson...

 

 

Part of this process that people need to consider is that casting is not about placing the right persona with the right character, its often about placing the right "face" in the right role--that meaning a face that people will want to see. Its about box office draws.

This is why there was so much effort in casting Ron Perelman as Hellboy--few executives thought he was enough of a draw to headline a movie, but the director and producer fought like mad because he was "right" for the role.

 

There's probably a couple other causcasian actors that could have fit the role of the Kingpin in Daredevil, but they are not box office draws. Michael Clarke Duncan is a better draw than most--so that's likely why he was cast.

Wayans is well known amongst a certain slice of the audience, his name in the film will invoke curiousity REGARDLESS of what he does on screen.

He's done drama before, and excelled at it, so he could well do the same kind of things here.

His role might be the screwball of the unit, but he could also be the casualty too.......being the Joe that gets killed. His "job" in the movie is not neccessarily what they tell us on screen, but instead to put butts into the seats in the theatre.

 

But even I keep think back to Catwoman, which starred Halle Berry and Sharon Stone, and was still garbage....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

picture a movei trailer with the G1 Transformers brought to life... autobots and decepticons jumping all over the screen.. fighting.. explosions... etc. You thnk anybody watching that would have said, "well.. I wish they would look like butt-ugly alien insects instead"

 

If one goes stickly by the G1 looks, then what you have is pretty clunky looking CGI designs.

Remember, the cartoons and comics that came after were all based on things designed as TOYS first.

The boxy nature of characters like Optimus Prime would look pretty simplified on the big screen.

Objects with many facets, parts, visual depth ( being able to see inside and through) with a lot of intricacy just look more interesting and realistic on screen. A simplifed version wouldn't look convincing or believable.

Its the same reason the TV model of the TOS USS Enterprise would look like a wood and plastic model on a movie screen, there's not enough visual texture to suggest scale.

To imply that the TF are giant robots means they needed to be made up of lots of intricate complex shapes and parts.

 

Unfortunately, some of the motif-direction that went in made them look like insects.

 

GIJOE though, as a lot more potentially down-to-Earth designs like tanks and planes that translate better from toys to screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE

However I still don't like the idea of them changing Ripcord's race when there are actual black characters for them to choose from (Stalker?

 

 

With most of the public being militarily-illiterate, what do you think they would make of a character whose name is "Stalker"?? To actually have that character named as per his "function" and not be miscontrued, you'd need to call him "Tracker", "Point" or "Pathfinder"--which are actually OTHER characters.

Ripcord is a easy code-name to visualize with a character.

 

 

Riiiiiiggghhhttt.........cause people are "Military-Illiterate"..... I guess you are saying that most of the general population doesn't even know basic vocabulary. Cause "Stalker" is waaaayy more military than "Ripcord" or "Halo Jumper" .........by that reasoning you should just call the guy "Phil" or "African-American Actor #4"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, don't forget that the producer referred to the cartoon movie as "Batman" and this movie as "Batman Begins." By that analogy, it's easy to see where they got the idea that Duke needed a "buddy" who he bails out of trouble. I'd have more respect for this if they really did make Falcon in the movie than some bastardization of Ripcord.

 

And as far as Transformers, I was on the fence before it was released and I have to admit I liked it. That doesn't mean it was perfect. Frankly, the robot designs were too realistic. All the moving parts made them impossible to tell apart. Once transformed, they just looked like hunks of parts. And some of the original characterizations would have worked much better than the new movie versions (a sneaky smart ass Frenzy rather than a crazed muppet who speaks gibberish, for example. Don't even get me started that that is really supposed to be Soundwave, who they only renamed because people bitched.)

 

At least they are trying to get some of it right. Destro will be British, Snake Eyes a badass, etc. But please Lord, don't let Ripcord/generic goofy black guy become Cobra Commander like in the original script! @grumpy@

 

Louis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is also a very, very good point! Again, changes for change's sake? I agree agree with CLAM on everything but the X-Men, because I can see why blue and yellow spandex may not work on camera. ;)

 

 

Are spandex and leather the only choices we have for costumes on screen? I hated the xmen costumes and that they wanted to look matrixy, xmen is not matrix and they are not bikers. They did something different with Supermans costume so it wasnt spandex but it worked. I can handle tweaking but come on what they did was ridiculous. Also if sales of figures means anything the comic figures always sold well but the movie figures went on clearance and eventually to dollar stores.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A while back I was wearing a DareDevil T-shirt....this was back in like 2002 or whenever the movie came out. I ran into some casual friends and they all started giving me crap for wearing a DD shirt cause the movie was awful. They didn't really know much about DD but they KNEW the movie and what came along with it.

 

Dude! Same thing happened to me with Fantastic 4. I can't wear my "4" shirt anymore without getting crap.

 

I never anticipated seeing Ripcord in a GI Joe movie, so I don't care that they are changing his race or character in that respect, but for the sake of the action figure, I'd like him to stay the same. They could even make a new character, DDP is doing that all the time, no sweat. :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Riiiiiiggghhhttt.........cause people are "Military-Illiterate"..... I guess you are saying that most of the general population doesn't even know basic vocabulary. Cause "Stalker" is waaaayy more military than "Ripcord" or "Halo Jumper" .........by that reasoning you should just call the guy "Phil" or "African-American Actor #4"

 

Go up to people on the street and ask 100 of them that a "point-man" is ( for example) and one in 10 might be able to give you an answer, or even a correct answer.

Call a character Stalker and most of the movie-going public isn't going to understand the reference to a tracker, they are going to think the character is a guy super-fixated on his ex-girlfriend. Military lingo just isn't in the purview of most people.

 

You and I might understand the terms because we are into the toys and the whole genre--the movie has to address things to people that barely know GIJOE is a toy and not much more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Riiiiiiggghhhttt.........cause people are "Military-Illiterate"..... I guess you are saying that most of the general population doesn't even know basic vocabulary. Cause "Stalker" is waaaayy more military than "Ripcord" or "Halo Jumper" .........by that reasoning you should just call the guy "Phil" or "African-American Actor #4"

 

Go up to people on the street and ask 100 of them that a "point-man" is ( for example) and one in 10 might be able to give you an answer, or even a correct answer.

Call a character Stalker and most of the movie-going public isn't going to understand the reference to a tracker, they are going to think the character is a guy super-fixated on his ex-girlfriend. Military lingo just isn't in the purview of most people.

 

You and I might understand the terms because we are into the toys and the whole genre--the movie has to address things to people that barely know GIJOE is a toy and not much more.

 

Yeah, Stalker is a bit iffy. They could get away with it, I think, but I can understand the reluctance.

 

They should just make him British and call him Jammer, I'd be fine with that. I mean, if they're going to do international characters anyway...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a good chance that Ripcord will not be the RAH Ripcord. Hasbro has used names more than once for new characters like Altitude, Airborne and Life Line, etc.

 

If they say this is a second Ripcord then I would be fine with that idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are spandex and leather the only choices we have for costumes on screen? I hated the xmen costumes and that they wanted to look matrixy, xmen is not matrix and they are not bikers.

 

Rest assured, costume designers draw up dozens of designs before they go with what's seen on screen.

Prototypes of designs are made and test-fitted for screen tests to see how they work on film......and the producers and directors make the call on what works best.

In the case of X-men, there were designs made with the masked characters wearing masks and such , and costume designs of them in close-to-comics looks. In the case of Wolverine, he looked like a big yellow bumblebee, and Cyclops looked like he was wearing a bondage mask........so, yea they dumped those ideas in favour of what we ended up seeing.

The leather gear was chosen because its functional and LOOKS protective--which is the idea. It also tipped its hat to the very first incarnation of the comic book X-men, in that they all wore a common styled uniform.

 

 

on GIJOE: COBRA Commander, if he's in this film, might never appear in his hood--instead he might wear only his battle helmet, for example. Or his might wear the hood for only very brief time, and don the helmet the rest of the time.

Or they might not have him in the movie at all.

 

Destro's full-head mask could be styled to represent some chromed asian battle mask, for example, because doing a straight chromed skull-cap mask might make him look too close to the Silver Surfer. That's another consideration with these changes--the changes are to render things in a unique way.

If something is too close in appearance to a thing in another movie, it CAN cause confusion ( or at least distract) in viewers. People can be sitting there thinking........."hey, they ripped off that costume part from THAT movie--they are so cheap"--not realizing that the character originally looked that way.

So they have to take stock of things like that when they consider designs and costumes-and they make changes accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are spandex and leather the only choices we have for costumes on screen? I hated the xmen costumes and that they wanted to look matrixy, xmen is not matrix and they are not bikers. They did something different with Supermans costume so it wasnt spandex but it worked. I can handle tweaking but come on what they did was ridiculous. Also if sales of figures means anything the comic figures always sold well but the movie figures went on clearance and eventually to dollar stores.

 

 

exactly!

 

Spiderman and Superman have the best costumes of any comic-book movie. They aren't leather!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...
Sign Up For The TNI Newsletter And Have The News Delivered To You!


Entertainment News International (ENI) is the #1 popular culture network for adult fans all around the world.
Get the scoop on all the popular comics, games, movies, toys, and more every day!

Contact and Support

Advertising | Submit News | Contact ENI | Privacy Policy

©Entertainment News International - All images, trademarks, logos, video, brands and images used on this website are registered trademarks of their respective companies and owners. All Rights Reserved. Data has been shared for news reporting purposes only. All content sourced by fans, online websites, and or other fan community sources. Entertainment News International is not responsible for reporting errors, inaccuracies, omissions, and or other liablities related to news shared here. We do our best to keep tabs on infringements. If some of your content was shared by accident. Contact us about any infringements right away - CLICK HERE