Roger Ebert's mistake-ridden GI Joe movie review

[Jin Saotome]

I present to you the glaring and painful mistakes Ebert makes in his GI Joe Rise of Cobra review, all wrapped up in to one neat little package.

 

Jin Saotome's Dangerous Blog!: Roger Ebert, it's time to retire

 

Ebert either wasn't even paying attention or he just read someone else's review and decided to glean all his info from that. It's a sad, sad day for movie reviewers everywhere.

 

Time to retire Ebert, time to retire.

[DonkeyKong]

Yeah, Ebert sucks. He did the same for his review of "Star Trek" and others, apparently.

[Newton]

Ebert does really good reviews I believe... EXCEPT when it comes to anything like this. His review of the first Ninja Turtles movie goes on and on about how it was based off a video game.

[TLCMathMan]

He should stick to reviewing movies like 'Julie and Julia.'

[Viper Hunter]

This is the kind of movie that these critics (like Ebert) loathe having to even bother with. I wonder sometimes if they even sit thru the actual movie or have some hired college student do it for them and take THEIR "notes" and then construct a "review" their own? If not...then I imagine Ebert merely goes thru the motions of watching the movie but has his mind on OTHER things.....breakfast, brunch, snack, lunch, snack, dinner, snack, bedtime meal, midnight snack and "I had a bad dream comfort food"?

 

I can't imagine HOW these critics even relax their minds enough to get INTO these kinds of films that are (in their heads) BENEATH them?

[canprime]

There are a lot of circumstances around movie critiques. Most critics do get to that point of having seen so many films that they do get jaded. It happens. I have given Ebert more leeway since his stroke, but anything more than one or two mistakes definitely makes your review suspect.

[Dragonrider1227]

Most movie critics can't seem to fathom the concept of movies that are simply just for fun

[pesatyel]

There are a lot of circumstances around movie critiques. Most critics do get to that point of having seen so many films that they do get jaded. It happens. I have given Ebert more leeway since his stroke, but anything more than one or two mistakes definitely makes your review suspect.

 

Stroke shmoke. All critics have their most favorite and least favorite genres.

[Vogue]

The term would be mistake-riddled.

[Viper Hunter]

The term would be mistake-riddled.

 

 

Actually, I've heard it both ways.

 

-ridden 

a combining form meaning “obsessed with,” “overwhelmed by” (torment-ridden) or “full of,” “burdened with” (debt-ridden).

rid·den (rĭd'n)

adj. Dominated, harassed, or obsessed by. Often used in combination: disease-ridden; grief-ridden.

 

or in THIS instance...mistake-ridden.

[RJones]

That guy is just an ass. To be a movie reviewer I think you should be non bias, these people that judge movies, and only really like certain movies, should have a note at the start that says "Only listen to me if you like (insert movie genre) movies".

[Outsiders]

I read the review and blew it off cause he kept comparing to Transformers 2... What do they 2 movies have in common except they come from toys?

 

G.I. Joe and Transformers are 2 different movies...

[pesatyel]

I read the review and blew it off cause he kept comparing to Transformers 2... What do they 2 movies have in common except they come from toys?

 

G.I. Joe and Transformers are 2 different movies...

 

Until we get the crossover @firedevil@

 

I can see the reason for comparing them...but all it REALLY does is show the reviewer's ignorance.

[Nguyen_Dragon]

Do people still take this guy seriously?... He is stealing money from the people he works for with this crap...

[Superpowers1980]

How abou the movie sucked anyway. well an ok movie but not a good or great one.

[Devilbat]

Ahh...I just chalk it up to Ebert being out of touch with his inner child or completely unfamiliar with the G.I. Joe universe. I wouldn't expect him to like this kind of movie. That's why his review doesn't mean as much to me, not that I think he's a jerk or anything...

 

I do think this movie can appeal to the Joe Blow's that know zero about G.I. Joe, but I think it's makes a heckuva lot more sense if you grew up with it or liked it and were familiar with the mythos to begin with.

[CLAM]

I don't really see the point here... so what, he said that Duke did something that Ripcord did, Destro did something CC did, and said Cobra instead of M.A.R.S.

 

does any of that actually matter? @lol@

[revsears]

I think he needs to be cut slack about the confusion between MARS and Cobra. that's easy to do. There is barley any cobra in this movie at all and yet it's called "the rise of cobra" I'd say that is very confusing to an outsider.

[yojoebro82]

I don't really see the point here... so what, he said that Duke did something that Ripcord did, Destro did something CC did, and said Cobra instead of M.A.R.S.

 

does any of that actually matter? @lol@

 

Exactly. Ebert didn't like the movie. I didn't expect him to.

 

I don't see the reason for all the hate. He mixed up two names and pointed out a few plot holes? Boo Hoo.

 

As for the critics hating movies of this genre, that also does not hold water. I seem to remember last summer when critics (correctly) praised Dark Knight and Iron Man. I would personally lump those into the same genre as movies like Transformers and GI Joe--action/fantasy. Those two movies raised the bar big time. I did not hate GI Joe, I liked it for what it was, but it wasn't on par with those two movies.

[GPM in ICT]

Six months ago if some said Ebert had hated the movie a lot of fans would have been declaring a clear sign that the movie sucked because a well known and well repected movie critics hated it. Now we have people complaining about it, funny how things work.

 

Yeah it's said to see the mistakes but it happens. I just usually don't take any reviews for anything other than one own opinion. I mean how many times has a reviewer said something like "it was aweful on a spectacular level" only to have their quote used for the movie as "it was... spectacular". Happens all the time. I enjoyed it for what it was and tha's all that really matters to me.

[Chaz]

I lost all respect for Roger Ebert when I read his Transformers 2 review, where he actually insulted anyone who liked the movie, claiming they were idiots.

[pesatyel]

It isn't that we need to cut him slack for not being familiar with the source material. If they do a decent job you don't really NEED to be familiar with the source material.

 

The problem is that, like I said earlier, EVERYONE has a particular genre that is most favored and one that is least favored. So, simply put, paid to or not, why would you review a movie you know your not going to like?

[The Avenger]

I really don't think his review was that bad. The Ripcord/Duke mix up wasn't even on his site review, maybe it was corrected, maybe it was an editorial typo, maybe it was never there in the first place. I dunno. And can anyone really blame him for being confused anyway, I wouldn't have known the name of a single character in that movie if I hadn't been a g.i. joe fan following movie news on it for three months. And why, if it is called the Rise of Cobra, is the villain MARS? Reviewers always give spoilers in their reviews, so that explains the thing about Destro, but how could anyone spoil anything in a movie that is so rotten to begin with. Hell maybe his review that makes it sound like he's on cocaine was an homage to the style of the movie, that was equally confusing and stupid.

 

Ebert did make one huge mistake though...He said this piece of garbage was better than Transformers: Rise of the Fallen, which for all its faults is nowhere near the crapfest that G.I. Joe was.

[darthcamaro]

First off I think as a movie goes, it was pretty good, minus the fact they screwed the character bios....

 

but when comes to "official movie reviewers", well they suck, they are just plain bitter that they don't have the talent to make such a movie. I don't ever follow what they say etc.