 |
Joe*Battlelines
The "Old School" Edition
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mr. peasant
Corporal
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 114
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 2:06 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Dantho wrote: | I think you are missing my point and I understand yours, BUT GIJOE was created in America for Americans. I would gladly share it with anyone around the world who is interested in it. BUT, to remove the American element out of it, is to change what it is. GIJOE is comprised of America's best from all walks of life. It showcases that which is best about America-the American spirit. To take that out, is to remove the heart and soul of what GIJOE is.
It would would be akin to taking Norse mythology out of Thor and replacing it with Asian mythology, as to make Thor more marketable to the Asian part of the world. Doing that removes what makes up the mythos of Thor and it would no longer be Thor but some strange variation. |
I agree you have a point there. And just like you have for your American Joes, I am fond with the 'international concept' Joes I grew up with. But in the end, my main argument was not so much against having purely American Joes but rather against bashing the movie and prejudging that it will be bad purely based on the 'change' in the nationality of the characters. As it's a new continuity and a reinvention of the Joe line, I strongly believe that the movie ought to be given a chance and seen before coming to any conclusion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
gunslingercbr
Corporal
Joined: 27 Oct 2005
Posts: 112
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 5:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Frozen Custard Trooper wrote: | | gunslingercbr wrote: | | but TMNT, when it was at its height of popularity during the 90's, was a HUUUGE departure from the comics. going back to similar roots to the comic doesn't neccessary reflect that TMNT's popularitytoday is dependent on that when the property has shown that it was not only popular but more popular when it was a huge departure. |
Well bear in mind when the cartoon debuted back on Thanksgiving Day, almost no kid was familar with the comic, so the cartoon and toyline WERE the canon by which everything was judged. The cartoon was successful, but it was also extremely campy, much like the old Joe cartoon. Seems like most people here want a more serious comic book tone for the film. Remember, when the TMNT movie came out, which storyline did they use? They went back to Eastman and Laird's original comic book for the source material. (The only thing they kept from the cartoon was April O'Neil's job as a news reporter.)
I guess this is just one of those things you and I are never gonna agree on. I do see your point though, even if I don't quite agree with it. No hard feelings right? 
I just worry that too many concessions made to please everyone everywhere is gonna dilute and ultimately hurt this movie. I'd hate for Transformers and it's sequels to be the "Pirates" franchise of Hasbros, while G.I. Joe ends up it's "Haunted Mansion."  |
no hard feelingfs at all, we're just discussing opposing opinions, that doesn't make us mortal enemies. 
but in regards to source material, ultimately, with Joe, what is it? the comics? cartoon? toys? this is where the source material argument comes into trouble. the comics and cartoons had two different stories and many key character differences, but they were both about the same thing: a military team vs terrorist organization. that is it. that is the key brand element that the RAH mythos is dependent upon, first and foremost, in regards to its story, and all the movie really needs to adhere to...IMO.
that is what the toys were about. a brand has brand elements that it can never contradict, less it lose credibility with its consumers. the cartoon and comic are in no way source material for the toy, that is why they could tell two different stories that adhere to the same idea but be about the same thing. it is that same thing, the conflict between G.I. Joe and Cobra, that is what is most important, not the different, and contradictory, ways the two outlets decided to tell their preferred stories. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Compulsive Collector
Private
Joined: 06 Sep 2007
Posts: 25
Location: Charlotte, NC
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gunslingercbr wrote: | | but in regards to source material, ultimately, with Joe, what is it? the comics? cartoon? toys? this is where the source material argument comes into trouble. |
I really don't think there's much debate over what is the ideal source material from which a feature film should be made. Hasbro has some idea, it would seem:
| Quote: | Brian Goldner, the COO of Hasbro, exec producer of Transformers and the upcoming G.I, JOE personally emailed me after my that script review to assure the fans that there will be a contemporary G.I. JOE vs COBRA storyline in the G.I. JOE movie.
Here is what Mr. Goldner had to say...
Dear Mr. Mayimbe:
Thanks for your note. We are working to develop a movie script that delivers a contemporary GI JOE vs. COBRA story, inspired by the comic books. We do not yet have one. Hopefully soon….
Regards bg |
I've been of the opinion for years, long before it was announced that Michael Bay would be forever destroying Transformers, that G.I. Joe would work best as a serialized action drama on HBO or Showtime (think Band Of Brothers, but set in modern times with terrorists - and ninjas!). There is so much material in the Larry Hama well, that you could go at least two thirteen-episode seasons before it even started to run dry. I just don't know that the financials could be worked out on something like that, but it would certainly allow for more character and story development. I really don't know how much you can establish in two hours. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fyrefly
Conflict Resolution Specialist
Joined: 14 Apr 2005
Posts: 237
Location: Semi-Retired in Belize
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Compulsive Collector wrote: | | I really don't know how much you can establish in two hours. |
Hollywood comics-to-movies flicks are all about trilogies now. So you'd establish the origins of the Joe team and/or COBRA. Probably devote about ten minutes at least, to show who "was once a man" turning into Cobra Commander, maybe show the background of Baroness (I bet she was into some light BDSM, with those sexy leathers... oh G'd yes...), Destro, etc. How they all tie together. And since apparently Baroness's background involves Snake Eyes, and since he's basically a Mary Sue (even though Tunnel Rat was supposed to be Hama) then he'll figure prominently. It's unavoidable.
_________________
"Show Thine Enemies No Mercy."
wtf-pwning n00bs since April 1998.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jmacq1
Sergeant Major
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 1889
Location: Arlington, VA
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Funny enough, I don't think Snake-Eyes will be as prominent as some people think. As the Cartoon found out, it's hard to hang a narrative on the shoulders of a masked mute.
Duke will probably be the central "hero" since he's far more Hollywood-friendly.
Snake-Eyes will get the best action scenes, though.  I wouldn't be at all surprised if they keep him just as mysterious in the first movie as the comics did for the first 20+ issues. More on his origins will come in the sequels. I'd bet the first movie will only give us hints as to his connection with Storm Shadow (as that rivalry has "Hollywood" all over it)...and to be quite honest I'm betting his connections to Cobra Commander will be dropped entirely (and that may well be for the best, as I always thought that was "a bridge too far" as far as the overall narrative was concerned), or perhaps even transferred to Duke or Hawk (if he makes it into the film). They might throw in hints of his relationship to Scarlett.
Make no mistake, he'll likely be a significant presence and the "coolest" character in the film, and he'll probably be the guy all the kiddies want to be, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if they just kept him as the "silent mysterious badass" as opposed to delving too deeply into his background and personality, at least in the first film. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fyrefly
Conflict Resolution Specialist
Joined: 14 Apr 2005
Posts: 237
Location: Semi-Retired in Belize
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 2:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ray Park = Snake Eyes.
EDIT:
Ray Park also = Darth Maul for the non-hablars.
EDIT:
Ray Park also also = Toad in X-Men
_________________
"Show Thine Enemies No Mercy."
wtf-pwning n00bs since April 1998.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
madmac41
Dreadnok Enforcer
Joined: 29 May 2005
Posts: 241
Location: Louisville,Ky
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 2:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is a reply to a comment posted on page 2 I think.G.I. stands for Government Issuse and is mostly used in the ARMY.The General Issuse was a secondary term.I for one am going to wait until way down the line before I get too excited either way,After all this in Hollywoods hands it can be changed right up until the premier.You also have to take into concideration how many others will have a say,Writer ,Producer,Director,Hasbro.Where they are right this second is still very far from where this may end up.The thing that makes me nervous is the possibility of the toy line riding on the movies sucess or failure.
_________________
Be all you can be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Compulsive Collector
Private
Joined: 06 Sep 2007
Posts: 25
Location: Charlotte, NC
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fyrefly wrote: | | Hollywood comics-to-movies flicks are all about trilogies now. So you'd establish the origins of the Joe team and/or COBRA. Probably devote about ten minutes at least, to show who "was once a man" turning into Cobra Commander, maybe show the background of Baroness (I bet she was into some light BDSM, with those sexy leathers... oh G'd yes...), Destro, etc. How they all tie together. |
There are just so many characters, though, that even a trilogy couldn't really get the job done. Besides, the film would have to turn a profit to spawn a sequel, let alone two of them, and there's still no guarantee of that happening.
| Fyrefly wrote: | | And since apparently Baroness's background involves Snake Eyes, and since he's basically a Mary Sue (even though Tunnel Rat was supposed to be Hama) then he'll figure prominently. It's unavoidable. |
Interesting. It never occurred to me that a character whose face was so mangled that people would get nauseated just from looking at it might be considered a Mary Sue. I'm going to think about that for a while. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jmacq1
Sergeant Major
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 1889
Location: Arlington, VA
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 3:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"Mary Sue" is a vastly overused term these days. It's been warped from it's original meaning to an easy criticism for any character that's competent/popular that a particular person doesn't care for in far too many cases.
There's a difference between Mary-Sueism, self-insertion, self-identification and simply having a central character that's more popular than many of the others around him. Snake-Eyes evolved into the central character of G.I. Joe (at least in the comics) because readers liked him, and toy-buyers thought his action figures were cool. He was marketed well. He wasn't really designed from the get-go to become the "icon" of G.I. Joe that he did. It could just as easily have been Flash, Stalker, or anyone else on the team if the consumers had responded in the same way to those characters.
Besides, Snake-Eyes suffers defeats and losses too often to be a true Mary Sue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gunslingercbr
Corporal
Joined: 27 Oct 2005
Posts: 112
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Compulsive Collector"] | gunslingercbr wrote: | | but in regards to source material, ultimately, with Joe, what is it? the comics? cartoon? toys? this is where the source material argument comes into trouble. |
I really don't think there's much debate over what is the ideal source material from which a feature film should be made. Hasbro has some idea, it would seem:
| Quote: | Brian Goldner, the COO of Hasbro, exec producer of Transformers and the upcoming G.I, JOE personally emailed me after my that script review to assure the fans that there will be a contemporary G.I. JOE vs COBRA storyline in the G.I. JOE movie.
Here is what Mr. Goldner had to say...
Dear Mr. Mayimbe:
Thanks for your note. We are working to develop a movie script that delivers a contemporary GI JOE vs. COBRA story, inspired by the comic books. We do not yet have one. Hopefully soon….
Regards bg |
that's an old quote from well before Stephen Sommers came on board. but even so, it doesn't answer the question what is the actual source material of Joe, it only answers which version they will base it on, which is entirely different idea.
but I am pretty confident that the cartoon reached far more children than the comic, so if the movie is based on the comic, by the argument that sticking to the source material will determine the success of the movie, you are going to isolate an entire segment of the audience that will find the story not what they remember it as because it isn't the same source material that they remember. thaht's my popint, there is no true "source material" for G.I. Joe, because at the height of its popularity you had two different versions of its story, the cartoon and comic, and a toyline meant to sell both.
saying that the story has to adhere to the comic only identifies personal preference, not the absolute source material that the movie must be based on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Compulsive Collector
Private
Joined: 06 Sep 2007
Posts: 25
Location: Charlotte, NC
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gunslingercbr wrote: | | that's an old quote from well before Stephen Sommers came on board. |
I'm not sure I would call July of this year well before, but okay.
| gunslingercbr wrote: | | but even so, it doesn't answer the question what is the actual source material of Joe, it only answers which version they will base it on, which is entirely different idea. |
If you polled collectors and devoted fans, I still don't think you'd find much debate. If you asked the general public what they remembered, I'm sure the cartoon would get more votes. If that same general public watched those cartoons today, though, I'd wager that most of them would find them to be ridiculous. That was my impression of most episodes even as a child, although I had the comics for comparison.
| gunslingercbr wrote: | | saying that the story has to adhere to the comic only identifies personal preference, not the absolute source material that the movie must be based on. |
Not only did Larry Hama write the comic books, but he also wrote the filecards for Hasbro (or most of them, anyway). Majority rules. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cmderinchief
VAMO!!
Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 177
Location: Indianapolis, IN
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 4:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dunno if this has been posted yet. Fox News has picked up on the movie.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,296054,00.html
_________________
The one and only! * As seen on the TNI, Joesightings and GIJCC Forums
  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fyrefly
Conflict Resolution Specialist
Joined: 14 Apr 2005
Posts: 237
Location: Semi-Retired in Belize
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Compulsive Collector wrote: | | There are just so many characters, though, that even a trilogy couldn't really get the job done. Besides, the film would have to turn a profit to spawn a sequel, let alone two of them, and there's still no guarantee of that happening. |
I'm not suggesting that you put every character in the Joe-verse in one of three movies. X-men eventually grew to have a ton of characters, if you like I could list some of the characters that didn't make it in. Same with Transformers, though to be fair we haven't seen who's coming in the next two movies.
| Compulsive Collector wrote: | | Interesting. It never occurred to me that a character whose face was so mangled that people would get nauseated just from looking at it might be considered a Mary Sue. I'm going to think about that for a while. |
A face which was conveniently concealed by a mask, and if I'm not mistaken was a very close proximity to what it looked like pre-mangling. And a face which also came to be corrected by plastic surgery, yes?
| Jmacq1 wrote: | | Besides, Snake-Eyes suffers defeats and losses too often to be a true Mary Sue. |
That's merely my opinion. How many defeats and losses would you say he suffered in the Marvel run? Obviously Snake Eyes was a little peeved about Storm Shadow being shot in the face, but I'm almost kinda-sorta close to halfway being inclined to not count that since he came back to life. Between repeated brain washing and resurrection, that became too easy of a crutch to explain any turns in drama.
Now, granted - I will admit I'm still not up to speed on the fifty thousand reloads, reboots, alternate storylines from a succession of "what if?" re-starts or "second books" by Devil's Due. So I'm mainly looking at Marvel. Though I did see a chronological issue list with a complete (I think) list of Devil's Due issues by book title, I think it was on Joereloaded.com - so I'm not going to have an excuse for too much longer.
_________________
"Show Thine Enemies No Mercy."
wtf-pwning n00bs since April 1998.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gunslingercbr
Corporal
Joined: 27 Oct 2005
Posts: 112
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Compulsive Collector wrote: |
If you polled collectors and devoted fans, I still don't think you'd find much debate. If you asked the general public what they remembered, I'm sure the cartoon would get more votes. If that same general public watched those cartoons today, though, I'd wager that most of them would find them to be ridiculous. That was my impression of most episodes even as a child, although I had the comics for comparison.
| gunslingercbr wrote: | | saying that the story has to adhere to the comic only identifies personal preference, not the absolute source material that the movie must be based on. |
Not only did Larry Hama write the comic books, but he also wrote the filecards for Hasbro (or most of them, anyway). Majority rules. |
you hit the nail on the head. the general public remembers the cartoon, and the movie is being made for the general public. so if the movie is based on the comic, and the general public still goes and sees it, obviously its success will have nothing to do with the source material, because it is not only based on ONE aspect of the toys publicity but the one aspect that had the least audience. that was my point, that the source material argument is overinflated.
but, also, the comic is one of the worst written and silliest things I have ever read as an adult, and I loved it as a child. to this day, I find the cartoon far more enjoyable than the contrived, silly soap-opera that is the Joe comic, so adult opinions of childhood memories is pretty much irrelevant. what the potential Joe audience thinks NOW of their preferred Joe story if they experienced it today, the cartoon or the comic, has no bearing on whether they will go see the movie tomorrow and what they think of the movie. the majority of the audience is going to go simply for the nostalgia of seeing the core concept--Joe vs Cobra -- and won't care whether it is identical to a cartoon or comic they had 25 years ago that they probably don't remember anyways. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mr. peasant
Corporal
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 114
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not sure how much of an impact this article will do to the development, but I would like to comment on the credibility of those being interviewed.
Firstly, it should be noted that, at least for most of the interviewees, they seem to be talking about G.I. Joe as he was in the 1940's and 60's, of which the 40's isn't even directly related to the Hasbro product aside from sharing the same name. This is indicated by how they refer to G.I. Joe as a singular individual and their complaint that the movie was turning G.I. Joe into an amorphous task force, something Hasbro's G.I. Joe hasn't been for 25 years (and even then, the 60's version was comprised of different ethnicities, so it can be argued it wasn't one person then either; thus, it can be argued that Hasbro's G.I. Joe was never really about one man).
Secondly, they seem to be taking things to the extreme, concluding that because some characters will be of foreign heritage and nationality, this is a sign that the movie is dropping everything American despite having no concrete information either way regarding the topic.
Thirdly, those being interviewed against the idea were a conservative blogger and members of the military, both of which can hardly be considered neutral and unbiased. The military members can't very well be caught saying "it's good that they're reducing the military influence in the movie" irrespective of their thoughts while conservatives are hardly the first people to jump onto the idea of a multinational team when compared to an all-American one.
Also, I would like to point out that the article's comment that 'G.I. Joe bears no resemblance to the original', isn't very fair. True, it doesn't have much resemblance towards the 60's toyline but it's likely that the filmmakers have more of the 80's anti-terrorist version in mind, to which it bears key thematic similarities, particularly its fight against terrorism and Cobra being the premier terrorist threat. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
