*Blog post was started on July 17, 2021.
G.I. Joe: The Movie (1987): Where the Dwayne Johnson Franchise Should have Went
It is going to be interesting to see how this review works out. I prefer to write my reviews the next day (or by the time I finish viewing a feature, that day). The freshness is what I am going for. Too bad we have to do adult things like my job (which currently includes putting nine rolls of quarters by a space heater in hope to dry the paper that my water mug spilled over) and paying bills. Those are not too harsh when it comes to processes since my finances are in a blackish state. Please pardon any sense of appropriation.
And pardon the seemingly unwarranted bullshitting. I was (I guess am. The arguments that colleges should offer art degrees is fine, but my web design career was suppose to be an employable concept in 2002.) a website designer, so the pages on this blog have to be in sync with all the content on the right side. Thus, letting you know where my head is at with every post seems a necessary evil.
Am I evil? Guess I am. With that, it seems I can no longer say that I am just a fan of the art.
It seems I am paying for my vicefulness. My body feels like crap after it turns out that OSF would not allow me to get blood test so that I can offer a guide to whomever ends up being my next primary physician (No more physician assistants!). This meant that my cleanliness was for not, so I attacked about a half a dozen Krispy Kremes the following day and some Kraft Deluxe Mac and Cheese the next night. Christmas is still five months away, so asking my folks to pay for BJJ lessons must wait. The need to be humble over getting invited on a Disney World trip makes asking for anything a task.
If there is anything I am worried about in the now is that my promotion of Woody Allen movies is scaring away repeat guests for NinetyForChill - The Podcast. I suppose I have to respect the principles. And, at least they are not being petty like Michell Whitt over a contextual review. It also make me look at my own morals. Can one encourage revisiting the works of Lenni Rienfenstahl when it was a product of the Nazis?
Are pedophiles any worse than Nazis? Are these two groups equal? I would rather know what makes a sick mind, but if we should be violent towards Nazis (The most important lesson of "The Blues Brothers")...
The truth is, maybe I a just hang about for the arguments. With that said, check out my review for Roman Polanski's "The Ghost Writer". Should I have given the film which suggest that being a war criminal is far more evil than being a bale jumper a chance?
It should not be a legitimate worry. If that guest had listened to some of my podcast in preparation for their appearance, pro Marty Scurll mentions should have expressed my willingness to listen to everything I can about a controversy.
In the meantime, I have been working to line up a guest for an upcoming podcast episode. This party is working on a Jean Claude Van Damme podcast, so action movies maybe the topic. An episode focusing on the best DVD double feature pack ever released, "Bloodsport" and "Showdown in Little Tokyo" is where I am leaning.
But with "Snake Eyes" coming out soon, perhaps I should offer up a chat about the underappreciated/misunderstood G.I. Joe franchise. The two live-action movies do not fit the parameters of my podcast (The films are 118 minutes and 110 minutes), but if we start with the 1987 debut feature, it could warrant an episode.
G.I. Joe: The Movie
After Cobra's attempt to blow up the Statue of Liberty during its centennial celebration was thwarted by G.I. Joe, an American military unit solely dedicated to defeating Cobra, the terrorist group's supreme leader, Serpentor, attempts to remove Cobra Commander from his authority for yet another failure. This "court marshal" has to be placed on hold because when base, the Terror Dome, is attacked by a reptilian humanoid. Cobra Commander leads his lieutenants away from the battle in hopes that the assailant will kill their leader.
When she arrives to confront the head of the snake, Serpentor recalls her from a vision. Pythona informs him that it was not a vision but a memory of his homeland Cobra-La and that his destiny is to lead the people of this hidden land to reclaim the world from homo-sapiens. To do this, they will need to capture the Broadcast Energy Transmitter (BET). This should allow for the transmission of near unlimited amount of energy. Something so valuable is obviously being protected by G.I. Joe.
G.I. Joe's Himalayan security detail for the BET has left the military organization spread thin, so they will be counting on their next class of recruits. Their forces are further exasperated after they capture Serpentor when he led an attack to claim the BET. Despite his arrogance and immaturity, the top prospect seems to be the Green Beret Lt. Falcon. His most defining traits prove to be immediately detrimental as Pythona succeeds in allowing Serpentor to escape. If Falcon was more concerned about his post than trying to woo his ninja co-recruit Jinx, the unit should have prevented this attack.
Serpentor is returned to Cobra-La where we find out the history of the Cobra organization/civilization, that a group of Joes are being held prisoner after they pursued the retreating Cobras from the BET assault, and that Cobra Commander will answer for his inadequacies. The Cobra-Las are lead by Golobulus and the people have been in hiding since the Ice Age. This hiding came as a result of the rise of mankind and their constant development of technology destroying organic dependent societies.
They have launched a fleet of mushrooms to orbit the planet. With the BET's energy, the shrooms will be allowed to release their spores. These spores will force mankind to return to their ancestors' beast like nature allowing Cobra to finally conquer the world. With the success of Serpentor's escape, the Joes know that their organic weapons are more powerful than anything Cobra had previously thrown at them. The escape also has left the Joes in disarray. Are they even in a position to stop Golobulus's evil plan?
"G.I. Joe: The Movie" was pulled from a theatrical release after children were left disturbed from "The Transformers: The Movie" the prior year. I understand you do not want to scar any more kids, but for those who watched Optimus Prime die in the first act, their brains would be better suited for the insanity of the story about Cobra-La. Regardless, this is 40 miles of bad world no matter the preparation.
Aside from getting Don Johnson and Burgess Meredith to voice our new protagonist and antagonist respectively, who only exist to introduce a new line of toys, no effort was taken to provide the audience with anything worth attaching "The Movie" to. I suppose the musical number to an extended rendition of the TV show theme lets us know that the feature is far grander than the 22-minute shorts, but when it is the same rendition of the song, laziness is the only feeling expressed. If you can afford Don Johnson, surely you can afford Stan Bush.
And this laziness goes beyond not creating any new takes on the material. I thought it was limited to anime features of the time, but virtually all the sound effects are pulled from the "Star Wars" Trilogy. Who would have ever thought that electrified snakes sound exactly like light sabres? The BET is a dead ringer for Palpatine's force lightning.
Obviously the animation is not improved upon or even taken in a new direction. "Transformers" at least made the effort in that department. The earlier film also could hide the blatant 80's racism in toys. I did think that the BET was an attempt to have children associate the acronym with this series instead the television network. No wonder Hasbro toys fell into a lull during the early 90's. With no cold war to distract us from, everything about G.I. Joe is ridiculous.
So the story that would seeming feature elements to soon be used by "Highlander 2" and the "Super Mario Bros." ended up being appropriate. After essentially stopping Cobra from nuking the world at the end of the second live-action movie, ancient aliens are the only thing that can bring new life to this franchise. Is Paramount afraid that the fans would look to this feature and complain about the lack of originality? I think the trolls would be more fascinated making jokes about Sergent Slaughter having a full head of hair (That guy is just full of lies.).
My little brother rented this "G.I. Joe: The Movie" back in the early nineties, and I did not know what to think about it then. That is not great for a kids movie. Add to that experience knowledge of why things do not make sense and you know it totally missed its mark. Then realize that it is a bad movie, and I am reaching for a magnifying glass to go all "Toy Story" Sid on these plastic Real American Heroes.
Do I dare give "My Little Pony: The Movie" a rewatch? Does anyone know if it has the Stan Bush touch imprinted on it.
*This blog post was started on September 14, 2021. The review was written in 2010.
House on Haunted Hill: When They Use To Do Double Features
Why should horror sequels work? There is no need for exposition, so you can cut right to the mayhem. Why do they not work? Because they want to introduce new characters when all you need are stereotypes and archetypes.
In a gimmicky genre like horror, we do not necessarily need to know the torrid affairs of the protagonist(s). All you really need to know is the motive of the antagonist. This is the focus of the original "House on Haunted Hill", a trip into a wicked character's mind portrayed by Vincent Price.
For the amusement of his fourth wife, the eccentric millionaire Frederick Loren allows her to host her birthday party at the house that is supposedly possessed by generation after generation of murder victims. Thanks to his jealous nature, his wife is short on friends, so to make the night interesting, he has invited five individuals who are in need of money. Each will be awarded $10,000 if they successfully spend the night there, cut off from the world. Of course, Loren makes it clear that it is not about spending the night. It is about surviving it.
"House on Haunted Hill" is a wise thriller. Wise in the sense that it skips out on presenting exposition as the story moves forward. It opens like a video game. You view the characters and their two-sentence description, and then the movie goes forward, never looking back.
The story turns out to be anticlimactic, but the devious nature of the characters allow that conclusion to be fitting. The director and performers do a great job of presenting the "haunted" environment, but the mere presence of Price makes the film a classic.
Who would dare think that Geoffry Rush could capture what Price did with the role? Rush may have been destined to be miscast when it came to the 1999 "remake", but that is another conversation.
"House on Haunted Hill" is a prime example of how stories should be quick and to the point. This is especially the case when all you have is a premise and a performer. It shows that a director does not need much to make a classic, as long as they remember not to drag out the material.
