PDA

View Full Version : GI Joe movie: Joe is Flemish, fights a scotsman.



Drew
11-01-2007, 04:10 AM
http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/10849526.html




Hollywood now proposes that in a new live-action movie based on the G.I. Joe toy line, Joe's -- well, "G.I." -- identity needs to be replaced by membership in an "international force based in Brussels." The IGN Entertainment news site reports Paramount is considering replacing our "real American hero" with "Action Man," member of an "international operations team."

Paramount will simply turn Joe's name into an acronym.

The show biz newspaper Variety reports: "G.I. Joe is now a Brussels-based outfit that stands for Global Integrated Joint Operating Entity, an international co-ed force of operatives who use hi-tech equipment to battle Cobra, an evil organization headed by a double-crossing Scottish arms dealer."

Well, thank goodness the villain -- no need to offend anyone by making our villains Arabs, Muslims, or foreign dictators of any stripe these days, though apparently Presbyterians who talk like Scottie on "Star Trek" are still OK -- is a double-crossing arms dealer. Otherwise one might be tempted to conclude the geniuses at Paramount believe arms dealing itself is evil.
Brussels


(Just for the record, what did the quintessential American hero, Humphrey Bogart's Rick Blaine in "Casablanca," do before he opened his eponymous cafe? Yep: gun-runner.)

According to reports in Variety and the aforementioned IGN, the producers explain international marketing would simply prove too difficult for a summer, 2009 film about a heroic U.S. soldier. Thus the need to "eliminate Joe's connection to the U.S. military."

Well, who cares. G.I. Joe is just a toy, right? He was never real. Right?

On Nov. 15, 2003, an 85-year-old retired Marine Corps colonel died of congestive heart failure at his home in La Quinta, Calif., southeast of Palm Springs. He was a combat veteran of World War II. His name was Mitchell Paige.

It's hard today to envision -- or, for the dwindling few, to remember -- what the world looked like on Oct. 25, 1942 -- 65 years ago.

The U.S. Navy was not the most powerful fighting force in the Pacific. Not by a long shot. So the Navy basically dumped a few thousand lonely American Marines on the beach at Guadalcanal and high-tailed it out of there.

...

On Oct. 25, Mitchell Paige was back on the God-forsaken malarial jungle island of Guadalcanal.

On Guadalcanal, the Marines struggled to complete an airfield that could threaten the Japanese route to Australia. Admiral Yamamoto knew how dangerous that was. Before long, relentless Japanese counterattacks had driven the supporting U.S. Navy from inshore waters. The Marines were on their own.

As Platoon Sgt. Mitchell Paige and his 33 riflemen set about carefully emplacing their four water-cooled .30-caliber Brownings on that hillside, 65 years ago this week -- manning their section of the thin khaki line that was expected to defend Henderson Field against the assault of the night of Oct. 25, 1942 -- it's unlikely anyone thought they were about to provide the definitive answer to that most desperate of questions: How many able-bodied U.S. Marines does it take to hold a hill against 2,000 armed and motivated attackers?

But by the time the night was over, "The 29th (Japanese) Infantry Regiment has lost 553 killed or missing and 479 wounded among its 2,554 men," historian Lippman reports. "The 16th (Japanese) Regiment's losses are uncounted, but the 164th's burial parties handled 975 Japanese bodies. ... The American estimate of 2,200 Japanese dead is probably too low."

You've already figured out where the Japanese focused their attack, haven't you? Among the 90 American dead and seriously wounded that night were all the men in Mitchell Paige's platoon. Every one. As the night of endless attacks wore on, Paige moved up and down his line, pulling his dead and wounded comrades back into their foxholes and firing a few bursts from each of the four Brownings in turn, convincing the Japanese forces down the hill that the positions were still manned.

The citation for Paige's Medal of Honor picks up the tale: "When the enemy broke through the line directly in front of his position, P/Sgt. Paige, commanding a machine gun section with fearless determination, continued to direct the fire of his gunners until all his men were either killed or wounded. Alone, against the deadly hail of Japanese shells, he fought with his gun and when it was destroyed, took over another, moving from gun to gun, never ceasing his withering fire."

In the end, Sgt. Paige picked up the last of the 40-pound, belt-fed Brownings and did something for which the weapon was never designed. Sgt. Paige walked down the hill toward the place where he could hear the last Japanese survivors rallying to move around his flank, the belt-fed gun cradled under his arm, firing as he went.

Coming up at dawn, battalion executive officer Major Odell M. Conoley was the first to discover how many able-bodied United States Marines it takes to hold a hill against two regiments of motivated, combat-hardened infantrymen who have never known defeat.

On a hill where the bodies were piled like cordwood, Mitchell Paige alone sat upright behind his 30-caliber Browning, waiting to see what the dawn would bring.

The hill had held, because on the hill remained the minimum number of able-bodied United States Marines necessary to hold the position.

And that's where the unstoppable wave of Japanese conquest finally crested, broke, and began to recede. On an unnamed jungle ridge on an insignificant island no one ever heard of, called Guadalcanal.

When the Hasbro Toy Co. called some years back, asking permission to put the retired colonel's face on some kid's doll, Mitchell Paige thought they must be joking.

But they weren't. That's his mug, on the little Marine they call "G.I. Joe." At least, it has been up till now.

Mitchell Paige's only condition? That G.I. Joe must always remain a United States Marine.

But don't worry. Far more important for our new movies not to offend anyone in Cairo or Karachi or Paris or Palembang.

After all, it's only a toy. It doesn't mean anything.


And guess who is playing Duke? George Clooney!
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=&ie=UTF-8&ncl=1122901622



Man this is highly outrageous, GI Joe has been a part of the psyche of American kids and specifically boys for near 50 years. I'm probably more annoyed by the neutering of this beloved American icon than I am about more "real" issues. I don't give a shit that the rest of the world doesn't like our military right now, GI Joe is an American, he fights terrorists not Scottish arms dealers. End of story.

Drew
11-01-2007, 04:18 AM
Also I know Destro was supposed to be Scottish in the cartoon but Joe fights Cobra, not Destro.

Hanksbane
11-01-2007, 07:54 AM
Its not longer a force of GIs, nor are they American Heroes.

They should call it really what it is: "Action Man: In No Way Are we Associated With the United States"

Besides if they go with the version they are planning, the main bad guy is called Cool Dude and Snake Eyes talks. So maybe they should just call it "The K-Mart Brand of Gi Joe: The Movie"

Parkbandit
11-01-2007, 08:36 AM
"A Real American Hero" will be replaced with what..

And having him fight terrorist, "until the fight's won".. would be far too politically incorrect.

:rofl:

Leave it to the libs in Hollyloon to fuck up a good movie by making it politically pussified.

Tsa`ah
11-01-2007, 12:07 PM
I still seek revenge upon my wife for decapitating Destro when we were kids.

StrayRogue
11-01-2007, 12:36 PM
Much more excited about X-Files 2. Snake Eye's talking is retarded dumb as well.

Kembal
11-01-2007, 01:01 PM
Hell, I find this dumb. Not the going after a Scottish arms dealer part...it's not necessary that the villains be the Cobra organization we saw in the cartoons. Or Arabic terriorsts. Or whatever.

However, eliminating the connection to the U.S. military? B.S. That's part of American history and cultural lore, and that's not something you screw with.

Skeeter
11-01-2007, 01:05 PM
It's bush's fault

Suppa Hobbit Mage
11-01-2007, 01:19 PM
I got goosebumps reading the history behind it, never heard that story. It's a shame they are changing it.

Hanksbane
11-01-2007, 01:35 PM
I got goosebumps reading the history behind it, never heard that story. It's a shame they are changing it.

agreed. I never knew either. That's a real cool story behind it.

Warner Bros is dumb. If you are going to change the story behind GI Joe that much, don't bother associating it with the franchise that has been around for almost 50 years. Just make your crappy action man movie. Leave the GI Joe franchise to people who have the balls to actually make a movie about American heroes fighting a terrorist group run by a dude with a blue hood.

875000
11-01-2007, 11:02 PM
I refuse to pay Hollywood $10 so they can profit from raping my childhood.

875000
11-01-2007, 11:57 PM
Hasbro’s G.I. Joe Team wanted to take this opportunity to clarify some of the facts regarding the G.I. Joe live-action movie that we are developing with Paramount Pictures.

First and foremost, we are not changing what the G.I. Joe brand is about. The name “G.I. Joe” will always be synonymous with bravery and heroism.

The G.I. Joe brand has enjoyed a successful 43-year history, spanning two key generations. The first was the line of 12-inch “realistic military” figures that were popular with kids in the 1960s and 1970s.

The second generation, was created in 1982, and is based on a cast of fictional heroes and villains that make up the “G.I. Joe vs. Cobra” fantasy. The premise of this fantasy is the story of the G.I. Joe team, led by Duke, and their “fight for freedom wherever there is trouble” against the evil Cobra Commander and his Cobra force. This storyline was an instant hit with kids in the early 1980s, spawning a highly popular 3-3/4-inch action figure line, comic book collection and animated series.

This movie will be a modern telling of the “G.I. Joe vs. Cobra” storyline and its compelling characters that Hasbro created 25 years ago. The G.I. Joe team will not be based in Brussels. Instead, they will be based out of the “Pit” as they were throughout the 1980s comic book series. And, in keeping with the G.I. Joe vs. Cobra fantasy, the movie will feature characters and locations from around the world. Duke, the lead character and head of the G.I. Joe team, will embody the values of bravery and heroism that the first generation of G.I. Joe figures established.

G.I. Joe is a very important property to Hasbro and we thank all of our fans for their enthusiasm. Without all of you, the brand would not be where it is today.

Thank you.

Let's translate this.

>>Hasbro’s G.I. Joe Team wanted to take this opportunity to clarify some of the facts regarding the G.I. Joe live-action movie that we are developing with Paramount Pictures.<<

Translation: We are going to lie to you.


>>First and foremost, we are not changing what the G.I. Joe brand is about. The name “G.I. Joe” will always be synonymous with bravery and heroism.<<

Transation: We are changing what the G.I. Joe brand is about. While it originally was "A Real American hero," we have decided to change it to something more marketable. By focusing on concepts like "heroism" and "bravery," we feel we will be able to reach a more diversified international audience, including the much sought after "suicide bomber" demographic.


>>The G.I. Joe brand has enjoyed a successful 43-year history, spanning two key generations. The first was the line of 12-inch “realistic military” figures that were popular with kids in the 1960s and 1970s.<<

Translation: We are hoping that everyone in this demographic segment -- which was originally based in the US -- are dead, hence will not be seeing our movie.

Editor's note: "G.I Joe" actually originated in 1942, with a movie being made in 1945. The action figures were released by Hasbro in 1965. Nice revisionism, assholes.


>>The second generation, was created in 1982, and is based on a cast of fictional heroes and villains that make up the “G.I. Joe vs. Cobra” fantasy. The premise of this fantasy is the story of the G.I. Joe team, led by Duke, and their “fight for freedom wherever there is trouble” against the evil Cobra Commander and his Cobra force. This storyline was an instant hit with kids in the early 1980s, spawning a highly popular 3-3/4-inch action figure line, comic book collection and animated series.<<

Translation: If you have continued reading this far without recoiling in disgust, you probaby have a crayon shoved up your nasal passage further than it should humanly go. Since it is probably lodged in your brain and you are for all intents and purposes helpless, the raping will commence.

Editor's note: The comic book and the toys came roughly out at the same time -- 1982. That is about where the truth ends.

1. The phrase "fight for freedom wherever there is trouble" comes from the cheesy song from the equally cheesy cartoon, which probably destroyed the franchise. It never, EVER, was the motto. Nor was it part of the original release.
2. The toys were not an instant hit. They did not become a best seller until 1985.
3. Duke was never the leader of the entire G.I. Joe team. There was always a higher ranked officer -- the most notable of which was Hawk, who was part of the first release.
4. Cobra was led by Cobra Commander. Not Destro. Combra Commander. And -- for a brief period of time -- Serpentor. Who will also not be in the movie.

>>This movie will be a modern telling of the “G.I. Joe vs. Cobra” storyline and its compelling characters that Hasbro created 25 years ago.<<

Translation: We are giving Hollywood free reign to f**k it up.

>>And, in keeping with the G.I. Joe vs. Cobra fantasy, the movie will feature characters and locations from around the world. <<

Translation: At this point we have no idea what we are talking about, so we are just blowing smoke up your ass.

Editor's note: In the comics, most of the action was set in the United States or an Island just offshore. The cartoon was set in more international locations. However, those episodes also tended to involve weather machines, mad scientists, professional wrestling, talking parrots, and -- right before everything collapsed -- genetic mutants. None of which will be in the 2009 movie script.

>>Duke, the lead character and head of the G.I. Joe team, will embody the values of bravery and heroism that the first generation of G.I. Joe figures established.<<

Translation: Minus a few details. Like the fact that Duke was never the head of the G. I. Joe team. And he will not really be a real American hero. And, we have decided to cast a pretty boy to represent him, instead of a rugged badass, because Hollywood's gay mafia is no longer into rough trade.

>>G.I. Joe is a very important property to Hasbro and we thank all of our fans for their enthusiasm. <<

Translation: Give us your money.

>>Without all of you, the brand would not be where it is today.<<

Translation: Go f**k yourself.


Editor's response: Man -- first Star Wars. Now this. If I had access to my toys and comics book right now, I'd be soaking them in acid.

radamanthys
11-02-2007, 12:37 AM
I remember when he died, I read up on him. Picking up the .30 cal browning and holding off what amounted to about 1000 japanese is probably one of the most badass and heroic things ever. That's at about the point where you say, "Fuck it, I'm dying for this".

Is nothing sacred?

Tea & Strumpets
11-02-2007, 09:25 AM
Sergeant Slaughter is a Frenchman in the movie.

Some Rogue
11-02-2007, 09:42 AM
Sergeant Slaughter is a Frenchman in the movie.

LIES

Skeeter
11-02-2007, 10:12 AM
I don't really see a problem with marketing globally.

I was an avid collector of the GI Joe comics as a kid. (Imagine that...on a GS message board no less)

I remember tons of story lines that took place all over the world. One of my favorite lines was when part of the team was trapped in some communist gulag.

Without doing any research it seems I remember more issues off of american soil than on.

Celephais
11-02-2007, 10:15 AM
I had never heard that story about the original GI Joe, that's incredible... and a real shame this story isn't told more often. A real American hero.


I don't really see a problem with marketing globally.

When it means breaking your condition to the marine in question that GI Joe always be an American Marine, yeah, I have a real problem with it.

Skeeter
11-02-2007, 10:17 AM
That's an anecdotal story. I doubt that marine set condition on using his "face" and even if he did that would only apply to the first big doll.

Celephais
11-02-2007, 10:22 AM
That's an anecdotal story. I doubt that marine set condition on using his "face" and even if he did that would only apply to the first big doll.
Anecdotal or not, it shouldn't be fucked with. They attached his face to a name, now they're detatching the name from all the man stood for.

Skeeter
11-02-2007, 10:30 AM
Do you feel perhaps you're a little too emotionally invested in this?

Parkbandit
11-02-2007, 10:31 AM
I don't really see a problem with marketing globally.

I was an avid collector of the GI Joe comics as a kid. (Imagine that...on a GS message board no less)

I remember tons of story lines that took place all over the world. One of my favorite lines was when part of the team was trapped in some communist gulag.

Without doing any research it seems I remember more issues off of american soil than on.

Quotes from the theme song:

"GI Joe, a real American hero"

"GI Joe is the codename for American's daring, highly trained
special mission force."

"It's purpose, to defend human freedom against Cobra-
a ruthless, terrorist organization determined to rule the world."

"He never gives up. He'll stay til the fight's won."


Maybe we should make James Bond from Denmark now and he fights for global warming.

Parkbandit
11-02-2007, 10:36 AM
And for those who are saying "Big deal.. it's a comic.. it's a cartoon.." I do agree.

If it were only this, then no big deal. But it's not. It's the whole politically correct movement that is really fucked up. This is but one slice of the huge bullshit pie. How much longer are some of you going to keep eating it, until you say "Hey.. this is fucking shit pie!"

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e6/belike53/Brown_Pie.jpg

Celephais
11-02-2007, 10:44 AM
Do you feel perhaps you're a little too emotionally invested in this?
If there was no emotional investment then we could change GI Joe to being a Innuit who clubs baby seals to provide blubber to suicide bombers so they stay warm before setting off their explosives. I just think it's incredibly disrespectful to market a product as an icon of patriotism and then to change the whole meaning of the product when it's not marketable.

I guess that depends on if your defining characteristic of America is capitalism or "bravery and honor"

Skeeter
11-02-2007, 10:57 AM
You're kidding right?

Because the GI Joe you remember, the one from the 80s, was only about capitalism. Little kids love guns and explosions. GI Joe (the 80s version and what the movie is about) was designed with capitalism in mind. Why else do you think they had pirates and ninjas? Do you see lots of pirates and ninjas in the marines?

People have used the army for marketing purposes for decades. Remember those little green army men you and your dad used to have? Before that it was cowboys and indians.

GI Joe as some last bastion of patriotism in the USA is laughable at best. I know it feels like they're stealing a portion of your childhood, but step back and look at the big picture.

Sean of the Thread
11-02-2007, 10:57 AM
That's an anecdotal story. I doubt that marine set condition on using his "face" and even if he did that would only apply to the first big doll.

Even USMC JROTC students are taught that story.

Skeeter
11-02-2007, 11:02 AM
It's a great story. The only part I'm doubting is there's some written contract somewhere between hasbro and this guy saying you can only use my face if GI oe remains a marine. The cartoon wrecks that theory.

Celephais
11-02-2007, 11:07 AM
You're kidding right?

Because the GI Joe you remember, the one from the 80s, was only about capitalism. Little kids love guns and explosions. GI Joe (the 80s version and what the movie is about) was designed with capitalism in mind. Why else do you think they had pirates and ninjas? Do you see lots of pirates and ninjas in the marines?

People have used the army for marketing purposes for decades. Remember those little green army men you and your dad used to have? Before that it was cowboys and indians.

GI Joe as some last bastion of patriotism in the USA is laughable at best. I know it feels like they're stealing a portion of your childhood, but step back and look at the big picture.
I'm not saying it's the only patriotic symbol or that it wasn't a marketing ploy in the first place, just that if they want to continue to milk it they need to respect the basis on which it was created.

The James Bond comment is a very good analogy, I'm not british, but I think it would be entirely disrespectful to change a defining characteristic of the franchise. I don't have a vested interest in maintaining that assosiation, but I would see it as a super shitty move (infact I hate it in the James Bonds when he's driving a BMW... less so the Lotus, that's British at least)

Celephais
11-02-2007, 11:09 AM
It's a great story. The only part I'm doubting is there's some written contract somewhere between hasbro and this guy saying you can only use my face if GI oe remains a marine. The cartoon wrecks that theory.
No one said it was a written contract, I'm not sure it's true either, but if anything it was likely an off the cuff request, not made official that neither party assumed would be in question in their forseeable futures.

875000
11-02-2007, 11:12 AM
I don't really see a problem with marketing globally.


I know it feels like they're stealing a portion of your childhood, but step back and look at the big picture.

Not stealing. More like violating or raping.

This is not just about "marketing globally." This is about Hasbro and Hollywood selling the soul of a beloved childhood and American icon.

That press released said it all. They are abandoning the premise of the toy line; and, in the process, they are chucking real similarities to the actual product out the window. In the end, they are just using the name as a launchpad for selling a different product.

What I also find offensive is the underlying rationale behind all of this -- that being from the US and American values are something to be ashamed of. It pissed me off when they did that in the latest Superman movie, and it is even more galling here.

875000
11-02-2007, 11:18 AM
It's a great story. The only part I'm doubting is there's some written contract somewhere between hasbro and this guy saying you can only use my face if GI oe remains a marine. The cartoon wrecks that theory.

Things do not need to be codified into a contract to make them wrong.

Skeeter
11-02-2007, 11:30 AM
What I also find offensive is the underlying rationale behind all of this -- that being from the US and American values are something to be ashamed of.

So American values are categorically different from European values? Didn't seem that bad when I was over there this summer.

875000
11-02-2007, 11:34 AM
So American values are categorically different from European values? Didn't seem that bad when I was over there this summer.

I don't understand where you are going with this. Care to explain?

Skeeter
11-02-2007, 11:40 AM
in your words they are shunning american values. Therefore they must be embracing someone else's. Are american values that much different from european/asian values. (which is where the global market would be)

Or is it all just pretty much the same?

how is this different from movie adaptations of popular books? Have you read Jurassic park? Not even close to the movie.

875000
11-02-2007, 12:23 PM
Are american values that much different from european/asian values. (which is where the global market would be)

Yes.


Or is it all just pretty much the same?

No.


Therefore they must be embracing someone else's.

Bad logic there. They can also choose to eschew values entirely.


how is this different from movie adaptations of popular books? Have you read Jurassic park? Not even close to the movie.

It is different because they are dealing with something that falls closer to an iconic status and a history. That is the reason why the G.I Joe name has value and why Hasbro felt compelled to put out a press release.

That said, let's set aside the issue of iconic status for a second. Sometimes Hollywood does a decent job converting books (and other written media) to the big screen: The Last Unicorn ... Lord of the Rings ... Sin City ... 300 ...

Other times it does an abomitable job: I, Robert ... Judge Dredd ... Howard the Duck.

What matters is that the ones making the movie remain respectful to the original spirit. The key for adaptations is to remain true to this spirit, while recognizing that minor details may need to be overlooked. Certain things don't make it into the movie. That is okay -- movies are a more limited media than books.

That is particularly true when things come closer to an iconic status (back to there, now). Lord of the Rings was a good example of things done right. Did Peter Jackson follow the book verbatim? No. Tom Bombadil never made it into the movies, for example, and groups of fans did not decide to riot over this. But Jackson also remained true to the characters and the spirit of the story, so when a character was not included or a character was slightly tweaked, the story was still came across; the characters still rang true.

That's a big difference.

radamanthys
11-02-2007, 04:31 PM
It's a conservative conundrum... free market economies or respect for excellence and virtue/ support of the military?