On behalf of Charlie, we would like to apologize for our delay in blogging for this year. We've been caught up with our personal lives and haven't really gotten ourselves up to speed with what's been going on in our favorite blogs. Today, however, was a good day because I accidentally stumbled upon a good movie. And if you're an avid reader of PBoaS - specifically, my part of the blog - you'd know that my titles are always related to the movie I blog about. And with that, we move on to the movie review.
Yeah, I'm putting the poster first, because I already wrote my intro to the movie.
Anyway, G.I. Joe: Retaliation lived up to its name. If you saw the first movie, you'll know how much of a snooze-fest that movie was no matter how action packed it was. The story of the first movie was so bland, Gordon Ramsay would have thrown it out of Hell's Kitchen because it wasn't seasoned. And because this movie's subtitle is "Retaliation", it's definition according to the dictionary of wordnetweb.princeton.edu is "Action taken in return for an injury or offense". To which, of course, it did with the first movie. But there is one question that hasn't been answered. "If the movie was able to retaliate from the first movie, did it qualify as a great action movie"? My answer to that is this: "It's not a 'Great' action movie, but it's up there."
Why do I say that? Simple, because the first part of the movie was a bit confusing. Sure you're re-introduced to the "G.I. Joe" and are given a quick background of the story, but I kinda got confused because I don't remember anybody from the cast. In fact, I didn't know Channing Tatum was part of the original movie up until before we entered the cinema. To which I might say that his appearance in the movie gave all the meaning of the word "Retaliate" to the story. If you notice, he's not in the poster. Guess why. :D
Now, without going into too much detail to the movie, let's focus on the appearance of Dwayne Johnson and Bruce Willis. As most (if not all) of you would know, these guys are up there when it comes to bringing action into action movies. Sure they've mellowed down a bit once in a while, but hey, when a movie needs someone to increase the testosterone, you get these guys into the mix and you're all set. In fact, I think "The Rock" should have been included in "The Expendables 2". Can we get a third movie and put him there? Even if it means him as a villain?
Also, a friend of mine pointed out the actions scenes that one would expect in an action movie. Personally, I think it's great that they mixed it up. But if you're going to go Asian, there's one small requirement to being Asian (pun not intended), and that's "If you're going to make action scenes, the only reason you die is because you got beat up by the enemy, not because of human error". 'Nuff said.
Last thing I'd like to point out is the presence of the two ladies in the posters. I'm not sure how they fit into the story, aside from putting hot girls into the mix, but I'm glad there wasn't any unnecessary "guy-girl relationship" going on. Sure there was a little bit of chemistry between certain cast members, and they tried to put a little romance into the movie, but because they're soldiers, it's more appropriate to kick ass instead of kiss around. I'm not saying I don't like such scenes, but I would have hated this movie if they put that scene because it wouldn't have fit into the story.
Overall, I'd rate this 7/10 stars. It's not the best action movie, but it's pretty much up there for keeping to the story.
P.S. - my title is "it's been a while" because "it's been a while since I saw a decent action movie.. :D"
