Despite a lot of contraversy, I am actually looking forward to a G.I. Joe Movie. Not just because I watched the cartoon every day after school, but that it seems Hollywood is willing to toss big budgets at 80s cartoon remakes after the success of Transformers. This gives me a fair bit of faith in G.I. Joe.
So when I heard rumours of Mark Wahlberg being involved we instantly thought he would be Duke, but the rumours have it that another actor is aiming to show us how good he looks in Duke’s beret. George Clooney.
FilmJunk helps spread this rumour:
He recently dropped out of Joe Carnahan’s White Jazz due to a scheduling conflict, and according to IESB the reason is that he is eager to get himself back into a blockbuster, pronto. Specifically, sources say that he is in talks to star as Duke in the upcoming G.I. Joe feature film.
Now the role of Duke just HAS to go to an actor with enough personality and attitude to fill the army boots of G.I. Joe’s feild commander. I think Clooney would be pretty damned good in that role.
I am reminded of Clooney’s role in Peacemaker or Three Kings that makes him such a believable soldier with all the attitude and charm that would make him shouting “YO JOE!!” not sound so cheesey.
I like Clooney a lot, and I can forgive him for things like Batman and Robin. So I think this might just be the ticket to get him out of that artsy serious crowd and score him a few points on the popularity meter!
Dudes…IT IS A FREAKING MOVIE!!!
Sorry, just had to put things in perspective…carry on…
Rodney,
I agree that a point of view can be flawed;however I dont think that in THIS PARTICULAR disccusion my opinion is flawed.I dont oppose a live action take of a “hockey cartoon” because they took away the American flag from the title.I was merely pointing out a an aspect of the film that I didnt agree with.
Im DONE talking about flat earth and green cheese,because that has absolutely nothing to do with our disccusion.I am NOT unwilling to accept”the slightest deviation to all possibility of change”(didnt I just say that I LIKED the CHANGES made for Transformers?)and I never admitted ignorance(your trying to make it appear as if I said somthing that I simply never said).
“Change is good if done right” Not always somtimes its better not to make changes.By the way,Venom was just one example of a film where I thought change shouldnt have been made(I actually kinda liked Spidey 3 even though MOST of it could have been greatly improved;but I HATED the way they did Venom);had they stayed true to the comic-book villiain,he would have been awsome.And I think Joes might fit that genre as well.As for “dosnt mean it will all be wrong” I never said that all change is bad( again your making it seem as if I said somthing that I didnt;there are many films that I LOVE having changes to).
1)I agree that not all the Joes were American but the Americans played the biggest part.Besides that,they all FOUGHT FOR AMERICA.There are many American groups that have non-Americans in them,but they are still AMERICAN groups.Take Justice Legue of AMERICA for instance it has non-Americans in it but it is still an American group.All that matters is who they fight for.
2) If a group poses a threat to someone else then,YES they are enimies.It is the people against terrorism;but GIJOE was made to show America doing THERE part in fighting terrorism.
3)Its not a coincdence to have an American lead a group that was originally made to fight FOR America.
4)Again,its merely showing America doing there part to fight the bad guys.
5) Lol do you honestly think GIJOE was not showing America react to terrorism.If that were true then gijoe WOULD have been an international group,however we know this isnt the case.
6)Whatever Whatever.Im dropping this point.
7) Im not even sure if you had an actual arguement for this one.
8)Showing the US kick butt wont make it seem as if the US HAS to act,it will show that America SHOULD act,cause they pay a big contribution(and no I dont think that America is the only country that is a big contributer.Still it would be nice to see US military kickin terrorist butt,on screen.
I dont think it would be shooting themselves in the foot to show Americans kickn butt.Think about Transorformers showing US troops saving the world from an army of evil decepticons.As for them not selling,Im pretty sure the number was 8000000+ movies sold.
How bout “Ya,look at America contributing their part”.
Peace.
Seth, I appreciate that this is your point of view, but even a point of view can be flawed. Your entire basis for opposing a modern live action take on a hokey cartoon is that they removed the unbiased American flag waving from the title. And they did so for a reason. A few reasons. All which I explained.
Also, the “because it was that way” was specifically what the flat earth and green cheese has to do with GIJoe. You are unwilling to accept even the slightest deviation out of your admitted ignorance to all possibility of change. I am not saying they have to change everything about the Joes, and it appears they are not changing much more than a mislabeled subtitle. Change is good if done right. Venom is an example of that not being done right. Doesn’t mean it will all be wrong.
1. Joes were deliberately not American though sponsored by the US Military, it made little sense to call them “real american heroes”. Even in the original cartoon. They were not American Heroes.
2. You assume that they are YOUR enemies. The “us and them” mentality is specifically what they are avoiding. Its PEOPLE against terrorism, not Americans.
3. Having an American leader will be a coincidence, not a directive. Its still an international team.
4. You are still on that “us and them” thing. See point 2 and 3.
5. GIJoe was not about America responding to terrorism. It was about America admitting that they need the whole world to HELP THEM fight something like Cobra.
6. Not even going there.
7. So adding the internationalism isnt really needed. Interesting. See point 6.
8. Showing the US kicking terrorist butt will only reflect well on Americans. You clearly missed this point. If the movie comes out with a clear American dominance, no matter how they intended it to look, it will appear as if the world NEEDS the US to act because no one else can do it. Adding internationalism says we did it together.
Bottom line is that the changes suggested are being made to make this a financially viable film. They don’t want to shoot themselves in the foot with a movie revolving around attitudes that the rest of the world already assumes about the US in the first place. That will not sell films.
The last thing they want GIJoe to be is “Yay, look at the American with the gun.”
Rodney,dude just calm down a sec.Im merely expresing my point of view.I read John’s post,however I have to say I don’t agree with some of it.Changing the characters somtimes works(by the way;don’t pretend you know me cause I loved watching Transformers,and would never pretend not to just to prove a point),however somtimes changing things in a film just dosn’t work.Take Spiderman 3 for instance,Venom SUCKED cause they changed him all around.Also WHAT THE HECK DOES GREEN CHEESE AND A FLAT EARTH HAFTA DO WITH GIJOE.I never stated that people should think the moon is green cheese because they used to.The idea that the earth was flat COULDNT be kept because in reality the earth WASNT flat.GIJOE on the other hand is a fictional story and CAN be kept the same,according to the filmmakers preference.
I simply think the REAL American Hero theme is good.Why change it?If it ain’t broken dont fix it.
1)I Know that GIJOE wasn’t made completely of American soldiers but it was still a branch of the US Military.(hence the American Hero theme).
2)Showing the US Military fighting our enemies ISNT portraying them as world police.
3)”THE team will be lead by an American”.I got nothing wrong with that.
4)”Terrorism isnt an American problem”.No,but it is the US militaries responsibility to protect us.And the original story line was simply showing the American aspect to fighting terrorism.
5) Again, I know other countries fight terrorism but there are branches of the US military that fight it to and thats what GIJOE was about.It was simply showing that aspect of th fight.
6)Sorry dude I dont believe in the Easter bunny,and I DONT neccesarily think this is a slap in the face for US troops(just see how the movie pans out)
7)Im not really sure that making this a non-American fighting force would give it a brouder scope or a potentially better movie(it might),but it could just add another demension to the film that really isnt needed.
8)Showing US troops kick terrorist butt might reflect pretty well on America as well.
These are some of the reasons I disagree with John’s Post.I could be wrong(still not sure they should change it the film though)
thanks for the info
Peace out
I’m curious who would play the rest of the characters, Flint, Scarlet, Shipwreck, And so on. So many GI Joe characters, On both sides.
I’m with Brad, George Clooney would make a fine General Hawk, but he’s just a tad old for Duke.
call me when they cast Michael Clarke Duncan as Roadblock. Who wants a body massage?
I’m all for a live action GI Joe movie, As long as they keep the spirit and light heartedness of the original cartoon of the 80s.
I hope they don’t use the new cartoon as the source material, They completely butchered that by turning it into an anime.
Seth,
I challenge you to read John’s post about how multinational GI Joe already is despite its weak claim of a “real American Hero”
The when you are done reading about how GIJoe never really was solely about Americans, you might see how this is the way it was and that is the way they should keep it.
Then when even that won’t phase your rock solid approach to “keep it the way it was” for no apparent reason other than “thats the way it was, so that is the way they should keep it” I challenge you to hark back to the days man thought the earth was flat, or that the moon was made of green cheese, or that social structures like Apartheid and Communism were “the way it was, so that was they way they should keep it”
Then even then when you STILL think this is a good idea, think of how they changed Transformers to adapt it to live action, and even if you want to pretend that Transformers sucked think of just how pathetic and lame that movie might have been had they stuck to “the way it was”. Even people who want to hate Transformers will admit this was a vast improvement.
How do I think they’re going to fit “A real universal task force hero” into a catchy lingo?
Yo Joe!
Sold.
Rodney how would you feel if one day the makers of James Bond decided that it would be to exclusive for that dude to work for the British.What if they were like”hey M16 might not sell to others”.Come on;this is no more than the changing of a good thing to please another crowd.I dont think that should matter to the filmmakers as much as GETTING THIS MOVIE RIGHT,getting it the way it was to begin with.An American hero,thats the way it was and thats the way they should keep it; and not worry about what others might think……..Just out of couriousity how do you think they’re going to fit “A real universal task force hero” into a catchy lingo.
Seth, It actually makes MORE sense to make this NOT be about a “real American hero” as only a handful of the Joes were even American. This is an international task force against terror (Cobra) and it would make little sense to imply that only the Americans involved would be the heroes.
Furthermore, with the US being so popular on the world stage when it comes to military actions, I hardly doubt anyone BUT US patrons giving this movie more than 2 seconds of their time. Play this movie in foreign markets and it would BOMB worse than Gigli.
This movies gonna be crap,I really hope Clooney stays away.When I heard about a GIJOE movie I was really exited.Somthing about a “Real AMERICAN Hero” caught my attention.Ya but that was before I heard the makers are taking away the AMERICAN HERO part.Apparently they thought it would be to exclusive to make the characters american;so our hero no longer fights for America but for some universal organization.Im sorry but this puts my expectations of this film significantly lower.It kinda ticks me off that they might ruin a film with this kind of potential.
This rumor has already been debunked. George in Joe ain’t happening.
WOW, you guys certainly don’t know your Joe’s.
Who ever starts these rumors needs to brush up on their “Real American Hero” knowledge, or if this truly is a casting “nice to have”, I would push George for no one other then General Hawk, the leader of G.I. JOE.
Duke was second in comand!
“I like Clooney a lot, and I can forgive him for things like Batman and Robin.” amen
I thought his ‘Ocean’ movies were blockbusters.
It was Flint in the beret…..George would make a good Flint
You people keep saying a “movie like this” and somehow assume that after Batman and Robin that he wouldnt be “stupid enough”
If this treatment is being pitched as serious and traditional military (not campy spandex soldiers) then I see no problem with Clooney in the role. The “movie like this” you are thinking of is like the Street Fighter movie with VanDamme. There have been no indications of them treating this movie as a hokey campy movie.
And I doubt they would either. Going with the very realistic versions of things like Batman and Transformers has indicated that this is what the fanboys want to see. Not campy Schumacker Batman.
Clooney as Duke? Nope, wouldnt work with his acting style. Why hasnt anyone thought of the guy from 300 who played King Leo? He be my second choice next too Jason Statham.
I can’t believe he would do a movie like this.
But it would take the whole project to a whole new level.
buster.
lol @ he needs a blockbloster,
Clooney’s too classy for this.
I think he could do the role justice.
John, now that you put that in my head id kind of be disappointed to see anyone else play the role. Like when i thought Jason Statham had a chance to be the hitman. Hope Joe doesnt let me down like #47 did.
No. He won’t take this.
He’s not stupid enough.