Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Roy Hart If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

valadas Yes, lots of odd devices not fully explained. Here is one more film of this kind which is only worth for the visual effects and digital animation as a matter of fact in large profusion sometimes tiresome. The story is a mere pretext to the display of these effects and animation. This is a more than ordinary story in this kind of movies. The honourable guys and the evil ones (the former very good and the latter very bad) are typical. The story develops itself through a series of violent episodes some absurd and even unintelligible. A group of malefactors called the Cobra who are the owners of a high technology intends to lay hold on the world using nanomite warheads. The Joes are a special team of the good ones who fight the Cobra to prevent that they reach their aim. A detail of this is that the man who runs a company that sells those warheads to NATO gives them also to Cobra. Nothing more dull-witted.

bowmanblue I'm writing this review after none other than my third viewing of 'GI Joe.' After I initially watched it, I ever went as far as to buy it. Yes, I know it's no work of art, but I enjoyed it enough for what it was –and what it was is a simple, no-frills action movie (mainly for kids, I guess).I never actually played with the toys when I was younger, so I can't say how faithful the film is to the toy-line, but the characters were pretty easy to define as either 'good' or 'evil.' And I enjoyed it quite a bit, both the first and second time I sat through it. However, after a third viewing, something didn't quite sit so well with me.I know it's minor, but somehow the special effects just didn't seem that special any more. Okay, so I probably could tell that real people couldn't really jump over (and through) trains on my first two viewings, but this time round everything just came across as too computer-generated – almost to the point of totally destroying what little realism there was in the film.That said, it was still an okay watch. It's pretty much aimed at kids. The characters are hardly three dimensional and are more 'cool' than well-rounded (probably in a bid to sell yet more toys in their likeness).Like I said... the primary audience is probably young boys, not really fully-grown men like me, but it's a decent enough story about a terrible tyrant trying to manufacture weapons that will take over the world and a team of special operation good guys who are out to stop him.Dennis Quid is probably the stand-out of the film, but he's not young enough to be the star, so his parts – although fun – are limited. Although, even if you are a fully-grown man, you'll probably appreciate Sienna Miller's *ahem* 'performance' in the movie (and when I say 'performance' I mean costume).Whether this is a good film or not, it'll probably keep the young boys happy on a Saturday afternoon (at least until the new Star Wars films come out). But could someone explain to me why they needed to cast a British actor to play the President of America? Surely there are enough American middle-aged actors who could play the small part just fine?

Taylor Kingston I enjoy this movie, but I can't watch it over and over. I honestly didn't know that G.I. Joe was a cartoon and a famous character. And when I did find out, I though that G.I. Joe was one person, not a team or an organization.I feel a bit bad for this movie, because it didn't get great ratings and not a lot of people liked it that much. I enjoyed, but I'm pretty sure that's mainly to do with Channing Tatum. I like this movie and would recommend it, but don't get mad at me, if your expectations aren't met. Since I never knew anything about G.I. Joe, I couldn't be disappointed.In this movie, a group of elite combat fighter spy people, called the G.I. Joe's, are called to action, against a ruthless enemy. Also, Channing Tatum is in it, and he looks good.Overall, I give this movie a 7 out of 10.

angelicardour I want nothing more than to say how much I loved this movie. I want to be able to say it was epic and it did the name "G.I. Joe" proud… but I can't. Not honestly anyway.I will say that I didn't hate the movie. It had its good parts. For instance, some of the action sequences were ridiculous (in a good way). The main characters were played really well. Channing Tatum was a perfect choice for Duke and did his best to breathe life into the character. Marlon Wayans managed to bring out the action with Ripcord without losing that funny edge that suits him. As for Christopher Eccleston… the ninth doctor definitely made the switch from light to dark side seamlessly – though I often found his "accent" a little hard to believe. Joseph Gordon-Levitt was on screen a bit too little for my taste, but I still love him none-the-less. He also shows a great deal more depth in his acting ability than I've seen up until now.As good as the acting was though, there were parts of this movie that I just couldn't get past. There's a point where there are some people who are not supposed to be able to feel fear or have any use of self- consideration. Yet those same people are pictured screaming in terror and trying to pull something out of their chest in panic rather than going after their target.If that wasn't enough to make one double glance at the screen, the storyline was flat. I knew just about everything that was going to happen within the first twenty minutes of the movie.I think, perhaps, my problems with the script and direction is a case of too many cooks spoiling the pot. I checked IMDb for the Writer credits and there were five different people listed. I've been writing a book with ONE other person and it's often difficult for us to be on the same page about where we want sh*t to go.In the end, the movie didn't suck. Perhaps I would have had more appreciation for it if I had been an avid watcher of the cartoon series, but even then – my problems still had to do with continuity more than anything else, so maybe not. I don't regret watching it, but I doubt I'll be watching it again either.