G.I. Joe: Retaliation

Awesome! Shame I’m not 10 and so I can’t ask dad for Zartan the Panda (with interchangeable faces). And while we’re talking about him, he is the best President of the United States ever (he handled nuclear disarmament of the country blindfolded and then played the Angry Birds) and Jonathon Pryce enjoys him to extremes. Bruce is just here to make up numbers, but works better here than in the last McClane. Tatum soon clears the decks (the opening scene was just because of him, in my view) and makes way for the powerhouse of the movie, the Rock whose Roadblock has a) a more complex character (as far as is possible for this popcorn genre) and b) the most worked-out body and he’s a really nice guy. Of course, the duels between those two ninjas are perfect and the peak of the movie is the abduction in the mountains. Unfortunately, for some baffling reason the action just doesn’t work - in fact it’s not baffling, but awful editing which turned everything into some sort of impenetrable goo. Otherwise, there are enough ideas that should have been made the most of and to greater extremes, but some things are very effective. But that’s where the Transformers sequel suffered too. Hasbro must be having a whale of a time. (07/04/2013)

It's a silly movie, but technically very daring, and some ideas are truly interesting. The scene on the rock, for example, is excellently filmed. Otherwise, it's a standard thing in all aspects. Technically solid, with lots of gadgets and gimmicks, which is exactly what was expected and the reason why this nonsense deserves at least two stars, because in terms of storytelling and plot, it's almost impossible to rate. (07/04/2013)

You want action, you will get action. If you want to think, go solve sudoku. The film "G.I. Joe: Retaliation" is based on a game and it's actually still like a game. Big boys play and other big and little boys can watch. When I say boys, of course I also mean girls who are into this. It's a game, in a good package. The content is weaker, occasionally adding unnecessary elements - like a blind master of martial arts, but considering my weakness for RZA, it's not harmful at all - and moreover, the story doesn't close at all, but it's simply a fun activity. Where the first film didn't appeal to me so much, the second film won me over with its playfulness. It's a shame about Channing, but the director of the films "Let's Dance 2" and "Let's Dance 3D" showed that he can handle an action spectacle where nothing else matters. If they still gave a small G.I. Joe figure with the ticket at the cinema, I would be completely satisfied. (19/11/2013)

The first G. I. Joe movie was idiotic, but there was some brutal, out-of-this-world action. After all, that’s exactly why I’ve enjoyed it. The sequel is only idiotic and it’s really hard to rate an idiotic movie. Actually, the only plus were Channing and Dwayne. But those two are drifting through fates so stupid that the movie would be impossible to understand even if the action scenes were amazing. And it’s not like I’d watch it ten times over, once is more than enough. This was probably the worst story I’ve ever seen in a movie. (23/04/2014)

While the sequels of thematically similar blockbusters about madmen who want to take over the world and a handful of last protagonists stand in their way are usually bigger, noisier, and more bombastic in every way, Retaliation paradoxically follows the path of modesty and artificiality, which was obviously the only sensible choice after Sommers' "over the top" madness. It’s not a bad thing, but even 4 years since the premiere I need both hands to list off the memorable moments, and Chu doesn't quite have it in hand as a whole, so the last half hour is a bit yawn-inducing. It is, however, kept afloat mainly by the fact that one likable cast has been replaced by another, only someone forgot to profile them better in this case. (18/07/2013)