Matthew Belinkie, Mark Lee, and Matthew Wrather are joined by special guest Thom Bowers to overthink G.I. Joe: Retaliation.
Want new episodes of the Overthinking It Podcast to download automatically? Subscribe in iTunes! (Or grab the podcast RSS feed directly.)
Tell us what you think! Leave a comment, use the contact form, email us or call (203) 285-6401 to leave a voicemail.
Here Are The Tweets We Never Got To
@overthinkingit – Why do you think GI Joe of all series proved resistant to the trend of the #GrittyReboot?
— Michael T Ford III (@MTFIII) April 1, 2013
@overthinkingit Also, was the techno/dubstep-esque remix of "7 Nation Army" from the trailers in the movie?????
— Gabrielle Arrowood (@Gabstheboss) April 1, 2013
@overthinkingit which actor has the better agent? Channing Tatum or Bruce Willis?
— Edward Lineberry (@elineberry) April 1, 2013
@overthinkingit Also, thoughts on Dwayne Johnson's penchant for UnderArmour, as evident in Fast 5, GI Joe: Retaliation and, likely, Fast 6.
— Arden Sedlins (@ArdenSedlins) April 1, 2013
My underthinking it contribution: GI Joe Colon Retaliation, very different movie
This isn’t a real “well, actually” but you can’t use Watch What Crappens because it’s already the name of a podcast that covers Bravo shows. http://www.tvgasm.com/category/screeningroom/watch-what-crappens-screeningroom
It took me a moment to realize it, but I’ve actually heard Larry Hama speak.
So I also said, “Race-class-gender analysis, GO!” You sort of did the race analysis. Were there class implications in Bruce Willis’s character’s fortress in his house? What about the ladies in the movie?
Shockingly, it is NOT a very feminist movie. Sure, Adrianne Palicki (who will ALWAYS be Tyra Collette to me) is some kind of super soldier, and she gets to do some fancy computer hacking stuff. But she also has to dress in not one but TWO sexy outfits and bat her eyelashes as part of an Ocean’s Eleven style scheme. And her one scene where she gets to talk about herself is about her daddy issues, and she does it while undressing.
As for Bruce Willis, it does strike me that he has a strangely beautiful house. It’s got all this polished wood, brushed aluminum appliances, lots of natural light. Very Martha Stewart, neat and tidy. It is NOT the kind of place you would image a retired (presumably widowed) General living. Maybe this is for comic effect, so we can have the scene where he unveils his massive arsenal behind his innocent looking kitchen cabinets.
Were the hand towels in the kitchen plaid?
After seeing this movie today, I noticed a few things regarding the timing of film events in relation to real world news.
This movie was originally slated to be released in summer 2012, as you mentioned on the podcast. I think that one major reason it was pulled was as a response to the terrible tragedy in the Dark Knight Rises theater shooting. Hollywood thought it might be in poor taste to release a film that was full of guns blazing.
Gangster Squad was pushed back from a 2012 release, to January 2013, because it included a scene where a movie theater gets attacked by gunmen.
Watching this film today, (literally, at a matinee, after work), I couldn’t help but think about how much they poke fun at North Korea. With the very recent threats of nuclear attacks from that country, calling them “the little guy” was a bit humurous, but also frightening. It reminded me that in the summer of 2012, we didn’t take that country as seriously as we are today, in regards to militaristic threats.
G.I. Joe: Retaliation is also the 2nd movie, a week after another action flick, in which we see an assault on the White House. After the previous week’s release, “Olympus Has Fallen,” we see the White House get attacked and taken over by terrorists, yet again. The previews before Retaliation, at least in my theater, included a new Roland Emmerich movie called “White House Down.”
Roland Emmerich loves to blow up the world, and, as it seems in this trailer, the White House, once again. Having the most iconic White House destruction scene in film from Independence Day just isn’t enough for this guy.
What does it say about our culture that 3 films depict an attack on the White House in such a short amount of time? Is this a reflection of a society frustrated with government?
Also, I notice that both in GI Joe and Olympus, there are references to Greek mythology. Cobra’s ultimate weapon was called “Zeus” and, well…..”Olympus Has Fallen” is pretty straightforward.
What say you, fellow Overthinkers?
Here’s the White House Down trailer. Also, it looks like Channing Tatum is playing Gerard Butler’s role from Olympus Has Fallen in this film.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AXbiCdmXgw
And in those two movies, there’s a White Knight saving a Black Man that’s in power.
Come on, folks, are Cat and I the only ones interested in critical race theory?
Hey, as a black man, I didn’t even think about that! Well done, Gab.
So how does that compare to race in GI Joe?
Well hold on Gab, in Olympus Has Fallen the President is played by Aaron Eckhart (Harvey Dent). Morgan Freeman is Speaker of the House (therefore substitute President during the crisis) but I don’t think he’s in danger. And Angela Bassett is the head of the Secret Service.
I think it’s very interesting that both The Rock and Vin Diesel are mixed race. It might be that being fully black is an obstacle to being a mainstream action star (it almost certainly is) but being something in the middle is a plus. I’m always reminded of Will Smith telling the story about how they cast the female lead in Hitch. Basically, the studio decided it couldn’t be a black woman (because then white people wouldn’t go see it) and it couldn’t be a white woman (because then people would get upset, I guess?) so it had to be Eva Mendes.
I am fully aware of how the succession of the presidency works. His physical body may not be in immediate danger. But it’s still a white dude jumping in to help out a Black man that’s in a position of power. Angela Basset is awesome, though.
However, Cat and I are discussing this particular trope already with respect to Epic, wherein the token female is also given a position of power (and often times made a person of color) in order to stifle criticism about lack of strong female women of color.
Right, Cat? ;p
And I bet part of why Hitch didn’t do so well is because Mendez is a terrible actress. But she’s hot, and a woman of color, so wooooo! >.<
I don’t know Gab, I haven’t seen either movie, but the situations seem pretty different to me. In one, Jamie Fox is a CAPTURED leader, in need of rescue. In the other, Morgan Freeman is the guy in charge, giving orders to the rescuers.
But if your point is that there aren’t enough black action heroes, I’ll agree to that.
Poop. I’m just doing the classic OTI 101 instruction to comment-without-having-seen-it. This is why I try to avoid doing that- invariably, I fail at it. Sigh.
But now that I’ve dug in my heels, I’m still going to push it, though. Morgan Freeman may be in charge, even giving orders, but it’s still a white guy that he needs in order for sh*t to get done. Sure, Jamie Foxx getting directly rescued is more precise. But. Brooooadly speaking, the situation is thus:
1) A Black man is, somehow, in a position of power and authority.
2) Bad things are happening.
3) A white guy comes to the rescue.
Yes, it’s broad, but a lot of general tropes are.
And yes, there are not enough action stars of color. I absolutely agree. But this isn’t about the race of action stars in general, this is about who is portrayed as being in positions of authority versus who has the largest hand in fixing whatever problems are that arise in narratives created for the screen. These movies don’t make themselves- they’re written by people. If people of color are constantly unable to solve problems on their own without the help of a white savior, what does this say about society? About the people writing these stories? About us as consumers?
::hops off soap box::
I see where you’re coming from Gab, but I think you’re sort of seeing the stereotype as half empty, and I see it as half full. These are two mainstream movies where the President is a black man, and I’m guessing the fact that he’s black isn’t a big deal in the plot. This is a positive thing! Until 24 did it, I can’t remember EVER seeing a black President in movies. Now it’s suddenly a CLICHE.
So yes, I agree with you that it would be nice to see more black action heroes, but do you really think the fact that these two movies make the President black is a BAD thing? I mean hell, the very fact that black actors can now go to an open casting call for “President of the United States” is a big deal.
Thanks Obama!
Oh, no, it’s not that I think that the president is black in itself is the problem- you’re forgetting the part about the White Knight. My issue is why can’t the president be black and that be the end of it? Why does the Black leader need a White man to save the day? It’s that last part that makes it problematic for me.
And just because we have a Black president in office doesn’t mean we live in a post-racist society. Far from it. Sure, we may be seeing more Black leaders in fictional works now, and that’s good. But HOW they’re portrayed is still important.
The tungsten rod space weapon is based on a genuine Pentagon project called “Project Thor”, or more colloquially “Rods from God”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment
The expected destructive force, however, is like a small tactical nuke at best, and wouldn’t be anywhere near powerful enough to destroy a city. (The idea is better suited to bunker-busting, as most of the force is directed downwards, and it’s non-nuclear.)
Funny, when Belinkie said “GI Beau” I immediately thought “Beau Biden biopic.”
Starring Leslie Neilson?
Gab,
Regarding race in G.I. Joe, I have a few things to throw out there.
The President is an older, white guy. Given the discussion on the podcast about having a President “who isn’t what he seems,” birth certificate references and etc, it may have been on the nose a bit to make him a black man and an imposter. (Jonathan Pryce did seem to be having a lot of fun in his role though).
Storm Shadow, a Japanese character, is played by Byung-hun Lee, a Korean actor.
The strangest casting for me was The RZA as the blind master. If not for his involvement in Wu-Tang, Kill Bill, Man with the Iron Fists, and his obvious love for martial arts culture, I really doubt a black man would have played this role. It was, to me, the funniest part of the movie.
Pryce: Yeah, I pretty much always enjoy him in whatever role he takes on. I was thinking something similar when listening to the podcast, though, that perhaps having the “fake” man be a man of color would be just way too close to home for whoever was trying to say whatever they were trying to say.
Lee would have more claim to commenting on the Korean man playing a Japanese character than I would. But as someone that cares about those sorts of things, I’ll say I’m not surprised, sure, but not happy with it, either.
I’d actually like to discuss the Korean man playing a Japanese character thing more. FIRST off, I don’t think anyone ever calls him Japanese in the movie. Just because he’s Japanese in the comic book doesn’t mean he is supposed to be here.
But let’s say he WAS supposed to be Japanese. Nobody gets mad when Australian Hugh Jackman plays Canadian Wolverine. The difference, perhaps, is that Koreans and Japanese are supposed to be racially different, not just culturally different? So it’s insensitive to cast someone Korean, because he clearly doesn’t look Japanese? Is that the deal? I’ll be honest, I don’t know if I can tell the difference, but maybe that just proves your point.
I see more of an argument when the character has a strong national identity (imagine casting an American as James Bond, even an American with a great accent).
I’m coming at this from an American film perspective, so hold onto your butts, as Sam Jackson says in Jurassic Park.
It can be somewhat reductionist to do binaries of “white” and “not-white,” but when it comes to power today, that’s kind of how the breakdown is. Then, the “not-white” gets broken down into “Asian,” “Hispanic,” and “Black.” And very, very rarely “Native American.” People don’t get mad about Jackman playing a Canadian, or a bunch of Brits and one Italian playing German generals and experts in WW2 (Conspiracy, one of my go-to examples of this) because the umbrella of “white” is dominant in the U.S. over anything that’s “not-white.” But lumping minority ethnic groups, races, and cultures together has colonial undertones and reflects the self-assigned superiority of (what ended up being) the dominant races. It’s a perpetuation of the practice of willfull ignorance and understanding of new cultures and peoples as western Europeans “discovered” “new” territories and lands.
Also, overall, it’s a bunch of rich white dudes in charge of the film industry. This may or may not be that big of a deal or have as direct of an impact, but if you think about it a bit more abstractly, I think it helps to explain why it’s not as “bad” for Jackman to play a Canadian man, but for Michelle Yeoh to play a Japanese woman. The big white blob is the one with the power, so if it picks an Aussie to play a Canadian, okay. But if it picks a Mexican to play a Puerto Rican… that could be kinda bad.
A simple way to determine whether he’s supposed to be Japanese or Korean or just generic “Asian” is, well, does he have a name other than “Storm Shadow” or what? You can usually tell the difference between Chinese, Korean, Japanese, etc. family names.
Storm Shadow’s given name is Tomisaburo Arashikage. I don’t think it’s mentioned in either of the movies, though.
That name is clearly Japanese, yes. I just looked, and he’s only listed as “Storm Shadow” on the IMDB page for the movie, though, so it’s hard to tell if they wanted to keep it that way. But what would they gain by changing the character’s given name? Maybe they were avoiding calling him by his given name to keep it ambiguous? Hrm…
That’s insane! His FAMILY name is Storm Shadow!?
Which does, admittedly, make it a pretty lousy code name. But my sense is that anonymity is not a priority for any of these characters.
Though this episode doesn’t need any more drinking rules, Drink whenever the guest talks before the reveal.
That’s a good one. We actually don’t TELL the guests not to talk before the reveal, but it’s just good manners, right? ;)
It was hardly the worst sin I committed over the course of the podcast. I’d say replying to your awesome Dodecahedron riff with a random snatch of paraphrased Whitman was far more egregious…but probably rare enough that it wouldn’t make a very good drinking rule.