G.I. Joe: Retaliation - A Review
When your movie is based on a line of 3.75-inch plastic action figures, aiming for cinematic brilliance or groundbreaking artistry is probably not on the agenda. No one expects “G.I. Joe: Retaliation” to compete with Oscar-winning dramas. Like its source material, its primary goal is simple: entertainment. Ideally, even if “Retaliation” seems a bit silly, viewers should leave the theater with a slightly improved mood. However, this sequel adopts a far more serious tone than its predecessor, as if its characters are permanently clad in lead-lined vests.
Plot and Premise
The film assumes a pre-existing familiarity with the storyline, picking up where the first movie awkwardly left off. The insidious Cobra organization has infiltrated the highest office in the land, replacing the President of the United States with a doppelganger. G.I. Joe retaliated in the previous film by capturing Cobra leaders Destro (the one with the silver face) and Cobra Commander (the one with no face left, no longer played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt). While some G.I. Joes were involved, they are quickly dispatched and replaced with equally forgettable characters, plus Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson. Johnson was expected to revitalize the franchise, but even for a titan like him, the task proves too heavy.
Missed Opportunities
“Retaliation” promises much but delivers too little. We’re introduced to Johnson’s character, Roadblock, in a friendly exchange with Duke Hauser (Channing Tatum), the only significant holdover from the first film. Their dialogue is lengthy and cringe-worthy, yet somehow, the two are amusing together. In a comedic action movie, this pairing would be perfect, but Tatum quickly exits, leaving a grim Johnson to carry the weight. “The Rock” is a great choice for a blockbuster lead, but he needs supporting partners and humor to shine. Later, Bruce Willis appears as the original Joe founder, offering another chance for a sparkling buddy-movie dynamic, but Willis’s screen time is also fleeting. It’s unclear why the film repeatedly reminds the audience of how funny it could have been.
Direction and Tone
Director Jon M. Chu’s direction is remarkably lifeless. He fails to extract anything compelling from a decent cast, and the action sequences devolve into chaotic flailing.
The most peculiar aspect is the film’s lack of enjoyment. While the first “G.I. Joe” was at least laughably bad, the sequel retains all the silly ingredients of the original but completely omits the humor.