Paramount Hiding G.I. Joe From Critics

John Campea 96 Comments

You all know my opinion on what it means when a studio hides a movie from critics before it gets released. Not good news at all. Well… that’s exactly what Paramount is doing with G.I. Joe.

Instead of giving my usual rant about this, I’ll just quote Slant who put it very well:

G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra is a noxious green substance capable of dissolving the Eiffel Tower. Oh no, sorry, it’s a movie about a noxious green substance capable of destroying the Eiffel Tower. Such mixups are understandable, given that, like most other critics in the U.S., I won’t get the chance to see G.I. Joe before it opens. Paramount is taking the unusual step of shielding its film from all advance press coverage, a PR strategy usually reserved for movies that are both lousy and not eagerly anticipated by the public. (I Know Who Killed Me, the 2007 bomb starring Lindsay Lohan as a serial killer’s victim, is a classic example of a movie given the no-advance-screening treatment.) Since G.I. Tract—I mean Joe, sorry, haven’t seen the movie—isn’t a cheapo exploitation flick but one of Paramount’s summer tentpole releases, it’s odd that the studio has done everything it can to block access to the movie, going to great lengths to make sure it’s seen only by focus groups, military personnel (the movie premiered Monday night at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland) and a few fanboy-friendly blogs like Ain’t It Cool News.

However relieved I might personally be to not have to sit through G.I. Joke, this news ain’t particularly cool for the future of film reviewing. When major releases start to get waved past press scrutiny and rammed directly down audiences’ throats with hugely expensive marketing campaigns, we’re that much closer to a world in which the only voices talking about movies come from the people who stand to make money off them. As Nathan Rabin puts it in the Onion’s A.V. Club blog, “Who needs a cultural conversation about a film’s merits when you can have a massive one-sided publicity blitz?” The G.I. Joe action figures of old were brave and stalwart men (and one soon-discontinued and now highly collectible woman), ready to battle not only the Cobra Command but the leotard-clad Intruders, with their fearsome “Crusher Grip.” Hiding from a few puny-armed, laptop-wielding critics is hardly the G.I. Joe way.

Brilliantly put. This movie is going to suck. We’ll see if I’m correct or not tomorrow night.

About John Campea

View all posts by John Campea →

You may like these posts

←  Older Comments
 →
  • T-Vo

    Rotten tomatoes has it at 62% right now. So these are hand picked critics, eh?
    Anyways, AICN has a couple of positive reviews, nothing negative yet. It a big dumb summer popcorn movie made from a Toy….seriously, what are you expecting? Just enjoy shit being blown up on screen now before all the depressing oscar movies come out later this year.

    • http://www.judymoodymovie.com John

      Hey T-VO,

      Actually, when it was just the hand picked Critics the Rotten Tomatoes rating was 91% up until last night.

      Now that the other reviews are coming in it’s dropped down to 59%.

  • http://www.whysoseriousgamers.wordpress.com Grave

    So far I can say this… The films music is dull. The game would have been better if it wasnt based on the film and had more development time.

  • MJS

    Reviews from professional critics are coming in from abroad, and they are siginificantly negative than the ones from the internet critics the studio hand picked.

  • chris

    can you blame them really?..

  • redwiggle

    I watched this movie in the UK today. It’s first day of release. The trailer looked pants, but I thought I’d give it a try. It’s a film with a very thin plot and mindless action. The action however delivers and the effects are pretty decent. A good two hours of entertainment. Nothing to dwell on for ages but not bad at all, much better than Transformers 2.

  • jaffahut

    Eh… This is such a silly argument. My apologies in advance, but… IT’S A BLOG. John’s writings shouldn’t make any difference to how people feel about this movie (unless they’re mindless fools who don’t know how to be critical towards something themselves).

    G.I Joe looks like shit. John feels that way, I feel that way, and honestly (though with only a strong feeling)… Quite a big amount of the world’s population feels that way and each & everyone of us is allowed to write our feelings down about it.

    If you find all the footage great and has got you excited, great. But don’t you try get over the fact that Paramount has Not shown this in advance for more than a very small selected group of critics who probably have waited for this all their lives. It’s fishy business and not right. I’m not saying other studios don’t do this kind of stuff… Hell, they ALL do. They are all cheating the customer, playing it dirty. If there’s a bad movie coming, then it DESERVES negative reviews.

  • Shane Hero

    Good on Paramount. I fully support this decision.

    I haven’t drawn the conclusion from this story that Paramount is “hiding” their film, I have drawn the conclusion that this has shown what a bunch of self-important crybabies so many critics really are. The tantrums being thrown over the fact they don’t get special treatment by Paramount to see this movie before everyone else shows how pathetic all these “critics” really are.

    “They won’t show me their film, so it must suck”. Yeah… right. And that hot girl who won’t date you must be a lesbian too, hey?

    These days the traditional “critic” is becoming irrelevant. Every person with access to the internet can post their thoughts for the world to see these days.

    I’ve known for months I want to see this film. So I’d see it regardless of reviews. So this move by Paramount changes nothing for me. However for these critics with a false sense of entitlement, it may be the beginning of the end for getting a free ride if studios make a habit of this. Time to get a real job perhaps.

    Most people go to see a movie on opening day because they want to see THAT particular film, and would see it regardless of advance reviews. Once a film is released, if a film gets great reviews, word of mouth will get a lot of people going to see a film, but so too will the continued fact some people would see it regardless of reviews. If you like action films, and you’re going to see a movie, you’re gonna pick the GI Joe over some chick flick getting top reviews. Traditional media reviews mean so very, very little to the overall box office.

    Paramount doesn’t owe these critics anything. Good reviews, bad reviews, or no reviews… opening day numbers would be the same regardless.

    As for yourself John, every post about GI Joe you’ve made has been “predicting” it will suck. You’ve picked apart everything you could leading up to this movie, and posted anything you could to support your “prediction”. Why would so many readers all have come to the same “wrong” conclusion about your bias against this film? If it was not your intention to express this, and everyone has indeed got the wrong idea, then don’t get mad at the people who read what you wrote. Take it on board, and try to realize how your writing may in fact be giving so many people such a wrong impression.

    • AndyS

      GREAT POST :)

←  Older Comments
 →