Snake Eyes

Saw the movie last night and was not impressed with anything I saw. The makers of this film have either no idea of the origins of Snake-Eyes or they intentionally destroyed the character. Aside from the fact that Snake-Eyes was always a Gaijin (white guy) he was also honorable in all that he did. This version has him as a two-faced, lying, thief. The feeble redemption arc in the final act was too little - too late, and unbelievable. The casting choices also left me a bit confused. Golding was never a good choice for Snake-Eyes and as much as I love Samara Weaving, she was a horrible Scarlet. The actress who ineptly portrayed the Baroness was too young for the character and was not even close to being believable. Iko Uwais was great as usual but would have been a much better Storm Shadow or even Snake-Eyes! Andrew Koji did do a good job as Storm Shadow and his was the best performance in the whole film by far.

The story was subpar, even for a genre piece, and the script could have been written by a middle-schooler. The action was decently choreographed and wasn't too over the top. It seemed like it couldn't decide whether to be gritty or cartoonish in its approach to the action, which was a letdown. There are several continuity issues as well; a brawler raised on the street with no formal training can automatically hold his own against highly trained ninjas (can you say Rey Palpatine?) or a girl who had been a devoted part of the clan for over a decade breaking sacred rules to save someone she just met?

All in all, this movie sucked!

So this is now essentially the third attempt to bring GI Joe to the big screen. Lorenzo Di Bonaventura returns at the helm and proves once again - he does not really care... Honestly - how this film actually came to be is beyond me - a group of professional people working in the industry collectively decided that firstly : this film should be made - then that Evan Spiliotopoulos (who has hardly written a single great film to date) should write the damn thing - then add a director, Schwentke (who has a track record of terrible blockbuster films) - and let's top it off with TV travel host/Rom-com break out - Henry Golding to play Snake eyes himself. Shocking....

SO - It definitely is not the Snake eyes that people know and love. He does bad things in this film and unfortunately, Henry isn't a skilled enough actor to make you like him. I disagree that it was purely in the writing - a great actor can make you care for the most despicable characters but Golding proves here he should stick to Rom-coms...and his own accent. His physical skills and acting feel forced and awkward and in my opinion needs a lot of work if I would ever buy him as a legitimate action star. He does have some charisma and good looks though.

It seems like the majority of the articles and social media agree that the film's saving grace is Andrew Koji's Storm Shadow. He adds nuance and depth to Tommy (even though he is dealt the rough hand with having to deliver the majority of the exposition) He commands the screen whenever he is on and delivers us the most layered Storm Shadow in almost any medium to date - just too bad he is let down by an awful script. Koji steals the show with his performance and to top it off you can tell he knows how to move - his action moments were by far the most fun to watch - although he was let down by a terrible filming style there too. I definitely want to see more of Koji. Jin Sakai for Ghost of Tsushima!

The rest of the cast are great in their limited roles - Samara, Ursula, Iko and Peter Mensah - all do great. They are well cast but under utilised. Hollywood SERIOUSLY needs to stop thinking they know best with martial arts action sequences - Iko and Kenji Tanigaki's team is absolutely wasted here.

There was a lot of potential with a GI Joe reboot. There was some potential for a good Snake eyes film - but these people clearly are not the right people to do it. Paramount needs to learn. You would have thought Lorenzo etc would have learnt something since the last films 10 years ago - but clearly not. They have not only destroyed many people's favourite character - they have simple made a bad film and wasted a lot of money and talent....

5.5/10.

Great visuals ruined by terrible writing. Hollywood is a big place, where are all the good writers at? And why do people keep agreeing to go along with a film after reading a terrible screenplay? People need to start speaking up before the film is complete about the writing.

I'm a big fan of Yakuza films, so when I saw the trailer for "Snake Eyes," I was ecstatic - a gritty, grounded origin of one of G. I. Joe's most beloved characters, in the form of a Japanese mobster movie, seemed too good to be true. And lo and behold, it was! "Snake Eyes" seems to suffer from an identity crisis; there is not enough gangster politics to be a successful gangster movie - there is not enough character development to be a satisfying drama - and perhaps the worst offense: there is not enough well-filmed action for this to be a great action film.

Let's jump right into why "Snake Eyes" isn't a good film - the action. When you hire master choreographers to create beautiful action sequences, why would you then destroy them by choosing to film your action with close-up, handheld, shaky cam? This stylistic decision is infuriating and unforgivable. There was only one sequence in this movie that was well shot; other than that, literally every other single action scene was made incomprehensible due to the filmmaking.

There were so many set pieces that could've been memorable and exciting if only the cameraman would've put the camera on a tripod, prepared a wide shot, and stepped away. You have scenes of small armies engaged in katana-on-katana action, and you won't be able to see any of it because the cameraman is standing two feet away and shaking the camera like it owes him money. This filmmaking decision literally ruined the action in this film, and as a consequence, ruined the film itself - because when the action in your action movie sucks, your movie sucks.

That said, perhaps the storyline and the engaging characters can add some sort of entertainment value? You'd be half right. The story itself is pretty interesting, if not very engaging. There's enough to keep you slightly invested in what's happening and why, but again, everything is framed around terribly filmed action sequences that damper the fun. The acting was serviceable, but nothing too breathtaking. Henry Golding as Snake Eyes had a certain tenacity about him that was fun to watch, but the script seemed to try a little too hard to make him "cool." Samara Weaving was gorgeous, as always, and pretty good here - however, she barely has any screen time, and isn't introduced until about half way through the film. That said, she is a show stealer when she's on screen.

"Snake Eyes" did have some cool cinematography to bask at - if you enjoy Asian cinema, you'll certainly enjoy the look of the film. That said, if you enjoy good action, you're going to despise this movie. I'd recommend only checking this out if you're a big G. I. Joe fan - if you're not? There's a million other Yakuza action films at your disposal; don't waste your time with this.

Andrew. Koji steals the attention with his emotional expression, too bad his lines were not so good. I think he should be snake eyes.