Box art for G.I. Joe: Retaliation

  G.I. Joe: Retaliation

action & adventure, sci-fi & fantasy, thrillers


The greatest American Heroes are back and they've been set up to take the fall for a heinous crime they didn't commit.

Rotten Tomatoes® scores

  • Critic Score
    28%
  • Audience Score
    49%

movie reviews from Rotten Tomatoes®

Top Critic Reviews

Rotten: To borrow from Jack in the Box, "G. I. Joe: Retaliation" is one hot mess.

- Betsy Sharkey, Los Angeles Times, Thursday, March 28, 2013

Rotten: Ever played a video game with a friend and had to sit there while he hogged it, leaving you to do nothing but watch for what seemed like hours?

- Bill Goodykoontz, Arizona Republic, Thursday, March 28, 2013

Rotten: That's not to say that this G.I. Joe is good, aside from a couple of dazzling action set pieces, but at least it's efficient in its muscular mindlessness.

- Christy Lemire, Associated Press, Wednesday, March 27, 2013

Audience Reviews

2 stars

Retaliation's a confusing one; it's a sequel AND a reboot. I don't see the need for a reboot; the first one was, albeit, a forgettable flick, but it wasn't such a stinkball. Regardless, "G.I. Joe: Retaliation" dropped into theaters and it delivered exactly what it intended to do: mind-numbing, over-the-top action. Yet, it was so unfulfilling. I think action directors need to understand something here. Though many old-school action flicks may not have the production value, over-the-top spectacle, or the creativity within its action scenes, audiences still left theaters thoroughly pleased. They resonated with the film and there was, for the most part, positive feedback. But why is it nowadays when we see even grander, more epic, and larger-than-life looking explosions and set-pieces that we leave extremely disappointed even when the exact purpose of watching that particular flick was for mindless action? I think it's the lack of magnetic characters and the director's lack of understanding the art of shooting not only engaging but memorable action set-pieces. Retaliation misses it's mark exactly for those two reasons. Hey, I'll be the first to admit: its predecessor had a horrible story, but there ain't much to draw up from its source material, and that's completely fine. In fact, the first live-action outing of G.I. Joe was perhaps more faithful to the show than Retaliation ever was, tonally that is. Right from the start, the film decides to throw in a screwball into the narrative, which admittedly surprised me, but right afterwards, the story lacks any sort of an engaging plot, heart, and the cartoon-y tone. Let's just put it like this: you just don't care what happens. Alright, so let's just brush that aside and admit that Retaliation's story sucks -- how's the action? It's bigger, it's shot with precision, but even more forgettable than "G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra". Don't get me wrong: from the moment you set your eyes on action-packed galore, it fills your senses. You're enamored and almost hypnotized by the endless explosion flurry. The second it ends, the second it leaves your mind. Retaliation's just another big budget, mindless action movie. Nothing new here. Just another forgettable, testosterone-packed flick thrown on top of an entire decade bloated with movies just as forgettable. The ninja cliffhanger-esque scene was pretty badass though.

- fb1463751009, Saturday, June 1, 2013

2 stars

A forgettable movie with forgettable acting. Not even this action packed drival will keep you entertained!

- FiLmCrAzY, Monday, May 13, 2013

4 stars

One spectacular Roller Coaster of pure action. While this movie suffers from an overly complicated script, it makes up for it in every way with Ninja scenes beyond those seen in a very long time, and great acting from the likes of Dwayne Johnson and Ray Park (Who plays Snake Eyes spectacularly without muttering a word). If you go to see this movie expecting an oscar contender you will be very disappointed, but if you just want an explosive, non-stop action movie, you've come to the right place.

- fb674646753, Friday, April 5, 2013