Metascore
32

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 25 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 25
  2. Negative: 12 out of 25
  1. 38
    Certainly better than "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen." How so? Admittedly, it doesn't have as much cleavage. But the high-tech hardware is more fun to look at than the transforming robots, the plot is as preposterous, and although the noise is just as loud, it's more the deep bass rumbles of explosions than the ear-piercing bang of steel robots pounding on each other.
  2. 38
    More toy commercial than movie.
  3. After nearly two hours of nonstop mayhem, the film ends on a surprisingly muted note, though pains have been taken to make sure that the hoped-for sequel has been carefully set up.
  4. 30
    After a first hour that plays like a bad TV show, Sommers hits his groove with an over-the-top Paris chase sequence that, in turn, leads to an underwater finale that’s absurdly overproduced, momentarily diverting, and then instantly forgettable.
  5. Reviewed by: Richard Corliss
    30
    The only collateral damage is in the audience, where, as you sit through the movie, you can feel your IQ drop minute by minute.
  6. Reviewed by: Cliff Doerksen
    30
    Loud, shiny, and critic-proof, this franchise launcher is basically Transformers minus the humanity. Dennis Quaid provides some ballast as grizzled patriarch to the troop of sexy young lock-and-loaders.
  7. Reviewed by: Chris Nashawaty
    25
    Don't go expecting an escapist night at the movies; go expecting to be cudgeled into numb, drooling submission.
  8. G.I. Joe was not screened for critics, but that’s not because of its mindless action and nonsensical plot. It’s because G.I. Joe is the kind of movie that bludgeons the viewer into submission with its loud and constant barrage of sound and fury.
  9. 12
    I don't know what to say about the acting, writing and directing in G.I. Joe because I couldn't find any.
  10. 12
    Formerly a real American hero, G.I. Joe is no longer a hero (it's a group) or American. (It's a multinational team of military superstars, though the way it does business, you'd feel safer with the Croatian navy on your side.)
  11. There's a way to do this kind of thing (Just witness Hasbro's other toy-turned-dumb movie franchise, "Transformers"). G.I. Joe, though, hasn't got a kung fu-grip on what it is.
  12. This pricey, juiceless pulp could never have been killed by critics, simply because it was already dead.
User Score
5.3

Mixed or average reviews- based on 325 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 86 out of 174
  2. Negative: 66 out of 174
  1. Nov 4, 2010
    3
    G.I Joe is just an awful awful, movie. It all comes down to one major flaw in the entire movie: the plot is retarded. And I don't mean it like every action movie needs to be Shakespeare, if I wanted that I'd see a play. No, the problem is G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra is just way too sincere with being a story-focused movie, wasting alot of time building on the non-existent motivations and traits of it's characters and hammering cliché after cliché into the damn thing. Its just boring for no transparent reason. Furthermore providing a plot twist you are apparently supposed to figure out at the beginning of the movie. Movies like Shoot 'Em Up can get away with a lame plot because it is only an excuse to have non-stop action whereas G.I Joe becomes a pain to sit through . Speaking of the action, it's not even especially good at all. Admittedly I found the Paris car chase scene somewhat entertaining but it takes too long getting there and the final "epic" battle is a mess of parallel events, failing to engage and ending in a pointless 90s-style sequel hint, because that was the best part of Godzilla (1998) right?

    Ice doesn't sink in the ocean G.I Joe writers.
    Full Review »
  2. Sep 29, 2011
    3
    Foolish it is to create "G.I. Joe: The Rise of the Cobra"; a inane movie with dull action and a 7 year-old-can-write-that story. Possibly one of the worst, no, biggest Razzie flicks of the year. Full Review »
  3. Feb 3, 2013
    1
    Bad movie, really really bad, its all i can say, I think it goes without saying why.
    is so boring, stupid and immature. How could pay a large
    company like Paramount Pictures, 175 million, into something so ugly? Besides, how could act Joseph Gordon-Levitt in a movie so horrible?
    than disappointing, really disappointing.
    and still get to do a sequel, that damn curse. respect for that if you like but that's my opinion, is a really bad movie.
    Full Review »