








6.3| Average votes grouped by age and by sex: | |||||||
| Age: | 1-12 | 13-17 | 18-25 | 26-35 | 36-49 | 50+ | Total |
| Men: Votes: |
10 4 |
9.3 6 |
6.3 11 |
5.5 21 |
5.8 32 |
5.5 15 |
6.1 90 |
| Women: Votes: |
- 0 |
7 1 |
5.9 8 |
7.3 19 |
8 7 |
4 2 |
6.9 38 |
| Total: Votes: |
10 4 |
8.2 9 |
5.7 21 |
6.4 41 |
6.1 41 |
5.1 18 |
6.3 139 |
| Total includes those who didn't specify sex. | |||||||
This "reboot" attempts to bring Gi Joe back to its gritty raw roots without the fancy technology and lair. Acting was OK and the plot was predictable. It's an action movie based on a popular toys line... expect action and lots of explosions and leave reality outside the room.
| 7/10 | jfenton4@ - 10 reviews 8.5.2013 - age: 36-49 |
Okay there was one thing in this movie that did sit well with me they killed off the biggest name in the G. I. Joe franchise other than that the movie was okay.
| 6/10 | deejaydjs@ - 19 reviews 5.5.2013 - age: 26-35 |
You get what you get going to, what? -- the second I think in the series. I didn't bother with the earlier instalments, but wasn't lost. I went for Bruce Willis. I could have done without Dwayne Johnson.
| 6/10 | clifforda@ - 92 reviews 5.5.2013 - age: 36-49 |
G. I. Joe movie common who ever likes G. I . Joe likes this movie. Lots of action. Loved it.
| 10/10 | manelfern@ - 22 reviews 4.5.2013 - age: 36-49 |
This movie was awesome for guns, combat, the moves and kicking butt too. I loved it, thank u for making this movie!
| 10/10 | ferrerchrischristian@ - 3 reviews 4.5.2013 - age: 18-25 |
There was a story line and there was action throughout the movie. It did not get boring.
| 9/10 | andie911@ - first review 29.4.2013 - age: 36-49 |
I didn't care much for the first one but this one was awesome!
| 8/10 | hunter_1_2005@ - 2 reviews 29.4.2013 - age: 26-35 |
I think that it was worth seeing and it was a great movie, but for me I think Channing Tatum should have been playing the lead role [...] Overall I liked the movie, worth seeing.
| 7/10 | roro12434@ - first review 29.4.2013 - age: 13-17 |
I absolutely hated the first GI Joe movie and was expecting to be very disappointed by this one, also because of negative reviews. In fact I was delightfully surprised that it delivered much more than I expected. My friends and I got a great deal of laughs and we're seasoned movie-goers, been at this a long time. But we were all thoroughly entertained. Some scenes were so well done that it made up for any crappy scenes. I would normally give a movie like this a 7 but giving it more because I think it's too skewed to the lower ratings and undeservedly so.
| 9/10 | bludash2@ - 3 reviews 29.4.2013 - age: 36-49 |
One good scene with the fight in the mountains, other than that I would have been happier to have left half way through. 10 yr old mentality. Absolutely hated this movie but went with my 24 yr old son and wasn't sure if he was enjoying it so I stayed in the theater.
| 3/10 | benr@ - 95 reviews 27.4.2013 - age: 50+ |
Great performance by rock... he owes the movie.
| 7/10 | kapoor.gshabbir@ - first review 27.4.2013 - age: 18-25 |
Very good action packed movie go see it! Way better than the first.
| 8/10 | bubbasback@ - first review 26.4.2013 - age: 18-25 |
Pineapple head is getting better as an actor, but it is hard not to improve when you are at 0. That is also not saying much. This movie was pure crap and should be avoided at all costs.
| 1/10 | thedude@ - first review 26.4.2013 |
Great movie!! Get off your butt and go see it!!
| 9/10 | monster.hartley@ - first review 25.4.2013 - age: 13-17 |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
Way better than the 1 movie, but still lacking a lot. Cobra Commander has the right look, and Firefly. The rest of the people were just the plain military look, and killing off Destro and Zartan, was really lame, let's kill off two of the biggest names in the G.I Joe series. Still no Zartan Dreadknocks, why?
| 6/10 | noeljjc@ - 2 reviews 22.4.2013 - age: 36-49 |
It makes up for the confusion in G. I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra. Probably because Steven Sommers doesn't know how to make movies, but Jon M. Chu does. It has its sad moments, but retaliation rises against it.
| 9/10 | chw@ - 262 reviews 21.4.2013 - age: 13-17 |
My husband and I went to see it on the second week of showing. There was action over action, very good movie a must see!!
| 10/10 | k.sauve@ - first review 21.4.2013 - age: 36-49 |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
This movie was a complete was of time, energy and money... While I realize this movie is not based in reality it still had so many lame [...] in it that it became unwatchable. For example, how does a guy get hit by a car doing 40 mph after being in a knock down fist fight with the Rock, and get up from the collision and RUN to an awaiting motorbike and ride off like none of it happened... the whole movie is so badly written I wanted to leave 2/3 of the way thru... which is not something I have wanted to do in a long time. Save your money... and time.
| 2/10 | oddjob.and.company@ - first review 21.4.2013 - age: 36-49 |
They should have borrowed more money to get the actors from the first GI Joe...
| 6/10 | adamkk@ - 2 reviews 21.4.2013 - age: 26-35 |
It was great in 3D and loved all the people in it.
| 8/10 | high5me@ - first review 20.4.2013 - age: 13-17 |
Junk movie - no scipt, bad acting, action is boring. Willis is almost a no show.
| 4/10 | itisherehotmail.com@ - 32 reviews 20.4.2013 - age: 50+ |
A bit better than the 1st one, but overall the movie is average - has a lot of action sequences but there is nothing amazing. I just hope they won't make a 3rd one!
| 5/10 | frederichamra@ - 32 reviews 20.4.2013 - age: 36-49 |
Excellent action movie with tons of special effects. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie.
| 9/10 | mew53@ - 23 reviews 18.4.2013 - age: 50+ |
Good movie if you want to forget about your day and worries!
| 7/10 | genr@ - first review 18.4.2013 - age: 26-35 |
Super de bon film, j'espère qu'il va en avoir un autre avec The Rock.
| 10/10 | lay_s19@ - first review 17.4.2013 - age: 18-25 |
It wasn't as bad as I was expecting. I actually enjoyed watching it. I wanted to watch a mindless action flick with lots of fight scenes and explosions and cheesy one-liners, and that's what I got!! It is what it is. My only complaint is that I was confused as to who had allegiances to whom; I had to ask my date afterwards. She hated the movie, but, for some reason, knew who was fighting who. It's still unclear, for me, but that's ok.
| 6/10 | stanlee@ - 101 reviews 17.4.2013 - age: 36-49 |
This is one more time to prove that the rate doesn't mean anything. I liked the movie very much. There's everything in it you're looking for in an action film: action, graphics, actors (man, the girl is looking sooo [...] good when she walks in the desert...), great actors and much more. I do not know why, but there was no Morgan Freeman in it - the fella today is in almost all great movies (well, they have Bruce Willis instead ;-)) I concur with all who gave it 10s and even with those, who gave it 9s. It is not worse than any big movie in the same category. Name one and I'll prove it. The problem is it came out now, but if it was in theaters before Avatar, ok - before Avengers, no - before 007, well, ok, before Dark Knight or Spider Man... Kidding. Great movie in its category! And, guys, the key word is "category". Do not expect it to be like "Titanic" or "Gone With The Wind". It's G. I. Joe! Retaliation...
| 10/10 | qwert7@ - 6 reviews 16.4.2013 - age: 50+ |
Waited a long time to see this one, trailers ran for almost a year, what a let down, really two half movies thrown together to make one, GI JOE weak, Ninjas were not bad, shaky camera for the first part, would make a good DVD rental.
| 5/10 | dtat@ - 19 reviews 16.4.2013 - age: 50+ |
I don't know why others are rating this movie as bad, I loved it! It was full of action and I thought it was very well done. The Rock is awesome (as usual) and so was Bruce Willis. I agree that this is suitable for family! Nice to see a movie without every second word being a curse word. I can't wait for the next chapter in G I Joe!
| 7/10 | moorem@ - 2 reviews 15.4.2013 - age: 50+ |
This movie is like so cool I almost fell out of my seat! But this is one movie that will last for ever!
| 10/10 | zakariah@ - first review 14.4.2013 - age: 1-12 |
Go to the store and buy some GI Joe action figures and play with them like kids do in the sand box and you'll have a better plot, dialogue and movie!
| 1/10 | deedee@ - 25 reviews 14.4.2013 - age: 50+ |
It was bad. The 3D conflicted heavily with the action scenes; acting was okay, but over all the plot was lacking and the overall lack of returning actors from the first film made it feel like a reboot, not a sequel. Not recommended.
| 3/10 | theodore177@ - 8 reviews 13.4.2013 - age: 18-25 |
Went for a movie date night with hubby. Both of us really enjoyed the movie. Lots of action, funny and good storyline. Would be a good family movie as well, for kids 8 and up, no gore and the 3-D action the kids would enjoy.
| 8/10 | kerri_york66@ - 46 reviews 13.4.2013 - age: 36-49 |
Pretty lame considering how 3/4 of the characters of the first movie aren't in this one... The connection just isn't there. Decent movie overall but could have been so much better.
| 6/10 | mlavoie@ - 4 reviews 11.4.2013 - age: 26-35 |
Great entertainment for the whole family. The girls also loved this action movie. It captured the comic book feel, as well.
| 7/10 | tariqbajwa58@ - first review 10.4.2013 - age: 26-35 |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
Two good scenes, one being the fight on the side of a mountain, the other with the president playing Angry Birds. The 3D effects against fast action made it very difficult to watch as the effects competed with each other.
| 3/10 | lostincalgary@ - 3 reviews 10.4.2013 - age: 50+ |
I'd just seen OLYMPUS HAS FALLEN so this was much better, but still not great. It's confusing for the longest while, not sure who are the bad guys because there are factions. Some lovely scenes of the mountains, some ok special FX. Cartoon character ninja costumes. I saw it in 3D, which was its own reward. See it if there's nothing else to see.
| 5/10 | bellesque@ - 37 reviews 9.4.2013 - age: 50+ |
Horrible movie, half of the time I did not know what was going on... pointless action... useless explosions and very very bad editing. Tatum was there only for the first 15 minutes... and then the movie starts going down a 90 degree slope, hits rock bottom and penetrates it. It's even worse than the last Die hard movie, if you think that was possible.
| 1/10 | fsa@ - 72 reviews 9.4.2013 - age: 26-35 |
An utterly pointless excuse to string together some terribly edited fight/action sequences. You can rarely really tell what's going on in those sequences, but there sure are a lot of explosions, so if you like seeing a bunch of random explosions in a movie, this is definitely among the movies that will let you do that.
| 2/10 | stampimo@ - 91 reviews 8.4.2013 - age: 26-35 |
The plot was somewhat ridiculous but I did like the action. The 3-d was amazing but it gave me a big headache, maybe I'm just getting old... worth seeing for sure, especially for the fight scenes.
| 6/10 | ysilan@ - 28 reviews 8.4.2013 - age: 26-35 |
Typical #2 movie franchise formula, acting somewhat laughable at times, story decent in continuing from first movie. Lots of action is what you want and it's good escapism... if you can, wait for Blu Ray.
| 7/10 | trevordool@ - 9 reviews 8.4.2013 - age: 36-49 |
Great entertainment for the whole family. The girls also loved this action movie. It capturured the comic book feel, as well.
| 8/10 | ericj@ - 11 reviews 7.4.2013 - age: 50+ |
Really disliked this movie and the script. It was somewhat better than the first one but still really disliked the dumb dialogue between characters.
| 4/10 | cyn.ramacieri@ - 42 reviews 7.4.2013 - age: 26-35 |
Note: User reviews posted on this page are personal opinions of our readers. We are not responsible for their content.