IMDb user comments for
G.I. Jane (1997) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 12:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

111 comments in total

---

101 out of 114 people found the following comment useful :-
Don't believe the rating, 21 May 2004

Author: jasp0002 from Somewhere, Pale blue dot

OK this is going to be a bit long... but it will be good food for discussions.

Yes, this movie is "Hollywood". The Plot line is predictable, but it is the concepts that the director explores along the way that make it interesting an thought-provoking, assuming you pay attention and didn't just rent it for the bang-bang, or a chance to see Demi in a wet T-shirt. Ridley make some mistakes, but he does some really good things too. Let me comment on what some other people have said, and talk about what I think Ridley does well with this film.

I think Mr. Scott gets a really excellent performance from Demi. I feel this is her best film, but I haven't seen to many, because she usually gets on my nerves. However, she is believable in the role of a woman who just wants to prove to herself that she can do this. I believe her when she says she doesn't want to be a poster child for women's rights... and the Commander is right in telling her that she's gonna have to wear that hat anyway.

Viggo is great too. I don't think too many people knew who he was when this movie came out, but he was even billed above Anne Bancroft. Someone said he looks embarrassed in every scene... hogwash. He looks like a very tough character in a very difficult situation. He knows that the issue is not whether a woman can make it, many can. This isn't about women's rights... this is about how men, mainly YOUNG men, relate to women in stressful situations. If all soldiers were in their late thirties, emotionally and psychologically, then the issue would be much smaller. Most of these guys are young, dumb and full of... you know the rhyme. I was there too, once upon a time. Viggo is excellent, he reacts the way many military instructors would... trying to stop the inevitable, fighting against politicians way over his head who have never been in the crap, but think they know better. Pay attention, you can just see that he respects LT O'Neil. But he believes he has to make an example out of her. Ms. Bancroft is excellent as well, some people say over the top, they obviously haven't had to deal with high level politics before. Perhaps she is a bit rough for reality, but remember, it is a movie, making a point, and being entertaining, things have to be gritty... and Senate will always be more vicious than any military training. I find her performance fun and a joy to watch.

I don't know if Mr. Scott has any military training, but he does a better job of conveying the realities of it to the screen than most. Yes, the SERE segment goes farther than real SERE training would go... but not by much. Talk to someone who's been through it. It would not have been the same group of instructors... it's a very specialized field and the instructors have extensive psychological screening and training. However, I'll give that one to Ridley, he's trying not to complicate the plot, and he needs the scene with Master Chief Urgayle. BTW Women do go through SERE sometimes... and the instructors do use them against the men's emotions.

As for other Militray stuff, much of the language, feelings about chain of command, frustration with training constraints and political a**-covering was /On The Spot/. I speak from 6 years of experience as an Army officer (some of the stuff you see on active duty is amazing, but in the end it all balances out and the US Armed Forces are still the best in the world). Even the way Ridley has to frig with the plot to put the trainees in a an actual firefight was plausible... not possible, but plausible. Remember, it is a movie, he's got to have a real combat situation to entertain the dumber audience who just came to see the boom. But Ridley even goes far enough to give the Master Chief a chance to back out. It is a group of Navy SEAL trainees, deep into their training cycle, with a buttload of prior experience (IF you pay attention you will note that one of the trainees is a US Army Ranger, one a Marine, probably from RECON, these are guys who know the job already, and this is true to reality). You are also talking about a straight forward mission facilitating extraction of US Army Rangers from the deep inland mission. Ridley even has that right, this would be a Ranger mission, and the Spec-ops community may do a joint op where the SEALS secure the sea-side extraction point.

Quite frankly... the movie is better than most people could have done. Matter of fact, I think it was a tough challenge for Mr. Scott and don't think anyone could have done much better. One bad point I agree with is that artistically, the movie is shot entirely too dark.. that's about the worst thing I can say about it though. As for plot predictability... how often do you REALLY see an original plotline?

One last comment. I was at the Army Officer's Advance Course when this movie came out. There was a group of Officer's that were gong to see this movie, ostensibly to have a good laugh. These were Ranger-qualified Infantry guys, a Marine officer from RECON, a couple guys going to or coming from SF training... all Type A's. The next day they weren't laughing... they just said "you know what, that wasn't half bad." That don't sound like much, but it's high praise from that group.

Probably why this has such a poor rating is because it isn't Hollywood enough for the lowest-common-denominator crowd.

Enjoy the film.

---

35 out of 41 people found the following comment useful :-
Maybe Demi Moore does have what it takes, 22 February 1999

Author: Sean Gallagher (naes@cgocable.net) from Oakville, Ont. Canada

I fully admit I am not the biggest Demi Moore fan in the world. As a matter of fact, she's been in some of my least favorite movies of the decade (A FEW GOOD MEN, INDECENT PROPOSAL, THE SCARLET LETTER, THE JUROR, STRIPTEASE), and she really hasn't been good in any of those. But she did win me over in this movie, because she lives up to her character's line, "Look, I'm not trying to make any sort of statement here." And she isn't. Instead of letting vanity get in the way, or injecting pathos, she lets her actions speak for her, just like her character does in trying to win acceptance as a SEAL. The haircut scene is a good example; though it's directed with cinematic flourish, she does it matter-of-fact.

Moore's performance is one of the two performances that elevate this from your standard grunts-become-soldiers movie. The other is the riveting Viggo Mortenson as the Master Chief, who's the drill instructor. He doesn't play the role as a sadistic tyrant, but rather as a subtle manipulator who gradually recognizes Jordan O'Neill(Moore) is someone worth taking seriously. He also avoids going for pathos.

The movie is best when it concentrates on the training. Ironically, making just a standard grunts-become-soldiers movie makes its message work, because like O'Neill's superiors, we take her seriously because she becomes no different than anyone else. The beginning is bad, and the climatic battle at the end is overblown, which weakens the movie. Still, it's worth a look, and I maintain Moore was only given a Razzie Award for this movie and performance because of her past work, and the naysayers really weren't paying attention to her performance here.

---

29 out of 38 people found the following comment useful :-
Where I think this movie fails., 7 August 2003

Author: deliaj from U.S.

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

G.I. Jane has some good points, good scenes, and (some)good acting. However, I saw its main point as trying to promote a "can-do" scenario for women in the military (I am a female veteran of 24 years) and I think several things in the movie do just the opposite. If the idea, problem, or goal is to prove that women can succeed in a traditionally male career, task, or training, then that should be presented while maintaining the woman's gender. What I mean is, O'Neil doesn't succeed until she shaves her head (shorter than the men's - and unnecessary), bulks up to the point where her body fat falls below normal and she ceases to menstruate, and generally becomes "one of the boys." The point is, she's a woman, not a man. She shouldn't have to become a man to prove she can succeed with a group of men. This is painfully clear when she screams "Suck my dick," at the Sergeant. The obvious point is that, since she's a woman, she doesn't have one of those. Nor should she need to metaphorically develop one in order to succeed. Another point I'd like to make is that her dialogue as a prisoner of war was ridiculous. The object is to survive. If you don't, your mission has failed. Taunting, bragging, and arguing with captors is a big NO-NO. Her, "I'm sorry, am I supposed to be afraid?" line would have gotten her stripped naked and suspended under a water hose for hours. There are no cadets that are tougher than the captors(instructors). Bringing unhappy attention to oneself in that situation is inescapably stupid. It is not tough. Her worst line, though, is "I'm going in." CLICHE!!

---

17 out of 24 people found the following comment useful :-
Worth a second look, 18 May 2002

Author: jtboyd from Charlotte North By God Carolina

I ignored this on it's release and caught flashes of it during it's run on HBO, there were some exciting action sequences and amazing glimpses into the hell that SEAL training requires, but somehow I just couldnt put all the pieces together. It didnt make sense.....until now. I finally watched this movie in it's entirety last night and I am hooked. Whether the film misses the target on it's "statement" is not the point. It's just a good flick. Demi Moore pulls off the roll in convincing style and Viggo Mortenson has his best part as the Master Chief of the SEAL training unit. They have this crazy dynamic between themselves that finally unfolds at the ending, leaving you wishing for just a little more. Solid action film with a great support cast and a perfectly despicable villain played to the hilt by Anne Bancroft as a Senator who compromises GI Jane for her own political gain. Well, at least she tries. I think Demi Moore is one of the most underappreciated talents in recent memory. She has this unique combination of hardass determination and sensitivity that is rare. 9/10

---

16 out of 25 people found the following comment useful :-
No problem with it, it just could have been 30 minutes shorter, 26 March 2007

Author: Kristine (kristinedrama14@msn.com) from Chicago, Illinois

I was really looking forward to G.I. Jane, because I always tried to think of it when I was renting movies, but it always slipped my mind, then I just saw I love the 90's on VH1 and was reminded one more time, so I just stuck it in my head and finally watched it tonite. I have to say that actually I enjoyed G.I. Jane, I think that the rating on IMDb is a little unfair, but I can let it go. My problem with the film was the way it ended, it just turned into those big twist stories that wasn't really needed, because you are just rooting for Demi to make it throughout training and there is always some kind of block to make the audience "interested".

Jorden O'Neil has been given a very special assignment, the army does not feel the need for equal opportunity for women when it comes to their jobs. But Sen. Lillian DeHaven wishes for them to give one woman a chance to prove herself that she can do a man's job, she gives this assignment to Jorden, Jorden isn't just given any average boot camp, but the SEALS, which is the toughest boot camp around. Of course no one will accept her into their teams, but she pulls her way through to prove that no one will hold her down.

I loved how hard Jorden kept pushing herself, Demi did a great job in showing the hardships of what it is still like to be the outsider in a man's world. Like I said, the only main problem was that it just didn't need a little twist, you'll see what I mean, it just could have been cut like 30 minutes shorter. But I would still recommend this movie, it was a good one to watch.

7/10

---

9 out of 12 people found the following comment useful :-
a surprisingly good Demi Moore movie, 15 July 2003
Author: coza_usa from New Jersey

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Demi Moore gave a good performance to a role that suited her really well. I can understand where her character was coming from when she said that she did not want to become a poster figure for women's advancement in the military and society at large. However, being that she was the only woman in the NAVY Seal training camp, it was sort of inevitable for that to happen. Hence, her character's comments were unnecessary.

Viggo Mortensen was excellent as Master Chief. I found myself still liking his character after he beat the crap out of Demi Moore's in a training game gone wrong. That scene was brutal but very necessary. In this case, the social message was that equality in the military does not just mean that men and women get an equal share of the pie but also that they both get an equal share of the pain.

SPOILER: I would have liked to see Anne Bancroft's character on Moore's side towards the end but as politics goes, she only cared about getting re-elected. It was a good reality check for the viewer.

I recommend this movie.

---

5 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :-
Hoo-yah!, 27 June 1999
Author: Altaira from Williamsburg, VA

Demi Moore shines with shiners and a bit more in an often brutal film about the first woman to enter the elite Navy SEALS training. While some scenes in the movie, such as the confusing end battle, seem a little out of place (exactly who were the trainees fighting?) the film moves along with startling pace and precision. Moore, who as everyone knows shaved her head for the role of Jordan O'Neill, is tough but feminine and internally vulnerable as a woman scorned by her male teammates. The most violent scene in the film comes during the survival exercise in which O'Neill is bashed around by the Master Chief. It's gruesome but necessary, and O'Neill earns her fellow trainees' support during the ordeal.

---

8 out of 12 people found the following comment useful :-
Apprenticeship, 11 January 2002
Author: tedg (tedg@FilmsFolded.com) from Virginia Beach

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Spoilers herein.

I have a lot of respect for Ridley's filmmaking. He shoots high and the stuff he does takes learning. This and White Squall are practice for Gladiator, all people striving under impossible external constraints.

You can see it here, where he works on the character to personalize each scene. He still hasn't mastered the art of projecting a scene into the next. Moore can carry the focus, but not the focus to come in anticipation. (Crowe can.)

I first saw this in a theater near the SEAL base. SEALs train two blocks from my house. This film doesn't capture how crazy these guys are made to be.

---

3 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
Don't Listen to the Sad Armchair Warriors, 12 October 2008

Author: mzmorpheus09 from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

This is one of Ridley Scott's better films, up there with 'Alien' or 'Matchstick Men'.

There's been A LOT of dissing of this film, especially by idiots that refuse to even watch it. Most of them whine and moan about how the writer (David Twohy who wrote 'Pitch Black') got the terminology and endless DoD acronyms wrong. SFW. It's a fictional drama, not a documentary. You want a documentary? Watch the Hitler Channel.

I used to be a wildland firefighter and, yep, I'm a split tail. I've seen fictional wildfire movies where the tanker planes fly at night and the actors sprint through fields of flaming dirt (note to non-firefighters: dirt don't burn). Again, SFW. It was a movie, big deal.

The No. 1 reason I like this film is Viggo Mortensen's performance. He's way better than Demi Moore, not that Demi is bad. I don't think she deserved the Razzie for this. Again, that came from misogynistic armchair warriors who are unemployed and live with Mommy. Consider the source.

What this film does have is action, suspense, conflict, fast dialog, good character development -- all the stuff a movie like some horrendous Steven Segal mess is SUPPOSED to have but usually doesn't.

Rent this flick, keep an open mind and enjoy the show.

Also keep in mind, a very high percentage of the enlisted women who have served in the Middle East have been harassed, assaulted and raped -- by their own coworkers, not 'the enemy.' Then reconsider all these bad reviews and ask yourself what does that say?

---

1 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
A cutesy name for an abrasive and confronting film about prejudice., 29 September 2009

Author: Ben_Cheshire from Oz

Demi Moore is one female Seal out of water.

In most cases of discrimination, the minority party is a small percentage of the total population. They have friends, you might say. Here its one against the world. The odds aren't hardly fair. The environment of prejudice here is completely believable. We don't need much convincing that Navy Seals training is a hardcore testosterone-fueled boys club. And its a scary place to be. I'd liken it to a girl put into an all-boys public high-school. She's eaten alive at every turn. The viewer is put in the position of such vulnerability, because we are aligned with the one woman in a world full of bitter, threatened soldiers, constantly passing sexist comments and threatening to take advantage of the female Seal.

There are moments that border on exploitation: Demi Moore's implants are put to good use in a sequence doing pushups in a short cut-off shirt, set to Three Dog Night's Mama Told Me (Not to Come). There is a speech intended for dafter viewers by an African-American character sympathising with Moore by likening her to his grandfather who was refused navy service on the grounds that African-Americans can't see at night (A surreal anecdote, but believable.) On the whole, however, the film is well made in Ridley's late style, which is to say, less style than his earlier pictures. It has several glimpses of the striking lighting which characterised his earlier pictures. My recommendations are as follows: 1) If you're looking for a silly movie, this is not one. Its dark.

2) If you're looking for a dark war training picture, or a good drama, then I recommend it.

3) If you're going through all Ridley Scott's movies as I am, this is a good three-star picture, but probably won't be one of your favourites by the end, which for me so far are Alien, Legend and Blade Runner.

---

---

Page 1 of 12:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Amazon.com summary	Ratings
Awards	Newsgroup reviews	External reviews
Parents Guide	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user comments	Your vote history