What's new

RoboCop (2014) Review (1 Viewer)

Yavin

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
196
Real Name
Ben Mk
Fans of the original will also notice the many winks and nods to the world of RoboCop 1987 peppered throughout Padilha's version. The fan service extends beyond the film's Detroit setting, with highlights being a reprise of the classic RoboCop theme, the inclusion of cult-favorite mech, ED-209, line references ("I wouldn't buy that for a dollar!") and even a rendition of the original RoboCop's fourth directive (which finds its contemporary counterpart in the new RoboCop's programmed inability to harm "Red Assets"). But that's where the similarities end. For the most part, Padilha and screenwriter Joshua Zetumer forge their own unique take on RoboCop — a faster-paced, more action-oriented (and less violence-oriented) iteration of the character. Aside from familiar names like Murphy and Lewis, there aren't any Dick Joneses or Clarence J. Boddickers to be found — though elements of those characters are certainly present in Keaton's portrayal of Sellars, and in characters like Jackie Earl Haley's military tactician, Rick Mattox, and Patrick Garrow's villainous Antoine Vallon. Yet, with all the effort expended on action, the film still finds time (and justly so) to focus on Murphy's emotional and physical vulnerabilities, as in a scene where he gazes upon his disembodied visage, removed from the RoboCop suit, for the first time.
4 out of 5.

My full review can be found here.
 

Freddie Z

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Messages
93
Real Name
Freddie Zaragoza
Original Robocop : Part Man. Part Machine. All Cop.

New Robocop : Some guy in a rubber suit who shoots a taser, yes TASER, not a real gun with real bullets. Just too PC for me. Will pass.
 

Aaron Silverman

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 22, 1999
Messages
11,411
Location
Florida
Real Name
Aaron Silverman
Yavin said:
there aren't any Dick Joneses or Clarence J. Boddickers to be found
Yes, let's leave out two of the awesomest villains of all time. (Red was so intimidating on That '70s Show because subconsciously we were all thinking of Clarence!)

Then again, maybe it's better that they left 'em alone. . .
 

Tony J Case

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2002
Messages
2,736
Michael Elliott said:
Is it better than ROBOCOP 3?
Yes, but just barely. This remake blew goats.

Actually, that's a bit unfair. It was below average pedestrian, mediocre at best. It was the second best movie I've seen all year, but that's only because I've only see two movies (and there's no way this would have beat the awesome Lego: The Movie in a month of Sundays).

First - Sam, please never have hair again. You look weird with it (and considerably less sexy).

Second is the whole host of problems that I have with modern action flicks: a tepid score (Basil Poledouris comparisons aside), the action scenes were all herky-jerky messes, and nobody in Hollywood can compose a damn shot anymore. Cinematography is a dead art. But this has been the standard for movies for 10 years now, so I don't hold these issues against Robocop (or at least any more than I do with any other action movie of the Aughts and beyond). Moving on. . . .

First was the complete lack of strong Bad Guy. There's no Clarence Boddicker, no Dick Jones, no Cain - who while trapped in a shit movie was a pretty strong villain. The drug lord was a non-entity and the OCP overlord was pretty inert until the final reel and then only a pretty tepid bad guy, as if someone at the final draft stage of the scripting process said "Hey! OCP was bad! We should make our faceless megacooperation bad too! and then never bothered to actually rewrite the previous 180 pages to actually reflect that.

There was nothing memorable about the movie, nothing iconic. There was no melting man, no I'd Buy That For a Dollar guy, no good quotable lines (that weren't recycled from the first film), there was nothing that stood out as truly awesome moments.

And most importantly - what is the movie about? There was a clear central theme that resonated throughout the Good Robocop that they danced briefly with but never exploited - well, until the very end on the rooftop showdown where Corrupt OCP Boss said "You're nothing but a robot". No he's fucking not - he's been a human in a goofy rubber suit the whole movie long.

The original worked so well because - aside from the satire and cool action bits - there was a compelling story arc about humanity, where Murphy goes from ordinary guy to soulless automaton and back to human being (in spirit, if not body). Underneath all the explosions and squibs, there was heart.

Here, there was never a triumph of the human spirit. Murphy never struggled with his lack of humanity, OCP never treated him like property (well, aside from Australian Weapons Jerk). He was always Alex and never Robocop.

The flick is at it's best when it's playing with the idea of instead of a machine coming to terms with being a man, a man coming to terms being trapped in a machine. The first We Can See Your Brain scene was pretty damn powerful. But the movie didnt do anything with those moments. "Hey, here's a concept! Now lets move on!"

Oh, also - fuck this PG 13 nonsense. Fuck it all to hell!

It's pretty telling that my first impulse after getting out of the theater was to run to the video store and pick up something to wash the bad taste out of my mouth. Now if you'll excuse me - I have to decide between watching Octaman or Mako: The Jaws of Death. . . .
 

Edwin-S

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
10,007
When I saw the trailer for this film, all that came to mind was why. Why remake this? How could anything they bring to this film ever top the sardonic wit and violence of Verhoeven's masterpiece. Why can't Hollywood make something new when it comes to SF films? Where is my BOLO or Retief film? Better yet where is my "Rendezvous with Rama" movie?
 

mattCR

Reviewer
HW Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Messages
10,897
Location
Lee Summit, Missouri
Real Name
Matt
Watched it today. This article sums up every single thing I think about this.

http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/feb/06/robocop-remake-total-recall-stormship-troopers-paul-verhoeven

Verhoven put up a satirical 'is it or isn't it' kind of wit which helped sell the movie. Chastising the company, the outcome and all involved because it was ALL wrong. From side moments talking about vehicles with crap gas milage to the drive to create crime they would fight.

The new Robocop doesn't just miss the point of the satire, it seems to just be cheering on everything the original was poking fun at. Same problem infected last years terrible Total Recall.

Bah. The effects aren't too bad, but it was a loser from start to end.
 

dpippel

Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems
Supporter
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2000
Messages
12,333
Location
Sonora Norte
Real Name
Doug
Edwin-S said:
Better yet where is my "Rendezvous with Rama" movie?
Amen! I'd love to see more intelligent sci-fi coming out of Hollywood but I doubt that's gonna happen anytime soon. Despite it's flaws, at least Ender's Game tried to rise above the current level of dumbness and was a shift in the right direction.

I'll be passing on the Robocop remake. Pointless IMO, even with Michael Keaton in it.
 

Freddie Z

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Messages
93
Real Name
Freddie Zaragoza
LOL! $3M opening Wednesday (from 3000+ screens). Yes, studio is blaming the winter storms but that's just a load of bull. Storm or no storm, this is no different when it comes to recent 80's remakes. Just another flop. It's just gonna get killed this weekend by The Lego Movie anyway.
 

Aaron Silverman

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 22, 1999
Messages
11,411
Location
Florida
Real Name
Aaron Silverman
Interesting Guardian article, but I completely disagree about the idea of a Starship Troopers "remake" that doesn't take a huge steaming dump on its source material. That movie had not one tenth the wit of the original Robocop.
 

Michael Elliott

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Messages
8,054
Location
KY
Real Name
Michael Elliott
My source in Hollywood just told me that as of five minutes ago this movie has made more money than seven films that made my Best of 2013 list. Congrats.
 

RoboCop

Auditioning
Joined
Jul 2, 2009
Messages
13
Real Name
Louis
The money this movie makes now, mostly reflects the perceived quality of the original movie, sir.
The money a second installment will not make, the quality of this one.

Thank you, Sir!


L.
 

Tony J Case

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2002
Messages
2,736
Freddie Z said:
LOL! $3M opening Wednesday (from 3000+ screens).
nelson-laughing.jpg
 

Tony J Case

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2002
Messages
2,736
Additional:
MGM/Columbia Pictures’ rebooted actioner starring Joel Kinnaman as the part-human, part-robot police officer, trudged into 3,366 theaters to take in around $3M, or only $891 per screen.
That's Speed Racer levels money! Man, sucks to be them!

(Anecdotal evidence: when I saw it on Wensday evening, there were 4 people in the theater other than me. And two of them left half way through. And my ticket was the free one I got in the best buy Blu Ray of the original!)
 

Michael Elliott

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Messages
8,054
Location
KY
Real Name
Michael Elliott
Sucks to be Robert Redford. I plan on seeing this at some point but I see this having the same fate as that Dredd movie.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Sign up for our newsletter

and receive essential news, curated deals, and much more







You will only receive emails from us. We will never sell or distribute your email address to third party companies at any time.

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
357,059
Messages
5,129,787
Members
144,281
Latest member
acinstallation240
Recent bookmarks
0
Top