Robocop (Reboot)

Mitch Connor

krudler wrote: »

Why though, there's a perfectly good (actually fantastic) original Robocop movie, this was completely pointless.

The original still exists and this has its own take on the story and was an enjoyable movie.

TheIrishGrover

I actually found this movie to be OK. I went in expecting the worst. Robocop's one of my favourite movies for the sheer fun of it and I had not got high hopes for this: 12s, low on the violence, the uninspired look of robocop,was it even needed at all, But I found this to be pretty passable. There were problems ("You have 10 seconds to cooperate....." Cooperate? It's COMPLY!!!!) I mean, it's pretty bland and fairly forgettable but it's not as awful as it should have been. Regarding the hand

I thought the reveal of his damage was VERY well done. Like most people, beforehand I assumed that he wasn't that badly damaged. Thought the fact that the hand was just as much of an addon as the rest was well done. They should have done a scene like "Bolt on a hand, it'll look good for the people". Kind of an inversion of the "Lose the arm" scene from the original

. Liked the way the bike scenes were done too.

It's no Robocop but it's not bad. Think of it as "robocop" as opposed to "RoboCop"

ScumLord

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Each movie should be judged on its own, unless the people involved have, themselves, a terrible track record.

Well if you see someone making a chocolate cake out of turnips you're going to be apprehensive.

GhostInTheRuins

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

For fans of the original, check out this. Warning: incredibly NSFW.

Jesus ****ing Christ :eek:

nyarlothothep

TheIrishGrover wrote: »

I actually found this movie to be OK. I went in expecting the worst. Robocop's one of my favourite movies for the sheer fun of it and I had not got high hopes for this: 12s, low on the violence, the uninspired look of robocop,was it even needed at all, But I found this to be pretty passable. There were problems ("You have 10 seconds to cooperate....." Cooperate? It's COMPLY!!!!) I mean, it's pretty bland and fairly forgettable but it's not as awful as it should have been. Regarding the hand

I thought the reveal of his damage was VERY well done. Like most people, beforehand I assumed that he wasn't that badly damaged. Thought the fact that the hand was just as much of an addon as the rest was well done. They should have done a scene like "Bolt on a hand, it'll look good for the people". Kind of an inversion of the "Lose the arm" scene from the original

. Liked the way the bike scenes were done too.

It's no Robocop but it's not bad. Think of it as "robocop" as opposed to "RoboCop"

Cooperate??? Cooperate???? wtf/!? I'm never seeing this now. Wtf is wrong with people today, cooperate, aghh. no.

pixelburp

I've been critical of the remake on this thread, but I went into the cinema with an open mind and cognisant of the generally favourable reviews this has been getting; and while yes it's much better than it could have been and isn't the total train-wreck many predicted (including myself I guess), once I got over the surprise that it didn't completely suck, Robocop 2014 didn't really do a whole lot for me - to be honest it still got pushed into the Total Recall category of redundant and superfluous remakes. Was it entertaining? Sure, I guess, I had little else to do this afternoon but I can't say it was fun in the way the original films were. It was ok, it did the job.

I do appreciate remakes are often in a no-win situation: stray too far from the source material and the film gets slated for messing with the mythology; stick too close and it invites excessive comparisons with the original; so perhaps a good remake should be one that has its own voice and purpose, that it takes a new slant on the material and runs with it, so both the original and remake compliment each other. The original Robocop wasn't perfect, but it was a big, splashy satire of 1980s America that took its cheesy material and went for broke. It wasn't subtle but it had an undeniable energy - Verhoeven's film was a force of nature. On the other hand, the remake felt tepid and half-baked, full of ideas skulking in the background but incapable of following through. The satire fell flat, it lacked a lot of humour, the action was generic and bloodless, and while the script dropped in ideas on human nature and free will, they went nowhere. The lack of satire was most frustrating because you could see it was there, just ripe for the plucking, but each time they failed to do anything with it. The Samuel L Jackson segments should have been lots of fun, and the film's biggest comedic element but they were too earnest and lacking in bite.

On the problem of the violence and the rating, it was noticeable, but praise where praise is due, the scenes of Murphy

without the suit and his remaining organs on show

were very effective, pretty icky and the camera didn't squirm or look away. While the rest of the film was PG13 to a tee, I can't fault the filmmakers for those lab scenes.

Is the remake as good as Robocop 1? No way, not even close. Is it as good as Robocop 2? Honestly, no; I know it often gets a shoeing, but the sequel was still a schlocky piece of comicbook-style action (not surprising given it was written by Frank Miller). Is this new film better than Robocop 3? Hell yes, but that's a long way for any film to fall, so at least it stayed away from that abyss.

Gbear

pixelburp wrote: »

I do appreciate remakes are often in a no-win situation:

It takes a special kind of person to make a "no-win situation" into a film instead of just not actually making it and making something else.


It's not like they ran out of films to make.

SherlockWatson

If it wasn't called Robocop I would probably have enjoyed it more.

pixelburp

Gbear wrote: »

It takes a special kind of person to make a "no-win situation" into a film instead of just not actually making it and making something else.
It's not like they ran out of films to make.

I hate remakes as much as the next person, but they're not going to go away so it's an interesting discussion to see how/where they can be worthwhile. Good remakes do exist from time to time!

But honestly, before going into the film I had realised however cherished Verhoeven's Robocop is, the franchise was already damaged by Robocop 3, the TV series and cartoon than this remake has or ever will manage. Robocop has spent most of its life as a PG13 hamfisted travesty, so perhaps my/our disgust has been misplaced; in comparison with previous drekk, the remake's actually fairly harmless, if completely flat.

Temptamperu

pixelburp wrote: »

I hate remakes as much as the next person, but they're not going to go away so it's an interesting discussion to see how/where they can be worthwhile. Good remakes do exist from time to time!

But honestly, before going into the film I had realised however cherished Verhoeven's Robocop is, the franchise was already damaged by Robocop 3, the TV series and cartoon than this remake has or ever will manage. Robocop has spent most of its life as a PG13 hamfisted travesty, so perhaps my/our disgust has been misplaced; in comparison with previous drekk, the remake's actually fairly harmless, if completely flat.

Not if everyone goes "just in-case" its good. There has not been a good remake since Psycho and that's stretching it.
The movie is PG and robocop has a stun gun and non human enemys. Anyone who pays for that deserves all these remakes.

ricero

Omar up in here !

Mickeroo

Temptamperu wrote: »

The movie is PG and robocop has a stun gun and non human enemys. Anyone who pays for that deserves all these remakes.

Surely the film should be judged on the story, direction, acting etc rather than what kind of gun he uses and what he fires it at?

Temptamperu

Mickeroo wrote: »

Surely the film should be judged on the story, direction, acting etc rather than what kind of gun he uses and what he fires it at?

I aint seen it but as far as i can see its a cash grab hoping to swindle unsuspecting movie fans into a CGI farce just like total recall last year. Movies like this are why I pirate stuff.

Mickeroo

Temptamperu wrote: »

I aint seen it but as far as i can see its a cash grab hoping to swindle unsuspecting movie fans into a CGI farce just like total recall last year. Movies like this are why I pirate stuff.

Not seen it yet either but it's got much better audience reaction and reviews than Total Recall did so I'll probably give it a look if there's nothing else on in the coming weeks. Sure all big budget Hollywood films are technically cash grabs, even the original ones.

norrie rugger

Temptamperu wrote: »

I aint seen it but as far as i can see its a cash grab hoping to swindle unsuspecting movie fans into a CGI farce just like total recall last year. Movies like this are why I pirate stuff.

Don't try justify your pirating like that.
No one forces you to watch, so your pirating is just an illegal download

pixelburp

Temptamperu wrote: »

Not if everyone goes "just in-case" its good. There has not been a good remake since Psycho and that's stretching it.
The movie is PG and robocop has a stun gun and non human enemys. Anyone who pays for that deserves all these remakes.

Remakes have been around since year zero of cinema. And your idea of a good remake is the Gus Van Sant shot-for-shot, possibly the benchmark for redundant remakes? That's kinda the point I was making: a good remake is one that establishes its own vision, in the spirit of the original, rather than shamefully copying verbatim. And just off the top of my head of more recent remakes I'd suggest True Grit, Insomnia, The Departed, Heat, 3:10 To Yuma, Dawn of the Dead, Solaris, Ocean's 11; just films I've personally enjoyed mind you, the arguments are there whether they're better or worse than the original but they all established their own tone and voice. For crowd-pleasers you could add the Star Trek reboot, even if I didn't like it myself.

I didn't go to Robocop 2014 'just in case', I went because it has been receiving fairly positive reviews and the general consensus here (a barometer I'd rate highly) seems equally so; better to make up my own mind than dig my heels and make some thin validation for piracy.

Anyway, I'm not going to go all out to defend Robocop 2014 as I already said I didn't think much of the film, but considering this is a world where Robocop 3 exists, it's a bit weak to get too sanctimonious about this film. It's average at best, but it didn't have Robocop with a kid sidekick, fighting robot ninjas :rolleyes:

Temptamperu

norrie rugger wrote: »

Don't try justify your pirating like that.
No one forces you to watch, so your pirating is just an illegal download

I dont pirate Games, books and movies because i feel i get my moneys worth. Movies though? especially big studio movies like this keep getting pumped out because everyone that loved robocop would go and see this and then the studio say. "well people only want remakes and sequels" and the circle continues.
Lets not try anything new and wallow in the comfortable.

Also ive only seen the first 20 minutes of Robocop 3.

My problems more with the industry than the movie per say.

Mark Hamill

Temptamperu wrote: »

The movie is PG and robocop has a stun gun and non human enemys.

Why wouldn't he have a stun gun? Is it that much of a stretch to believe that in the future that we would have effective non-lethal weaponry. It also justifies the PG13 rating a bit (well, better than if he had the original cannon but took bloodless non lethal shots).
Also, he has plenty of human enemies, the scene in the trailer with all the bots was

a training exercise

(I thought that was glaringly obvious myself).

It may not be a great film, but it is a lot better than last years Total Recall.

norrie rugger

I suppose that Star Trek phasers having a stun setting is bad also?

A Neurotic

Temptamperu wrote: »

I aint seen it but as far as i can see its a cash grab hoping to swindle unsuspecting movie fans into a CGI farce just like total recall last year. Movies like this are why I pirate stuff.

You haven't seen it. How could you have such an opinion of it? It's all hype. Watch the thing and make up your own mind, then you'll have an opinion worth sharing.

TerrorFirmer

Temptamperu wrote: »

Not if everyone goes "just in-case" its good. There has not been a good remake since Psycho and that's stretching it.
The movie is PG and robocop has a stun gun and non human enemys. Anyone who pays for that deserves all these remakes.

Not only have you not actually seen it, you don't even have the fundemental details right. His 'enemies' are mostly human.

norrie rugger

not that i agree with tempt but I can't afford to go see every film before I can decide its worth.
Going to the flicks is expensive so yes I do prejudge films, I have to.
The thing is though, I must always be aware that I am not giving a film a fair chance. To balance my initial impressions I will listen to reviews from people that have shown to have similar tastes to my own.
That's how I ended up seeing this Robocop and enjoying it. Hell that's how I first saw Serenity!!

Sad Professor

It's good. It's very Nolan-esque and is more of a reboot than a remake. It's a very different and modern take on Robocop and doesn't feel redundant in the way that everyone was expecting. Yeah, sure, it would be better if Hollywood made original films instead of remaking and rebooting everything but that's not going to happen anytime soon and I'm glad this particular reboot ended up in the right hands. Unfortunately I can't see Padilha returning but if he does I'd love to see what he'd do free of studio interference.

Hande hoche!

Not too bad a film. Was better than I expected. The scenes in Iran and those showing what was left of him were well done. Gary Oldman was solid as always. Must admit I laughed heartily when Murphy was

cock blocked by a carbomb

.

ScumLord

I started watching one of the pirate copies online but stopped when the film started looking some ways descent.

The set up at least seems ok, I still think I won't like it but I'll reserve judgement for now.

Frank Bullitt

Caught this tonight and I quite enjoyed it. The visuals are savage in places and the sounds transfer very well in the cinema.

7/10

jonnyfingers

Watched this yesterday with a surprising amount of children under 10 also in the cinema.

Really enjoyed it. Thought it does a good job of rebooting the story and they could easily do a sequel. Enjoyed how much time they spent showing the testing phase. Felt we never properly saw Robocop on police duty though. Also felt the suit looked good on screen, started to believe it was a cyborg suit rather than just a man in suit like it looked in the trailer.

00sully

Really enjoyed this. Enjoyed the original as a young kid (larf shouldn't have been even watching it then!) and I think This reboot did the original justice 😊

The pg rating typical Hollywood mainstream pandering but as another poster said some scenes were truly effective - my girlfriend couldn't even watch them ðŸ˜႒

Go see it with an open mind you won't regret it. Leave the almost 30 year old rose tinted glasses behind and you won't be disappointed 😉

Goldstein

To sum it up: Yes it's the 2nd best Robocop movie but it's still brainless, generic, emotionally devoid Hollywood schlock.

I do feel the trailers did it an injustice though implying almost all of his biological body was saved.

Bipolar Joe

Temptamperu wrote: »

I dont pirate Games, books and movies because i feel i get my moneys worth. Movies though? especially big studio movies like this keep getting pumped out because everyone that loved robocop would go and see this and then the studio say. "well people only want remakes and sequels" and the circle continues.
Lets not try anything new and wallow in the comfortable.

Also ive only seen the first 20 minutes of Robocop 3.

My problems more with the industry than the movie per say.

Why would you pirate something you know you'll hate?