| Author |
Message |
RoboTrap
OmniCon - A Silver Future
 
Joined: 17 Dec 2007
Post Count: 420
Comment: RoboCop: The Future's Silver Lining
|
  Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:04 pm |
|
|
|
| KidGoesWild : | | I meant that watching R2 you dont have to see the first one to understand it and most importantly, its not a shadow or recreation or extension of the original. Its something fresh yet still with the same feel and same universe. Being also a huge Jim Cameron fan, I always praise sequels for taking risks and different directions. R2 is its own animal yet continuing the same story with the same characters, something I surely was thrilled to see |
You talk about it adhering to the formula of the first, then flip around and talk about how it's a huge leap in a different direction! RC2 doesn't have the same feel as the original. The original, at its core, had a heart. Frankenstein's monster for the 21st century.
You have a man who has lost everything, even his own identity, and you experience his struggle to get back whatever he can, even if, at the end of the day, it simply means revenge against those who did this to him.
But now he's wiped out that scum and come to terms with the fact that he is Murphy, and not just a machine using Murphy's brain.
So what do they do? They have him tell his wife off, then mutter a few lines under his breath. And that's it? No solemn conversation with Lewis, with her reassuring him he still has a purpose in life (in fact, she doesn't seem to give a fuck at all about Robo unless he isn't working properly) or confrontation with his family? No erratic behavior to show that his emotions truly are affecting him?
That's... that's just damned lazy. It's unbelievable that they would even bother with those scenes if they weren't willing to carry through with it.
It's the equivalent of having a scene with some psycho shouting on the rooftops that he's planted bombs all over the city only for Robo to shoot him, and then never having the bombs mentioned again for the rest of the movie. You can't do that. It's just bad filmmaking!
| KidGoesWild : | | I didnt hear any one liners, only the continuation of Murphy's witty tough cop character. "Think it over creep" - "Your move creep". Nothing new here, unless you count what he says in the first movie as one liners too. Its simply Murphy's character and we see a nice continuation of it here |
Murphy has almost nothing but one-liners the entire movie! I can't think of a single instance, aside from lying to his wife and comforting Hob, where he actually spoke to someone about something.
| KidGoesWild : | | If thats how you feel than too bad but that doesnt mean there wasnt any exploration because there was and you just mentioned it. He meets his wife, hes spying on her. Theres an obvious emotional conflict there. I always wondered about him meeting his wife. I tohught it was great, he seemed almost as if hes gonna break when they kept telling him that he has nothing to offer her. For her good he told her goodbye and then he was obviously still taken by it. While it wasnt necessary since the first movie already told the emotional side and internal struggle, it was nice to tie a knot completely on that here in the sequel in a strong and emotional way. First hes getting coned and emotionally tortured and then he has to say farewell to his wife. I thought the bits when hes spying on Ellen were great too with some great music as well. Gives the movie a heart |
That isn't exploration, it's a quick throwaway sequence of scenes that allow the filmmakers to completely discard that aspect of Murphy and focus on shooting people instead. In the last film, Murphy's family had moved from town. Now they're back and... for no reason. Beyond that sequence, they have absolutely no impact on the film. They don't provide plot advancement in any form, and the event doesn't appear to influence Robo in anyway. None of the characters even seem to note that he's acting different in any significant way, leaving the entire "subplot" (and it's a stretch to even call it that) as a completely useless aside designed to distract you from how awful the movie is.
I'm sorry, but I find RoboCop 2's "emotional core" to be completely insulting to me as a viewer. The original film can actually get to me. RC2 just leaves me shaking my head and gritting my teeth at the sheer ineptitude displayed at almost every level of production.
| KidGoesWild : | | Again, that was the continuation of the leftover story from the first movie. It got resolved in the beginning because it had to get resolved. We wanted to see him meeting his wife and see what he will decide and why. R2 wasnt about internal struggle, it wasnt just copying the first movie's story which was about his emotional journey. It simply touched upon it, tied all the knots from the first one and moved on. It was obvious Murphy wouldnt just drop it, and I think the reason why he decided to leave and forget his family was really good and the execution of him taking that decision was very nicely done too |
There was no leftover story from the first one. His family had moved away, so he couldn't get closure. It was strong and poignant. By reintroducing his family in the second film, they had a responsibility to ensure that it made some difference to the film. Instead, it's left to blow away in the wind.
Remember, this is the same film where Robo just disappears for 20 minutes. Apparently they couldn't think of anything for him to do. If I was the editor, I would have moved the confrontation between Murphy and his wife to that point of the film. Having him leave his wife and then watch Hob die might have actually affected me in some way.
| KidGoesWild : | | I thought it was pretty obvious - use the old man and get a nice position of power because of him. yet another continuation of one of the themes from the original about trying to gain power in the world of big corporations |
In the original film, the corporate characters did shit that actually made sense. "Wanting power" doesn't excuse completely nonsensical actions.
| KidGoesWild : | | First of all, the nuke would end sooner or later. Secondly, she had the remote |
As she said, one canister of Nuke was enough for his entire lifespan (since the Nuke only needed to go directly to his brain) so that doesn't excuse that. And the remote obviously did nothing. For being played as such a conniving corporate backstabber, she couldn't actually seem to do anything that actually worked.
| KidGoesWild : | | I already explained what she wanted. In addition to gaining power she was also a little sick in the head and enjoyed her baby killing everyone around as shown in the movie. Another example of a complex character |
That's not complex. Complex is giving a character dimensions. Instead, they play Faxx as "power-hungry psychopath" and hope and pray that no one will notice she's simply a tool for the plot.
| KidGoesWild : | | No, that wasnt the reason. They had to help him because of the public relations, so they had an alternative way - fix robocop but in a way that he wont be able to truly clean up the streets and wont interfere with the plan |
| KidGoesWild : | | Because OCP couldnt know so fast about Robo loosing directives. Besides, they couldnt care less - it was too late and the city was already going private |
If Robo wasn't back to his old self, he couldn't have led the assault on Cain's fortress. I mean, there was even news footage of Robo at the scene during the MediaBreak segment. And according to the timeline the film showed, Robo went Directives-crazy, then back to normal, and then nabbed Cain all in the same day. So unless they reprogrammed him specifically to keep him impotent for two hours, that made no damn sense.
I mean, all it takes is one throwaway line from Faxx like "They can do whatever they want with him, I got my brain" or something like that. THAT'S ALL IT TAKES!
| KidGoesWild : | | Sounds like you havent seen the movie. Robo basiclaly grabbed them by the balls and said what Reed would normally say, that theyre cops and their job is to protect this city and that a murderer Cain is out there. They finally realized again what their duty is and also wanted to get the guy who stripped Robo. As for the second point, how could they know where Cain and his gang is? Plus, it was Robo's speech and attitude that motivated them |
Sounds like you've seen the movie but haven't bothered to think about. Robo had been doing his job the entire time they were striking, and they didn't give a damn. Hell, they seemed concerned when Robo was thrown at their feet in pieces, but they still kept striking. But Robo says "Are we cops?" and all of a sudden they're back in their turbocruisers? To face the city's biggest druglord head-on in his own personal fortress of which they have no knowledge of? They could have at least had Cain's gang dump Duffy's body in front of the striking cops, or maybe even made some type of crazy attack that got them all rallied, but no.
Robo sticks his finger in an electrical socket and they all grab their bodyarmor and drive off to get gunned down.
| KidGoesWild : | | Quote: | | That isn't being adult, that's using disturbing images for pure shock value. |
No its not. It happens all the time in poor cities. Families have to work this way to feed kids. Just like the original, R2 shows us the darkest side of reality |
Presentation and exploration are two entirely different things. RC2 was exploitative, not contemplative.
| KidGoesWild : | | Its weird that you take it so black and white and now I see why you dont "get" the movie. It isnt so black and white. The first two RoboCop movies had villains that were developed in such way that we absolutely hated them. They were vicious. Immoral. R2 pushed the envelope even further - we got all that...but in a kid. That alone raises many questions and issues - can we hate a child? Can we want painful death and revenge on him? But we do!... but we shouldnt..we cant! And on and on. Then theres the thing with his redemption during his death, wheter we give it to him or not. Love him or hate him, but theres no denying that he's a very good metaphor and device for many things in the story, and thats coming from a former student of film academy. |
All of the villains are played as clear-cut baddies with no redeeming qualities. So what if Hob is scared of his death? So is Duffy. So is Cain! What angers me is that the filmmakers simply assumed that I would feel sympathy for Hob during his death. If any depth was intentional, and not simply a heavy-handed "What has become of us?!" sob story, they would have given the audience a choice as to what to feel. Instead, they rub your nose in it, and it insults me.
The entire movie insults me! They dress up garbage as filet mignon and expect me to tell them it's delicious. It's not. The film is a mess. Tone, pacing, plot, characterization, all of it is a complete and utter failure. You're seeing things you want to see.
Talk all you want about how shit blows up real good, but attributing positive qualities beyond that... please don't.
Long winded, yes, but damn... I can't express how much I hate RoboCop 2. I mean it. HATE. I hate it in the way Jews hate Hitler. I hate it in the way English Majors hate YouTube comments. It's a movie that makes me feel like I've just been spat on, and am expected to give a great big thumbs up in return.
_________________
|
|
 |
|
 |
Stan The Man
Part Man, Part Sheep, All RoboCop-Fan
Joined: 05 Jun 2003
Post Count: 4498
Comment: The one, the original, the only - OCP Police 001
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 4:13 pm |
|
|
|
Well, I'll never feel as strongly negative about R2 as Trap does, but I'm sorry fellas, I'm more with him.
Especially with Murphy's wife - Trap put it excellently. All it did was remind us of something that sharper viewers already knew. 'He lets them go' - Bah, like we couldn't have come to that outcome without that whole sequence. It just wasn't necessary, you yourself even say so, KGW. And if it ain't necessary, why bother even having that whole damn aspect again in the first place.
Bottom-line, R2 looked great and had a lot of action, and that was the paramount thing they were going for. And a blind man can see that in a second. It's narrative is disjointed and the overall story is poorly structured at best. RoboCop 2 might have had some deep aspects if you look at it, but it didn't have true depth like the original. And that's what hurt it.
Now, I'll try to refrain from going much into this, I've stated my feelings before and Trap has touched on pretty much anything I'd care to bring up.
Overall, I think artuditu put it best -
| artuditu : | | When I was a kid I found R2 more entertaining to watch, more of a spectacle, it was colorful, with more robots, the city felt like much bigger, the crime wave looked more violent and rampant, so the action... BUT I always felt the first film was much more powerful, dramatic and authentic, maybe because of its simplicity, it was straightforward, and its characters also looked more real. |
_________________
|
|
|
|
|
Johan
Archive Dictator
Joined: 17 Nov 2001
Post Count: 5559
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 11:30 pm |
|
|
|
| RoboTrap : | | I can't express how much I hate RoboCop 2. I mean it. HATE. I hate it in the way Jews hate Hitler. I hate it in the way English Majors hate YouTube comments. |
You really hate it. You hate it with a passion, and i got to respect that.
However, all your arguments totally falls flat for me since you admitted you like RoboCop3, which is like saying you hate the plague but think Ebola is kinda alright. 
I'm joking of course, it's all good and a lot of valid arguments for and against. For me, personally, I'd rather watch a poorly made movie that is FUN than a well made movie that is boring.
That's how i roll. 
|
|
|
|
|
Stan The Man
Part Man, Part Sheep, All RoboCop-Fan
Joined: 05 Jun 2003
Post Count: 4498
Comment: The one, the original, the only - OCP Police 001
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 11:58 pm |
|
|
|
Trap, I'm sorry, but Johan made a good one there. 
I'm with Johan when it comes to actually watching the stuff. The point of a movie is to entertain and if it can't do that much it fails automatically. Hence why I too like R2 over R3.
But I still agree with some of Trap's points, though.
_________________
|
|
|
|
|
KidGoesWild
L-L1
Joined: 27 Oct 2009
Post Count: 451
Comment: I type it, you think it
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:25 am |
|
|
|
| RoboTrap : | | KidGoesWild : | | I meant that watching R2 you dont have to see the first one to understand it and most importantly, its not a shadow or recreation or extension of the original. Its something fresh yet still with the same feel and same universe. Being also a huge Jim Cameron fan, I always praise sequels for taking risks and different directions. R2 is its own animal yet continuing the same story with the same characters, something I surely was thrilled to see |
You talk about it adhering to the formula of the first, then flip around and talk about how it's a huge leap in a different direction! |
And that is correct. Formula and direction are two different things. RoboCop 2 continues the same template of the original movie yet goes on with its own story
| Quote: | | RC2 doesn't have the same feel as the original. |
Many would disagree. The largest DVD news site, DVDActive: This sequel is the closest to the original, at least in terms of the overall ‘feel’ of the movie
http://www.dvdactive.com/reviews/dvd/robocop-trilogy.html
| Quote: | | The original, at its core, had a heart. Frankenstein's monster for the 21st century. |
Youre talking about 2 different things again. The original was the frankenstein story, yes. And? It says nothing about the feel of the movie, feel meaning the sense of the same characters, world and dark reality, violence and same themes, all nicely continued in R2
| Quote: | | But now he's wiped out that scum and come to terms with the fact that he is Murphy, and not just a machine using Murphy's brain. |
I dont understand this statement because its completely incorrect. I gotta disagree here completely. I cant even think of one instance when he would act like a robot, aside from when he was reprogrammed. He's all Murphy, and his witty humor and character is ever present ("Dead then", "As good as money can buy", "are we cops!?"). Not to even mention the questioning scene when theres clearly an emotion in his voice and when he chooses very good words to calm his wife down. Robo-Robocop would say something like "madam you are in emotional shock and psychological denial thats natural in post-trauma state. Officer Murphy is deceased". Wanna hear RoboCop totally depraved of Murphy? Check out RObocop 3 - 'Im fine ann, thanks for asking" - acting like he did when he was reprogrammed by OCP, and zero emotion, zero difference in voice range and strenght ("How are you feelin"?-"My efficency rate is 93%", "vehicle approaching"). I always see and hear Murphy in R2, with the only difference being that he more or less accepted he's state. In R3 Robo is acting like a dumb cliche robot. It's like he never ever was human. He talks like a 50's sci-fi robot all the time and the character we knew from the first two movies is completely gone. Robocop here is just a walking image with nothing behind it. Murphy is completely gone. But even so, he didn't act so dumb in the first movie while he didn't have the memory yet. I mean, how dumb is the line (with low monotone voice) "you are arrested for *blank*..(gets his fingers cut)...and destroying police property". lol, are you kidding me? Can you imagine Robo in the first movie , when he kills Clarence and expresses his concern with his partner by calling her with concern "Lewis!" ,saying "officer down" in a robotic tone instead?? I mean what the?
He's basically a real life toy here, and can even replace his parts. Example: hands to gun, hand to flame thrower - classic action figure here! What else can kids want?
| Quote: | | So what do they do? They have him tell his wife off, then mutter a few lines under his breath. And that's it? |
What do you mean thats it? His wife was going through enormous depression, they didnt mutter few words. They basically explained that shes so hurt that its tearing her apart and driving to madness. He understands that he hurts her even more by being around her than by ignoring her and painfully chooses his ways.
| Quote: | | No solemn conversation with Lewis, with her reassuring him he still has a purpose in life (in fact, she doesn't seem to give a fuck at all about Robo unless he isn't working properly) or confrontation with his family? |
Because thats not what Murphy is. Again, R2 presents a good consistency of Murphy character. Murphy isnt the kind that would have freindly deep heart conversations with Lewis. In R1 he told her to leave him alone and he goes through an internal struggle, just like he does in R2. And the statement about Lewis is of course incorrect as well since we see her concern all the time, beginning with the scene when they tape him for the OCP statement
| Quote: | | No erratic behavior to show that his emotions truly are affecting him? |
Thats not true. Not only he is on the verge of breaking when told about his wife's pain, but we also see his emotional conflict when he takes the last look at his wiofe through the window, and then when they spy on Hob he is still very sad
| Quote: | | That's... that's just damned lazy. It's unbelievable that they would even bother with those scenes if they weren't willing to carry through with it. |
They did carry through with it and it wasnt lazy. Again, the reasoning why and how he resigned from his family is very well written. Its either him or her, he has to choose whats better for her and sacrificing his family is whats better for Ellen because of what shes going through, besides he knows he could never have a normal life, neither would she. And its all carried through, shown, explained and sealed right at the beginning so the story can move on
| Quote: | | It's the equivalent of having a scene with some psycho shouting on the rooftops that he's planted bombs all over the city only for Robo to shoot him, and then never having the bombs mentioned again for the rest of the movie. You can't do that. It's just bad filmmaking! |
Its not like that. Using your example, what happens in R2 is that either he lets go of the bombing and that can hurt a little, or he goes on about it and it destroys not only those he loves but himself emotionally as well
| Quote: | | Murphy has almost nothing but one-liners the entire movie! I can't think of a single instance, aside from lying to his wife and comforting Hob, where he actually spoke to someone about something. |
There are no one liners unless youre saying that he was using one li8ners throughout the first movie. in R2 he didnt have a need for a scene when he would sit down one for one, which would then require longer dialogue. Other than one lenghty scene (in R1, he only had one scene like that when he was asking about his family! All the rest was more or less the same way he was talking in R2, which is a witty humor and tough short statements - typical Murphy), Robo didnt have any long dialogue in R1 either. I dont understand this picking
| Quote: | | That isn't exploration, it's a quick throwaway sequence of scenes that allow the filmmakers to completely discard that aspect of Murphy and focus on shooting people instead. |
No. For the third time, the first movie was about Murphy's internal struggle and fight with his personality and loss of family. The only thing left unsaid was his meeting with his family and what decision he will take. And R2 took care of it right away because its a NEW movie, it moves on, it tells a differentr sstory. I would hate a copycat that would just continue with the same thing whcih thwe first movie already told beautifully. R2 tied the last know in the beginning to move on with its own story. And whats wrong with the shooting? There was plenty of that in R1, and like with everything, we have a consistency here too - we have similar shootouts where we see Robo doing some cybernetic and fancy moves while taking people down. Its also an action movie too and R1 was full of shootouts and gore - just like R2.
| Quote: | | In the last film, Murphy's family had moved from town. Now they're back and... for no reason. |
And theyre still not back. Its not the same house and it sure isnt Detroit city. Its never said that they moved out to another state or continent.
| Quote: | | Beyond that sequence, they have absolutely no impact on the film. They don't provide plot advancement in any form, and the event doesn't appear to influence Robo in anyway. |
For the 4th time, this is not the first movie. There was last thing to take care of and this is it. R2 isnt about his human struggle, first movie was.
| Quote: | | None of the characters even seem to note that he's acting different in any significant way, leaving the entire "subplot" (and it's a stretch to even call it that) as a completely useless aside designed to distract you from how awful the movie is. |
For the fifth time, it wasnt subplot. It was tying the knot for the last untold element of Robo's human story. Very well written and placed in a very good spot so the next story and new movie can start
| Quote: | | I'm sorry, but I find RoboCop 2's "emotional core" to be completely insulting to me as a viewer. The original film can actually get to me. RC2 just leaves me shaking my head and gritting my teeth at the sheer ineptitude displayed at almost every level of production. |
Well thats yuour personal take. But because one doesnt like it and didnt connect with it, it doesnt mean its not there. I myself always connected with Robo the way I did in the first movie because, quite frankly, the acting and music in those scenes are really good and they are very well written because they gave Robo a great and believable reason to resign from his past - for the good of his family
| Quote: | | There was no leftover story from the first one. His family had moved away, so he couldn't get closure. |
So there was no closure, exactly what you aid. Ever since I saw the first film I wanted to see him meeting his wife again. And I believe all viewers do, thats why the scene when hes approaching his old house is so emotionally engaging because we expect him to see his family and want to see his and theirs reaction. Also, its just natural and logical that he wouldnt just drop the whole thing. He would sure continue to look for his family and his past and there needed to be a reason why he would finally leave it in the past.
| Quote: | | In the original film, the corporate characters did shit that actually made sense. "Wanting power" doesn't excuse completely nonsensical actions |
.
What nonsensical actions? She got to her boss' pants, thats what happens all the time. Thats how many women gain their power in big corporations and business too. And she wasnt jsut your average power hungry botch, she was also a psycho.
| Quote: | | As she said, one canister of Nuke was enough for his entire lifespan (since the Nuke only needed to go directly to his brain) so that doesn't excuse that. |
No, she says its all the nuke he'll need. Im guessing for an immortal robot that wouldnt last infinity
| Quote: | | And the remote obviously did nothing. For being played as such a conniving corporate backstabber, she couldn't actually seem to do anything that actually worked. |
The remote did nothing because it was destroyed. They surely had more but not with them.
| Quote: | | That's not complex. Complex is giving a character dimensions. Instead, they play Faxx as "power-hungry psychopath" and hope and pray that no one will notice she's simply a tool for the plot. |
power hungry psychopath is a dimension. Shes not just a suit. Here's another nice consistency with the first movie when we see corporate people gain their power in an unconventional ways, and this time we get a little spin on it because its a woman and we havent seen a female character like that in the first. And in additon to all that, shes a disturbed individual
| Quote: | | If Robo wasn't back to his old self, he couldn't have led the assault on Cain's fortress. I mean, there was even news footage of Robo at the scene during the MediaBreak segment. And according to the timeline the film showed, Robo went Directives-crazy, then back to normal, and then nabbed Cain all in the same day. So unless they reprogrammed him specifically to keep him impotent for two hours, that made no damn sense |
.
Robo found out where Cain is from Duffy and went there alone. I dont think he told anybody, not even LEwis, presumably because he knew its gonna be dangerous for her to assist him in attacking an entire gang. So how could cops know who did this to him and where were they hiding
| Quote: | | Sounds like you've seen the movie but haven't bothered to think about. |
Just the opposite. Since I was studying to be a filmmaker, I disected every element of it. Story construction, cinematography, editing in realtion to the pacing and mood of the scene, narrative symmetry etc. Im not saying the movie's a masterpiece, R1 is, but R2 is a stellar sequel with great unique graphic novel feel and a fine gory scifi flick
| Quote: | | Robo had been doing his job the entire time they were striking, and they didn't give a damn. Hell, they seemed concerned when Robo was thrown at their feet in pieces, but they still kept striking. But Robo says "Are we cops?" and all of a sudden they're back in their turbocruisers? |
Obviously thats not everything he said. It was his starting line and a good line that grabbed them by their balls and said" hey, why did we became cops in the first place? " That sort of thing.
| Quote: | | Presentation and exploration are two entirely different things. RC2 was exploitative, not contemplative. |
How so? I trhink youre really trying to hate the movie too much because you really make problems where there are not. We see asian people with their kids by their feet working in drug factories. Sad and dark side of reality, as simple as that. Was the drug factory as offensive to you in R1 too? C'mon
| Quote: | | All of the villains are played as clear-cut baddies with no redeeming qualities. So what if Hob is scared of his death? So is Duffy. So is Cain! What angers me is that the filmmakers simply assumed that I would feel sympathy for Hob during his death. If any depth was intentional, and not simply a heavy-handed "What has become of us?!" sob story, they would have given the audience a choice as to what to feel. Instead, they rub your nose in it, and it insults me. |
Its not who's afraid of death and who's not. The point is hes a minor who obviously is a product of this rotten society and therefore was led to the track he had taken. I didnt give the character forgiveness, but the issue here is that its a psychologicaly vulnerable child. And like I already said, hes designed in such way that he hate him to death, just like all the villains in R1 and R2. But the moral issue here is that its a child and is it really healthy to want death for a child? Especially knwing how they absorb the ociety around them and that in this way theyre victims too who just had a bad guidance?
| Quote: | The entire movie insults me! They dress up garbage as filet mignon and expect me to tell them it's delicious. It's not. The film is a mess. Tone, pacing, plot, characterization, all of it is a complete and utter failure. You're seeing things you want to see.
Talk all you want about how shit blows up real good, but attributing positive qualities beyond that... please don't.
Long winded, yes, but damn... I can't express how much I hate RoboCop 2. I mean it. HATE. I hate it in the way Jews hate Hitler. I hate it in the way English Majors hate YouTube comments. It's a movie that makes me feel like I've just been spat on, and am expected to give a great big thumbs up in return. |
Wow, I shoudlve read that first because that means that I cant really have any real debate with you because you blindly hate it and all arguments will bounce off you like from a wall. I noticed that since you already presented double standard with few issues here, where the same thing is fine for R1 but its a crime in R2. I dont hate any of the movies, the closest thing is R3 (for obvious reasons) but theres still something good in everything and I always keep my mind open to things. But if you already made up your mind and blindly dislike this movie, further debate simply doesnt make sense
|
|
|
|
|
Stan The Man
Part Man, Part Sheep, All RoboCop-Fan
Joined: 05 Jun 2003
Post Count: 4498
Comment: The one, the original, the only - OCP Police 001
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:36 am |
|
|
|
Bah, here's a piece off the site, written by one smart individual who I wish was still with us. I agree with it almost to a T regarding the whole aspect with Robo-Murphy and his wife.
RoboCop 2 Retrospective - Narrative Problems
| Glenn Orr - RoboCop 2 Retrospective : | Narrative Problem #1:
RoboCop 2 introduces yet never satisfactorily resolves Murphy’s despair over his estrangement from his wife and son. We see him actually meet with his wife once, but he quickly sends her away, parroting the company line that he’s “just a machine” given him moments earlier by the *sshole lawyer guy from OCP. Many folks still seem a tad perplexed as to why Murphy would do this, but it’s always seemed rather sensible to me. Murphy, at this moment, is at his lowest, believing that he has nothing left to offer his family and that what is best for them is to believe that he’s dead and to move on with their lives.
A very noble -- although clearly downbeat -- thing for Murphy to do.
However, the problem, from a storytelling standpoint, with this is that you simply can’t tackle an item as big and emotionally wrenching as Murphy’s Angst Over His Estrangement From His Family and then effectively do nothing with it. I can tell you that when I first saw RoboCop 2, I fully expected to see Murphy’s wife and son reenter the narrative fray at some point in the film. Perhaps near the middle of the movie, or at the end, at least. Perhaps they’d find themselves in harm’s way somehow, caught in the crossfire between the cops and Cain’s Nuke Cartel maybe. Murphy would have to rush in to save them, thus forcing a final, no-questions-left-unanswered resolution between he and his family. When that didn’t happen, I remember feeling cheated and confused. “Why even bring this issue up again if they were gonna basically leave it where it had been left at the end of the first movie,” I recall asking myself in a darkened movie theater back in 1990. And to this day, I still don’t have an answer to that question. |
_________________
|
|
|
|
|
KidGoesWild
L-L1
Joined: 27 Oct 2009
Post Count: 451
Comment: I type it, you think it
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:38 am |
|
|
|
| Stan The Man : | Bah, here's a piece off the site, written by one smart individual who I wish was still with us. I agree with it almost to a T regarding the whole aspect with Robo-Murphy and his wife.
RoboCop 2 Retrospective - Narrative Problems
| Glenn Orr - RoboCop 2 Retrospective : | Narrative Problem #1:
RoboCop 2 introduces yet never satisfactorily resolves Murphy’s despair over his estrangement from his wife and son. We see him actually meet with his wife once, but he quickly sends her away, parroting the company line that he’s “just a machine” given him moments earlier by the *sshole lawyer guy from OCP. Many folks still seem a tad perplexed as to why Murphy would do this, but it’s always seemed rather sensible to me. Murphy, at this moment, is at his lowest, believing that he has nothing left to offer his family and that what is best for them is to believe that he’s dead and to move on with their lives.
A very noble -- although clearly downbeat -- thing for Murphy to do.
However, the problem, from a storytelling standpoint, with this is that you simply can’t tackle an item as big and emotionally wrenching as Murphy’s Angst Over His Estrangement From His Family and then effectively do nothing with it. I can tell you that when I first saw RoboCop 2, I fully expected to see Murphy’s wife and son reenter the narrative fray at some point in the film. Perhaps near the middle of the movie, or at the end, at least. Perhaps they’d find themselves in harm’s way somehow, caught in the crossfire between the cops and Cain’s Nuke Cartel maybe. Murphy would have to rush in to save them, thus forcing a final, no-questions-left-unanswered resolution between he and his family. When that didn’t happen, I remember feeling cheated and confused. “Why even bring this issue up again if they were gonna basically leave it where it had been left at the end of the first movie,” I recall asking myself in a darkened movie theater back in 1990. And to this day, I still don’t have an answer to that question. |
|
Nah, I would prefer Murphy's to just saty where they belong - in first's movie story. R2 gave me just enough - the conclusion of that story and moving on to something brand new
|
|
|
|
|
Stan The Man
Part Man, Part Sheep, All RoboCop-Fan
Joined: 05 Jun 2003
Post Count: 4498
Comment: The one, the original, the only - OCP Police 001
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:41 am |
|
|
|
^ Well, that's fine. But that'll be it for me, and I'll leave it there because I think this topic has delved way too far from the original point, which I think was intended to be just to post details on what your feelings/opinions, if any, have changed over time, as the thread says.
It's apparent Trap hates R2, and you love it, and that should be enough to leave it at that for right here.
_________________
|
|
|
|
|
KidGoesWild
L-L1
Joined: 27 Oct 2009
Post Count: 451
Comment: I type it, you think it
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:47 am |
|
|
|
True. Like I said, I come from Cameron fanbase first so Im all for sequels that feel like theyre part of the same series but have their own story and are independent of the first movie. And I see the complaint of those who dislike R2 is that it isnt redoing the same thing as the first one. And apparently some just dont appreciate moving on to a new story. Heres an interesting passage about it from IGN
Robocop 2 isn't a bad film by any measure. The reason it doesn't excel is that there's only so much that can be done with the idea of a cyborg policeman, and the first film tapped most of these possibilities.
So they just moved on and presented new story, new villains and Robo fighting them.
|
|
|
|
|
Stan The Man
Part Man, Part Sheep, All RoboCop-Fan
Joined: 05 Jun 2003
Post Count: 4498
Comment: The one, the original, the only - OCP Police 001
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:56 am |
|
|
|
I understand your point. I just also take issue with some elements of the film similar to Trap.
But I ain't let it dampen my own feeling about the movie itself much. I still find it the better continuation (or sequel, if you will) for RoboCop than the third, as I said before. Now my opinion of R2 hasn't really increased either, again, because of those same issues, but as I said, I like it and still think higher of it than R3.
R3's issues only got stronger as I got older and worked against my already poor liking of the film. As I said, when I was younger I knew even then it was a kiddified movie and thought it was silly overall save for some things. Though these issues are more prominent now, honestly, I can't say my overall opinion has changed much for R3 either. I already had a weak opinion of it to begin with, and it hasn't gotten better over time.
_________________
|
|
|
|
|
KidGoesWild
L-L1
Joined: 27 Oct 2009
Post Count: 451
Comment: I type it, you think it
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 5:27 am |
|
|
|
| Stan The Man : | I understand your point. I just also take issue with some elements of the film similar to Trap.
But I ain't let it dampen my own feeling about the movie itself much. I still find it the better continuation (or sequel, if you will) for RoboCop than the third, as I said before. Now my opinion of R2 hasn't really increased either, again, because of those same issues, but as I said, I like it and still think higher of it than R3.
R3's issues only got stronger as I got older and worked against my already poor liking of the film. As I said, when I was younger I knew even then it was a kiddified movie and thought it was silly overall save for some things. Though these issues are more prominent now, honestly, I can't say my overall opinion has changed much for R3 either. I already had a weak opinion of it to begin with, and it hasn't gotten better over time. |
Well you know. While R2 lacks the personal touch of R1, it still feels like a natural continuation and delivers all the thrills plus more. R3, while I always bag on it, its (imo), with all its enormous flaws, miles better than anything released for TV and provides the closure I was waiting for since the open ended ending of R2
DVD.NET describes it in a pill
"A slap in the face to anybody who enjoyed the intelligent, multi-layered nuances of its predecessors, the three-quel was an abominable dumbing-down of the series. It strived to make the tragic Frankenstein-like hero into a kiddie-friendly merchandise mover. It failed, both on this and every other level."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Register
Log in for PM
Log in
Has your opinion of Robocop changed over time?
20871
