| Author |
Message |
Archive
.
 
Joined: 17 Nov 2001
Post Count: 6550
|
  Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 10:15 am |
|
|
|
I think those are all valid points but personally i just don't get offended or disgusted by stuff like that, not enough to totally hate the movie anyway. I've seen way too much horror movies to get all sweaty and bothered. For me it's an entertaining movie with it's flaws but it's still fun to watch. Sure Verhoevens movie had more depth but it has it's equally disturbing and drawn out moments.
Nowadays particularly with movies like "saw" and "hostel" Robo2 really isn't that chocking. It was THEN perhaps but it's all been done worse and more in your face now.
It is a popular activity to watch Robo2 and take it apart and look for all the bad stuff so i would highly recommend that just once try to look at all the good stuff in there because the movie has that too.
The whole Robo rules or suck discussion has been done a few times though so I'm not gonna go much further with it. Let's just say i understand why some people hate it but none of those flaws bothers me. I love the character of RoboCop too much for that.
For more topics about RoboCop2 i recommend:
*Robo 2, what happened?
http://www.robocoparchive.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=557
* For FANS of RoboCop 2
http://www.robocoparchive.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=1379
|
|
 |
|
 |
Duke Serkol
O-L3
Joined: 17 Jan 2011
Post Count: 107
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 6:44 pm |
|
|
|
| ChickenStu : | | I think a BETTER story would be ANOTHER cop getting turned into Robocop 2, but going strange and bad LATER. Murphy has to kill him, but feels conflicted about it, cause he feels a unique kinship with him. Could've been interesting. |
"Mh, my ears are ringing."
 454
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
ChickenStu
R-L3
Joined: 09 Feb 2011
Post Count: 23
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 6:45 pm |
|
|
|
I think the problem here is that, like "E.T. The Extra Terrestrial", "Robocop" just did NOT NEED any sequels. Simply put, it told it's story and that was it.
The ending felt final and conclusive. Everything had come full circle. The idea of having further adventures with him going after different criminals - I don't think Robocop was something that one could've built an ongoing franchise around.
Notice it's only the first film that gets anything like decent reviews. Sequels, TV shows? All get SLATED.
Good reason for that.
159
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
KidGoesWild
L-L3
Joined: 27 Oct 2009
Post Count: 665
Comment: I type it, you think it
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 10:22 pm |
|
|
|
| ChickenStu : | | Archive : | | Hmmmm, is there any special reason you HATE RoboCop2? |
I hate the bit at the start where a thug holds a gun to a baby's head. Personally, I find stuff like that VERY upsetting. Verhoeven would never do a scene like that (he's against showing scenes of children in immediate danger). |
Well for me Robocop was ALL ABOUT upsetting. That was the charm of the movie, that it was so serious and violent unlike any other movie of this type. The first movie was extremely upsetting and disturbing both psychologically with its cold brutally and amoral killers and OCP characters, and physically with its violence. The sequel followed the suit and simply amped up the volume on both, showing even more of gore and showing more disturbing social aspects, such as child killers
| Quote: | | The story I find illogical, that they'd use a drug addicted criminal to make the new Robocop out of. There is just NO WAY the can sell that to me as an audience member as a good idea. I'm sure Murphy wasn't the only good cop in the whole of detroit. |
The story already explains it even more logically than the first movie. If I, or anyone I know would wake up without its body and without its family, it wouldnt last long before shooting yourself in the head. No one would like to live like this. They explained that psychologically Murphy was an exception, which he surely was and other cops did what people in normal life would most likely do seeing that theyre heads or brains in a machine. The use of Cain's brain is perfect and a very good writing as it explains why he doesnt kill himself (he is insane and thinks hes like Jesus and wants immortality) and he also can be controlled like every heavy addicts through drugs
| Quote: | | Plus, the 12 year old villian Hob. Found that distasteful. Along with the violence (dude getting gutted like a fish with a scalpel) was a bit much. Yeah I know the first one's violent, but at least the violence has a point. You know? |
I already explained part of it above, and another thing is that Hob did have a point. We spoke about it before here how it reflected the hot issue of the time when there were plenty of images from attacks and battles in South America, Bela Horizonte, showing kids with machine guns in gangs and armies. And since Robocop , the first and the second were an over the top, bizzare reflection of the culture and a social satire, Hob was perfect to show all this even more. And he certainly was more than just gimmicky thug for shocks, take a note that he didnt even smoke cigarettes or take nuke himself. Pro Youth Pages analyzed the character well - http://www.proyouthpages.com/robocop2.html
| Quote: | | Amid all this sickening violence are moments of ill advised comedy (like the mugging at the beginning of the movie) that seem to be out of an early Richard Lester film. Makes the tone of the movie VERY uneven, so as an audience member I never know where I stand with it. |
Despite the criticism the movie may get, the humor was actually always praised and I thought it was also in the same vein as the first one's. I didnt find any humor in the mugging in the beginning at all, so I cant comment on that, but the commercials were very much in line with the capitalistic satire
| Quote: | | To futher confuse that particular matter, is the VERY ill advised score by Leonard Rosenman. Having a choir chant "ROBO - COP" over the theme... man... it sounds like it's out of a long forgotten cheesy 80's cartoon, especially as we were so spoiled with Basil Poledouris' beautiful, lyrical, haunting - and yet rousing score for the original. |
While I agree about the sung Robocop name, the score is by no means bad. Different doesnt mean bad, and thats the problem with purists who criticize something not for being bad, but just because its not the same as the original. Rosenman's score is very well written and is filled with the old school, classic cues and arrangements that date back to the old scifi movies. As I always say, it fits the movie very well and the action sequences are undoubtly scored very well. Overall it matches the movie's surreal feel with such subtle additions as the angelic choir during Cain's operation and Robocop's first visit to Cain's hideout
| Quote: | | Peter Weller's performance came across as cheesy, making dumb wisecracks with little or no charisma. |
I fully disagree since his humor and use of lines is the same as in the first movie, and after all, Weller himself looked over the script and made changes and adjustments in robocops character since he knew the character and how to keep him consistent (and consistent he absolutely was)
| Quote: | | He sounds like Dudley Do-Right EVEN before he gets the extra 200 or so directives. |
Again, I disagree, and this should sum it up best - http://robocopmovies.blogspot.com/2010/12/robocops-personality-throughout-movies.html
| Quote: | | Sadly the film's most interesting plot-line, the one about Murphy's wife, is only merely paid lip service to, rather than being explored fully. |
And beat a dead horse? Tag what the first movie already told? Nah, Im all for the idea that sequels should be different and not be appendages of the original repeating the same thing, being remakes. His story of humanity was the subject of the first movie, part 2 ties up the loose eds in the beginning and moves on
| Quote: | | Robocop 2 is the film that Robocop would've been, had they not got someone like Paul Verhoeven who had a vision. Kershner had no vision here, it was just something he took on at the last minute. And it really shows. |
No, Robocop 3 is everything opposite to what Verhoeven wanted and what most likely Robocop wouldve been, because it ended up being what people initially thought Robocop will be - a cheesy superhero robot, flying, changing arms and fighting ninjas and funny CEOs
| ChickenStu : | I think the problem here is that, like "E.T. The Extra Terrestrial", "Robocop" just did NOT NEED any sequels. Simply put, it told it's story and that was it.
The ending felt final and conclusive. Everything had come full circle. The idea of having further adventures with him going after different criminals - I don't think Robocop was something that one could've built an ongoing franchise around. |
I disagree. Even before R2 was released I didnt feel like its the end and there was plenty of stuff that left me wandering whats next, like "now what"? Hes a guy who lost his family, lost most of his memory, cant do what he want and doesnt have many choices since he has directives that force him to do certain things, he has total body prosthesis which is horrific, cant ever have a family or lead a normal life, and so where will he go from there? What will he decide? And most importantly, what about his family? He would surely try to contact them or see them, I wanted to see this meeting. Weller pretty much agreed with me since he said the reason why he wanted to do the sequel is because he felt the character wasnt complete yet and theres more to say. And more there is - we do get to see what he does about the family, we do even get to see the meeting, we get to see Robocop regaining free will and see why and what he decides to do with his "life"
| Quote: | | Notice it's only the first film that gets anything like decent reviews. Sequels, TV shows? All get SLATED. |
Only the TV stuff and R3 gets slated. I read many, many different boards and if I had to sum it up its usually like this "Robocop is a masterpiece, R2 is good R3 is a complete joke, TV stuff shouldnt exist"
| Duke Serkol : | | I'm one of the very few (or the only one?) who actually holds the second movie as his favorite in the franchise. But it's my fourth directive never to claim that as an objective (rather than subjective) fact. |
Maybe not many list it as the favorite of the 3, but certainly fans of the movie and the movie fans in general hold it in rather high regard - http://robocoparchive.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=2309
|
|
|
|
|
Archive
.
Joined: 17 Nov 2001
Post Count: 6550
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 10:48 pm |
|
|
|
| ChickenStu : | | I think a BETTER story would be ANOTHER cop getting turned into Robocop 2, but going strange and bad LATER. Murphy has to kill him, but feels conflicted about it, cause he feels a unique kinship with him. Could've been interesting. |
Yeah, that was actually done in the 2001 TV series RoboCop:Prime Directives. Out of curiosity, have you seen any of the TV series? I get the feeling your more a fan of Verhoevens RoboCop than the actual RoboCop character. Not judging, just saying.
| ChickenStu : | | "Robocop" just did NOT NEED any sequels. Simply put, it told it's story and that was it. |
Of course, with that that logic we wouldn't have had any sequels to either Bond, Alien, Terminator, StarWars, Indiana Jones and many more. Just because the first movie ended doesn't mean there's not room for more stories. As a fan of the RoboCop character i want MORE RoboCop stories, not less.
I mean what happened after the end of RoboCop1? Did he go home to his family and everything was happy happy joy joy? Did he go on a hike to the Himalayas or perhaps on a ski vacation with Lewis thus starting many sessions of marriage counseling?
No, he went on being a cop. Not by free will but because he is no longer a free man. He is a machine owned by OCP. Thus starting RoboCop2.
|
|
|
|
|
vegasrobo
RoboGod and Shit
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Post Count: 2401
Comment: Vegas Baby!!!
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 10:57 pm |
|
|
|
Damn Robotrap straight up nailed the overview of Robo2.I agree with just about everything said..Still gotta soft spot for 3.
|
|
|
|
|
ChickenStu
R-L3
Joined: 09 Feb 2011
Post Count: 23
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2011 12:32 am |
|
|
|
KidGoesWild, it's just my opinion man, that's all.
159
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
ChickenStu
R-L3
Joined: 09 Feb 2011
Post Count: 23
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2011 12:51 am |
|
|
|
| Archive : |
Yeah, that was actually done in the 2001 TV series RoboCop:Prime Directives. Out of curiosity, have you seen any of the TV series? |
Never seen Prime Directives, but I've seen a couple of episodes of the weekly series. Can't remember too much about that though, it was YEARS ago dude!
| Archive : | | I get the feeling your more a fan of Verhoevens RoboCop than the actual RoboCop character. Not judging, just saying. |
Hmm. Yeah, that's probably a fair cop (no pun intended).
| Archive : | | Of course, with that that logic we wouldn't have had any sequels to either Bond, Alien, Terminator, StarWars, Indiana Jones and many more. Just because the first movie ended doesn't mean there's not room for more stories. As a fan of the RoboCop character i want MORE RoboCop stories, not less. |
Whoa, whoa, hold your horses there buddy. I'm not against the idea of sequels per se. EVERY example you've just given are either films DESIGNED from the get go to lead to an ongoing series (Star Wars, Indiana Jpnes, James Bond) or movies where the sequel was able to add something (Alien, Terminator)
| Archive : | | I mean what happened after the end of RoboCop1? Did he go home to his family and everything was happy happy joy joy? Did he go on a hike to the Himalayas or perhaps on a ski vacation with Lewis thus starting many sessions of marriage counseling? |
Archive, I think you're a good guy - but you seem to have a facetious streak in you, which can be unpleasant to a guy who's new to a forum. Frankly I expect better from an administrator. All I'm expressing is my opinion. THAT'S ALL. I'm not saying I'm right, I'm not saying you're wrong.
So please do me the courtesy of not trying to make me look and feel like a jerk, when I'm answering a direct question that I've been asked.
Besides, I answered the point above. Robocop got his humanity back at the end of the movie. When he says his name is Murphy at the end, well, that's all the payoff I need. What happens after doesn't interest me. I feel the movie ends in a perfectly satisfying way and doesn't need extrapolating upon.
| Archive : | | No, he went on being a cop. Not by free will but because he is no longer a free man. He is a machine owned by OCP. Thus starting RoboCop2. |
I just think it would be better if what happened after was left to the audience's imagination, that's all. Sue me man, but that's the way I feel.
159
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
MurphysGal
Sgt-L5*
Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Post Count: 390
Comment: Stay Out of Trouble
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2011 7:06 am |
|
|
|
All good points Stu, the difference is most of us are fans of the character itself, not just the first movie which u seem to be, i'm not saying your wrong and I'm right, but that's how the majority of us hard core Robo fans feel. I think I have only ever watched the 3rd movie once and I don't think even all the way through, but that doesn't mean I'm any less of a fan and sane goes for u too. I think u should just leave this alone now, you have expressed your feelings, everyone else has too and nobody is gonna change their minds. If anything it will just create tension because nobody will budge on their opinion.
272
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
KidGoesWild
L-L3
Joined: 27 Oct 2009
Post Count: 665
Comment: I type it, you think it
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:55 am |
|
|
|
Well Stu, of course everyone is free to express their opinions but heres the thing. No 1 , as I already mentioned , some of the points youre attacking are actually what most people like about the movie the most - like an even more disturbing gore and even more controversial elements of the dark side of society, like child killers, and some critcism is simply not fair and not true, like the supposedly different performance from Weller. Secondly, if you checked one of the links I posted you'd see that a lot of Robocop fans either like R2 or realy like R2 a lot, so they wont be fond of repeated beating. For example, Robotrap is this really rare exception among online community but he mentioned it once and dropped it
I see the first movie as a great and compelling scifi Frankenstein story and the second one as a great, straight forward scifi action piece, both with terrific cybernetic and robotic designs , feel and imagination, and both touching up on reflecting and exaggerating the dark side of late 80s/early 90s society with a pinch of disturbing gory violence. And I just think that those who criticize the second one criticize it only for not being a remake, not being what the first one was instead of really looking at the the movie in its own light, as an amazing and imaginative scifi action movie. Its the same situation as with Alien purists - in reality they just hate on the sequel because its different, not because theres anything wrong with it, and they simply WANT to see the faults and the wrongs with it and accent them to have real reason to hate it
As I said before, its proven that best sequels are those who bounce off the original but evolve , move on and are independent and different than the first one. Aliens, T2, Empire Strikes Back are just few examples, and same with R2, theyre different and evovled and went into a different direction, yet retained the core and the essence of the originals - in case of R2, the exaggerated look at dark side of society and the satire on capitalism.
Just also want to mention that Im also more of a fan of the movie rather than character, as Im not really much interested in EU (extended universe=games, comic books, the cartoons) or the TV show and movies. Im just a major, major fan of the first 2 Robocop movies and sometimes Im just really puzzled how a fun and surreal action flick like R2 may be so disliked
|
|
|
|
|
Archive
.
Joined: 17 Nov 2001
Post Count: 6550
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2011 9:45 am |
|
|
|
Your so uptight ChickenStu, don't take it all so dead seriously an get offended all the time. We're just having a discussion, which you started. In it I decided to infuse a little joke. It happens. That doesn't mean i attacked you or hate your guts. It's cool man!
Either way, it looks like we're at a deadend here. You have already expressed you only like Verhoevens RoboCop and don't think it should have had any sequels or a continuation at all. So I don't see how we can possibly make you like a movie you don't even wanted to exist in the first place.
Bottom line though, you are entitled to your opinion but that goes both ways.
|
|
|
|
|
ChickenStu
R-L3
Joined: 09 Feb 2011
Post Count: 23
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2011 6:10 pm |
|
|
|
Difficult to differentiate between the two sometimes dude. But anyway.
I don't hate sequels you know. A couple of my favourite movies of all time are sequels.
And despite what I said about my feelings the with the way Robocop ended, a sequel wouldn't have been so bad if it just didn't feel so... MESSY. To me at least.
With everyone in here slating Robocop 3 (justifiably in most cases) at least it knows what it's trying to be. I feel a lot of things in that movie are in direct response to what many perceived to be wrong with 2 (Basil Poledouris themes back in the score, the I'd by that for a dollar thing) and you know what? When I was a kid, I though the rocket pack was COOL!
It feels more focused than 2. Not saying I like it really, but that's the vibe I personally pick up.
159
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
MurphysGal
Sgt-L5*
Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Post Count: 390
Comment: Stay Out of Trouble
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:07 pm |
|
|
|
Even as a kid, I thought the rocket pack was deadset stupid
272
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
KidGoesWild
L-L3
Joined: 27 Oct 2009
Post Count: 665
Comment: I type it, you think it
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2011 10:13 pm |
|
|
|
| ChickenStu : |
And despite what I said about my feelings the with the way Robocop ended, a sequel wouldn't have been so bad if it just didn't feel so... MESSY. To me at least.
With everyone in here slating Robocop 3 (justifiably in most cases) at least it knows what it's trying to be. |
This is what I was talking about before, that some of the criticism you give is contradictory. You say R2 is messy, which is a derogatory way of describing an episodic story, yet you seem to give some kind of a free pass for R3 which is an epitome of messy and bad writing, as it contradicts itself, it has plotholes and major, major inconsistencies in nearly every scene. Also, it never claimed to be a dumb spoof on robocop for kids, it actually claimed to go back to roots but with lower rating, which of course is laughable since it was original's complete opposite and Im not talking about the rating, which leads us to the following
| Quote: | | I feel a lot of things in that movie are in direct response to what many perceived to be wrong with 2 (Basil Poledouris themes back in the score, the I'd by that for a dollar thing) |
Let that not fool anyone. Bringing back music and copy and pasting elements from the first does not make it in any way like the first. Its ironic that Dekker managed to move as far away from the first one as possible, or as Neumeier said missed the point completely, and unfortunately influenced the TV show and the TV movies with its miscalculated portrayal of the movie. It contradicted the first movie on every possible level, from story to - most than anything - the Robocop character itself, and turned Robocop, which was a violent and dark satire for capitalism and sociality into a kid superhero flick with a robocop that acts like a refrigerator. And here's another one of many head scratchers. You seemed to criticize Robocop for being stiff in R2 (even tho Weller overlooked the script to make sure hes consistent and as evidenced, he was), yet you seem to give pass to R3 which in fact stripped Robocop out of all possible humanity and contradicted him on multiple levels from what he was in the original movie. Too bad you didn't even read the links I provided, but perhaps I would try again and try to yet again hand you the black on white comparison of Robocop's character in the trilogy - http://robocopmovies.blogspot.com/2010/12/robocops-personality-throughout-movies.html , and how bad and messy R3 actually is - http://robocopmovies.blogspot.com/2010/12/robocop-3-faults-scene-by-scene.html
| Quote: | | and you know what? When I was a kid, I though the rocket pack was COOL! |
And thats what R3 as about, being cool for kids, completely throwing away the pathos of the character or the character itself, and all adult themes and the entire unique genre that the first 2 Robocops were in, which was a mix of gory scifi and social satire
| Quote: | | It feels more focused than 2. Not saying I like it really, but that's the vibe I personally pick up. |
And as a fact, its not focused at all. R2 was like a graphic novel series, being stitched up episodes in one movie, kind of like being a Paperback for the miniseries. R3 had a conventional movie construction, but that doesnt mean it wasa focused at all. Focused on what? Certainly not on the plothole ridden and contradictory script, not on the dialogue, not on the cliche cartoon catalog dime a dozen characters, certainly not on having any kind of connection to the first movie aside from cheaply hiring the same composer to appeal to the original fans and spoofing some scenes from the original, and certainly not on any kind of consistency with the original
| MurphysGal : | | Even as a kid, I thought the rocket pack was deadset stupid |
Same here and same goes for all my friends. My jaw dropped and I couldnt believe what they have done with robocop. Once R3 came out those who were big fans of the movies never spoke of Robocop again and it was dead and completely uncool since then. No one would ever admit they were Robo fans and hose who were before were now ashamed. What was once an adult scifi that we had to hide under the bed or try to take a peek of when our parents were watching it and what we didnt fully understand was now a saturday morning flying and action figure-like arm exchanging superhero flick with a kid sidekick and a cliche multiracial underground group. There was no hidden social satire of the lifestyle shown in "Wall Street", no subtle context on capitalism, no exagerrated portrayal of the social problems, and on and on. It was as shallow as it could be.Needles to say, R3 stained the name of robocop forever to the point that today people are laughing when they hear it and think its a cheesy flick for kids
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log in for PM
Log in
I really don't like the Robocop sequels... and I can't win
