RoboCop 2014 - REVIEW

[Rick]

Exactly right, Trap, and you also get a PT for me for that. Amazing that the writers didn't think of making Vallon more than what we see, yet you did it in the space of 5 minutes! If there is a sequel, let's hope it gets much better writers!
_________________

[Joined]

Exactly right, Trap, and you also get a PT for me for that. Amazing that the writers didn't think of making Vallon more than what we see, yet you did it in the space of 5 minutes! If there is a sequel, let's hope it gets much better writers!
_________________

[Post Count]

Exactly right, Trap, and you also get a PT for me for that. Amazing that the writers didn't think of making Vallon more than what we see, yet you did it in the space of 5 minutes! If there is a sequel, let's hope it gets much better writers!
_________________

[Comment]

Exactly right, Trap, and you also get a PT for me for that. Amazing that the writers didn't think of making Vallon more than what we see, yet you did it in the space of 5 minutes! If there is a sequel, let's hope it gets much better writers!
_________________

[Stebob1984]

[Joined]

[Post Count]

[Sin_Valor]

That weird Brain Drain drug dealer from the Titus game was more villanous than Vallon. (I really want to go there again, but I did)

Anyways, I don't understand why everyone here keeps calling him 'Vallon'...all I see is David Spade failing to act intimidating.
_________________

[Joined]

That weird Brain Drain drug dealer from the Titus game was more villanous than Vallon. (I really want to go there again, but I did)

Anyways, I don't understand why everyone here keeps calling him 'Vallon'...all I see is David Spade failing to act intimidating.
_________________

[Post Count]

That weird Brain Drain drug dealer from the Titus game was more villanous than Vallon. (I really want to go there again, but I did)

Anyways, I don't understand why everyone here keeps calling him 'Vallon'...all I see is David Spade failing to act intimidating.
_________________

[Comment]

That weird Brain Drain drug dealer from the Titus game was more villanous than Vallon. (I really want to go there again, but I did)

Anyways, I don't understand why everyone here keeps calling him 'Vallon'...all I see is David Spade failing to act intimidating.
_________________

[BurnOne4Robo]

After second and third viewings at home, I still enjoy the movie, though I still wish they would have grown some balls and went with an ultra violent R rating, because IMO the way Murphy is brutally killed in the original is a big part of the story. The generic car bombing and non-death of Murphy in the remake takes that aspect away, and makes you care less about Murphy. But as I said, I still enjoyed the second viewing, and found myself wanting to watch a third time. A few things I picked up on after multiple viewings:

- Vallon is not the villain. Maddox is the villain. I think the absence of a Boddicker type character really muddled the story. It takes a few viewings to realize Maddox is the real antagonist.

- When Murphy goes after Vallon, they claim he is "solving his own murder." He did not die, therefore was not murdered. Not sure if this was a leftover from a more violent earlier script where he actually gets murdered, or if the writers forgot mid-movie that they didn't actually kill Murphy.

- The whole human hand explanation is not only edited out of the movie, but in the scene where Robo first meets Maddox, he holds out his robotic LEFT hand to shake Maddox's hand, instead of the proper right hand (which happens to also be his human hand, left there for the sole purpose of fucking shaking hands...smh) Further proving that the whole premise of keeping the hand was an idiotic idea.

[Joined]

After second and third viewings at home, I still enjoy the movie, though I still wish they would have grown some balls and went with an ultra violent R rating, because IMO the way Murphy is brutally killed in the original is a big part of the story. The generic car bombing and non-death of Murphy in the remake takes that aspect away, and makes you care less about Murphy. But as I said, I still enjoyed the second viewing, and found myself wanting to watch a third time. A few things I picked up on after multiple viewings:

- Vallon is not the villain. Maddox is the villain. I think the absence of a Boddicker type character really muddled the story. It takes a few viewings to realize Maddox is the real antagonist.

- When Murphy goes after Vallon, they claim he is "solving his own murder." He did not die, therefore was not murdered. Not sure if this was a leftover from a more violent earlier script where he actually gets murdered, or if the writers forgot mid-movie that they didn't actually kill Murphy.

- The whole human hand explanation is not only edited out of the movie, but in the scene where Robo first meets Maddox, he holds out his robotic LEFT hand to shake Maddox's hand, instead of the proper right hand (which happens to also be his human hand, left there for the sole purpose of fucking shaking hands...smh) Further proving that the whole premise of keeping the hand was an idiotic idea.

[Post Count]

After second and third viewings at home, I still enjoy the movie, though I still wish they would have grown some balls and went with an ultra violent R rating, because IMO the way Murphy is brutally killed in the original is a big part of the story. The generic car bombing and non-death of Murphy in the remake takes that aspect away, and makes you care less about Murphy. But as I said, I still enjoyed the second viewing, and found myself wanting to watch a third time. A few things I picked up on after multiple viewings:

- Vallon is not the villain. Maddox is the villain. I think the absence of a Boddicker type character really muddled the story. It takes a few viewings to realize Maddox is the real antagonist.

- When Murphy goes after Vallon, they claim he is "solving his own murder." He did not die, therefore was not murdered. Not sure if this was a leftover from a more violent earlier script where he actually gets murdered, or if the writers forgot mid-movie that they didn't actually kill Murphy.

- The whole human hand explanation is not only edited out of the movie, but in the scene where Robo first meets Maddox, he holds out his robotic LEFT hand to shake Maddox's hand, instead of the proper right hand (which happens to also be his human hand, left there for the sole purpose of fucking shaking hands...smh) Further proving that the whole premise of keeping the hand was an idiotic idea.

[vegasrobo]

I can't man I watched the bluray like I said 4th viewing,The movies shit there's really nothing to it no edge nothing,I find it interesting Robofans claiming not to have liked Cain other than Weller Cains the best thing about Robocop 2 and as for Robocain not speaking?..Man that would have took all eerie intimidaition factor away from the character..Sometimes I really wonder what movies you guy's are watching?.

[Joined]

I can't man I watched the bluray like I said 4th viewing,The movies shit there's really nothing to it no edge nothing,I find it interesting Robofans claiming not to have liked Cain other than Weller Cains the best thing about Robocop 2 and as for Robocain not speaking?..Man that would have took all eerie intimidaition factor away from the character..Sometimes I really wonder what movies you guy's are watching?.

[Post Count]

I can't man I watched the bluray like I said 4th viewing,The movies shit there's really nothing to it no edge nothing,I find it interesting Robofans claiming not to have liked Cain other than Weller Cains the best thing about Robocop 2 and as for Robocain not speaking?..Man that would have took all eerie intimidaition factor away from the character..Sometimes I really wonder what movies you guy's are watching?.

[Comment]

I can't man I watched the bluray like I said 4th viewing,The movies shit there's really nothing to it no edge nothing,I find it interesting Robofans claiming not to have liked Cain other than Weller Cains the best thing about Robocop 2 and as for Robocain not speaking?..Man that would have took all eerie intimidaition factor away from the character..Sometimes I really wonder what movies you guy's are watching?.

[ROBOTCOP]

I finally watched the movie, I said I wouldn't but I did, overall it just moved too fast , as previously mentioned it felt rushed, they could have done so much more with it, it had the potential to be a good movie but felt short, I did not even mind kinnaman as Murphy , It just felt short for me , the blue suit was about the best thing in the movie, the villains were really weak and easily forgettable ..
I really don't know what they were trying to achieve with this movie . Am not going to compare it to the original as it was very different from the original , which am glad about as I hate when they remake something with the exact same story line ... For me it could have went further in a shorter time but it didn't , I may try and watch it again , maybe I was expecting too much , maybe if I was from another planet and never seen a robocop movie at all I might have liked it , who knows.

It wasn't the worst movie I have seen , but I have to say its RoboCop and anything RoboCop gets my attention , I even love prime directives , am all about the suits and props ,,

Maybe a sequel might improve, we will see

Cheers

Alex
_________________



"Dead or Alive you are Selling to Me "

[Joined]

I finally watched the movie, I said I wouldn't but I did, overall it just moved too fast , as previously mentioned it felt rushed, they could have done so much more with it, it had the potential to be a good movie but felt short, I did not even mind kinnaman as Murphy , It just felt short for me , the blue suit was about the best thing in the movie, the villains were really weak and easily forgettable ..
I really don't know what they were trying to achieve with this movie . Am not going to compare it to the original as it was very different from the original , which am glad about as I hate when they remake something with the exact same story line ... For me it could have went further in a shorter time but it didn't , I may try and watch it again , maybe I was expecting too much , maybe if I was from another planet and never seen a robocop movie at all I might have liked it , who knows.

It wasn't the worst movie I have seen , but I have to say its RoboCop and anything RoboCop gets my attention , I even love prime directives , am all about the suits and props ,,

Maybe a sequel might improve, we will see

Cheers

Alex
_________________



"Dead or Alive you are Selling to Me "

[Post Count]

I finally watched the movie, I said I wouldn't but I did, overall it just moved too fast , as previously mentioned it felt rushed, they could have done so much more with it, it had the potential to be a good movie but felt short, I did not even mind kinnaman as Murphy , It just felt short for me , the blue suit was about the best thing in the movie, the villains were really weak and easily forgettable ..
I really don't know what they were trying to achieve with this movie . Am not going to compare it to the original as it was very different from the original , which am glad about as I hate when they remake something with the exact same story line ... For me it could have went further in a shorter time but it didn't , I may try and watch it again , maybe I was expecting too much , maybe if I was from another planet and never seen a robocop movie at all I might have liked it , who knows.

It wasn't the worst movie I have seen , but I have to say its RoboCop and anything RoboCop gets my attention , I even love prime directives , am all about the suits and props ,,

Maybe a sequel might improve, we will see

Cheers

Alex
_________________



"Dead or Alive you are Selling to Me "

[Comment]

I finally watched the movie, I said I wouldn't but I did, overall it just moved too fast , as previously mentioned it felt rushed, they could have done so much more with it, it had the potential to be a good movie but felt short, I did not even mind kinnaman as Murphy , It just felt short for me , the blue suit was about the best thing in the movie, the villains were really weak and easily forgettable ..
I really don't know what they were trying to achieve with this movie . Am not going to compare it to the original as it was very different from the original , which am glad about as I hate when they remake something with the exact same story line ... For me it could have went further in a shorter time but it didn't , I may try and watch it again , maybe I was expecting too much , maybe if I was from another planet and never seen a robocop movie at all I might have liked it , who knows.

It wasn't the worst movie I have seen , but I have to say its RoboCop and anything RoboCop gets my attention , I even love prime directives , am all about the suits and props ,,

Maybe a sequel might improve, we will see

Cheers

Alex
_________________



"Dead or Alive you are Selling to Me "

[ROBOTCOP]

And I agree how can you solve your own murder when you were not murdered

So solving a murder that never happened kind of f#cks things up for me

Cheers

Alex
_________________



"Dead or Alive you are Selling to Me "

[Joined]

And I agree how can you solve your own murder when you were not murdered

So solving a murder that never happened kind of f#cks things up for me

Cheers

Alex
_________________



"Dead or Alive you are Selling to Me "

[Post Count]

And I agree how can you solve your own murder when you were not murdered

So solving a murder that never happened kind of f#cks things up for me

Cheers

Alex
_________________



"Dead or Alive you are Selling to Me "

[Comment]

And I agree how can you solve your own murder when you were not murdered

So solving a murder that never happened kind of f#cks things up for me

Cheers

Alex
_________________



"Dead or Alive you are Selling to Me "

[Stan The Man]

I felt of a lot of the writing in the remakeboot seemed silly anyway - He doesn't use his 'real' hand to shake Maddox nor to fire the 'killing' gun, lets not even mnetion the silliness of having two guns when both are capable of killing and in one of the few real shootout sequences he uses another captured gun anyway.. They don't expound on other things that should have been expounded on, they flub little things like saying Murphy was murdered when he wasn't, and frankly, there is no real 'villain' in the film - Vallon, Maddox, even Sellars are all just there and just do bad shit, none are real villains to my mind.

Again, Vallon wasn't even there enough to judge how bad or good he was really. Even with that short time he could have been made into something, as Trap brilliantly put with numerous examples (The badge trophy idea I like the most, hints at both real serial criminal pathology as well as a nice nod to the original and the high cop-kill count Boddicker had). As Trap said even secondary bad guys had something about them in prior cop/action/crime films, here we ain't got shit. The guy just wasn't memorable in any way, and while Trap didn't care for Cain in either version, no denying either human or badass-cyborg-mech Cain wasn't memorable. Hell, RoboCAIN is probably the most memorable piece of R2. That said -

[Joined]

I felt of a lot of the writing in the remakeboot seemed silly anyway - He doesn't use his 'real' hand to shake Maddox nor to fire the 'killing' gun, lets not even mnetion the silliness of having two guns when both are capable of killing and in one of the few real shootout sequences he uses another captured gun anyway.. They don't expound on other things that should have been expounded on, they flub little things like saying Murphy was murdered when he wasn't, and frankly, there is no real 'villain' in the film - Vallon, Maddox, even Sellars are all just there and just do bad shit, none are real villains to my mind.

Again, Vallon wasn't even there enough to judge how bad or good he was really. Even with that short time he could have been made into something, as Trap brilliantly put with numerous examples (The badge trophy idea I like the most, hints at both real serial criminal pathology as well as a nice nod to the original and the high cop-kill count Boddicker had). As Trap said even secondary bad guys had something about them in prior cop/action/crime films, here we ain't got shit. The guy just wasn't memorable in any way, and while Trap didn't care for Cain in either version, no denying either human or badass-cyborg-mech Cain wasn't memorable. Hell, RoboCAIN is probably the most memorable piece of R2. That said -

[Post Count]

I felt of a lot of the writing in the remakeboot seemed silly anyway - He doesn't use his 'real' hand to shake Maddox nor to fire the 'killing' gun, lets not even mnetion the silliness of having two guns when both are capable of killing and in one of the few real shootout sequences he uses another captured gun anyway.. They don't expound on other things that should have been expounded on, they flub little things like saying Murphy was murdered when he wasn't, and frankly, there is no real 'villain' in the film - Vallon, Maddox, even Sellars are all just there and just do bad shit, none are real villains to my mind.

Again, Vallon wasn't even there enough to judge how bad or good he was really. Even with that short time he could have been made into something, as Trap brilliantly put with numerous examples (The badge trophy idea I like the most, hints at both real serial criminal pathology as well as a nice nod to the original and the high cop-kill count Boddicker had). As Trap said even secondary bad guys had something about them in prior cop/action/crime films, here we ain't got shit. The guy just wasn't memorable in any way, and while Trap didn't care for Cain in either version, no denying either human or badass-cyborg-mech Cain wasn't memorable. Hell, RoboCAIN is probably the most memorable piece of R2. That said -

[Comment]

I felt of a lot of the writing in the remakeboot seemed silly anyway - He doesn't use his 'real' hand to shake Maddox nor to fire the 'killing' gun, lets not even mnetion the silliness of having two guns when both are capable of killing and in one of the few real shootout sequences he uses another captured gun anyway.. They don't expound on other things that should have been expounded on, they flub little things like saying Murphy was murdered when he wasn't, and frankly, there is no real 'villain' in the film - Vallon, Maddox, even Sellars are all just there and just do bad shit, none are real villains to my mind.

Again, Vallon wasn't even there enough to judge how bad or good he was really. Even with that short time he could have been made into something, as Trap brilliantly put with numerous examples (The badge trophy idea I like the most, hints at both real serial criminal pathology as well as a nice nod to the original and the high cop-kill count Boddicker had). As Trap said even secondary bad guys had something about them in prior cop/action/crime films, here we ain't got shit. The guy just wasn't memorable in any way, and while Trap didn't care for Cain in either version, no denying either human or badass-cyborg-mech Cain wasn't memorable. Hell, RoboCAIN is probably the most memorable piece of R2. That said -

[Yarbles]

[Joined]

[Post Count]

[ChAnOoD]

[Joined]

[Post Count]

[BurnOne4Robo]

[Joined]

[Post Count]

[ChAnOoD]

What I find funny is that all those "original" themes, like the hand and stuff like that, was done on purpose because they wanted the film to be "existencialist" (in the extras one of the producers said something like that), because the "Verhoeven one" didn´t have that. It amazes me how all the crew said that they´re big fans of the original and then say something like that. I don´t consider myself the smartest guy in the planet, but even with a small brain I could see the Verhoeven film has those themes as well, but doesn´t put them as obvious as the reboot.

For example, the whole family plot in the original: you have it on flashbacks. And hell, it works better than having the wife crying in 3 or 4 scenes. For a "obscene" and graphic film like the 1987 one, it plays subtle on the emotional scenes, and makes a bigger impact on the viewer.

Also I like how they always mention "Iron Man" as something they tried to avoid, just to put rock music on scenes to look like a bastard sequel of the Tony Stark character.

[Joined]

What I find funny is that all those "original" themes, like the hand and stuff like that, was done on purpose because they wanted the film to be "existencialist" (in the extras one of the producers said something like that), because the "Verhoeven one" didn´t have that. It amazes me how all the crew said that they´re big fans of the original and then say something like that. I don´t consider myself the smartest guy in the planet, but even with a small brain I could see the Verhoeven film has those themes as well, but doesn´t put them as obvious as the reboot.

For example, the whole family plot in the original: you have it on flashbacks. And hell, it works better than having the wife crying in 3 or 4 scenes. For a "obscene" and graphic film like the 1987 one, it plays subtle on the emotional scenes, and makes a bigger impact on the viewer.

Also I like how they always mention "Iron Man" as something they tried to avoid, just to put rock music on scenes to look like a bastard sequel of the Tony Stark character.

[Post Count]

What I find funny is that all those "original" themes, like the hand and stuff like that, was done on purpose because they wanted the film to be "existencialist" (in the extras one of the producers said something like that), because the "Verhoeven one" didn´t have that. It amazes me how all the crew said that they´re big fans of the original and then say something like that. I don´t consider myself the smartest guy in the planet, but even with a small brain I could see the Verhoeven film has those themes as well, but doesn´t put them as obvious as the reboot.

For example, the whole family plot in the original: you have it on flashbacks. And hell, it works better than having the wife crying in 3 or 4 scenes. For a "obscene" and graphic film like the 1987 one, it plays subtle on the emotional scenes, and makes a bigger impact on the viewer.

Also I like how they always mention "Iron Man" as something they tried to avoid, just to put rock music on scenes to look like a bastard sequel of the Tony Stark character.

[RoboHell]

This movie is just one big mess.
_________________

[Joined]

This movie is just one big mess.
_________________

[Post Count]

This movie is just one big mess.
_________________

[Comment]

This movie is just one big mess.
_________________

[RoboTrap]

I've said it before: the original is a smart movie that pretends to be dumb, the remake is a dumb movie convinced that it's smart.

The pretense of deeper meaning and emotional value that runs through the movie is infuriating because everything else in the film, from the narrative to the acting to the editing, is subservient to the idea that this is a "deep" film. And that simply isn't true. At best superficial fluff and at worst mind-numbingly overdone, the core conceit just doesn't work, whether through incompetence or misguidance. They could have suppressed those broken ideas and focused on action and humor, but instead of distracting the audience from the film's issues, they decided to shine a spotlight on them, in the hopes that hammering you over the head with them will blind you to the shortcomings.

It's a facade of intelligence and little more, the equivalent of a child waving his arms at you and screaming that he's got something important to say in an adult discussion, only to blankly recite Wikipedia articles should you dare pay attention.

I've seen episodes of Cheers that said deeper things.
_________________

[Joined]

I've said it before: the original is a smart movie that pretends to be dumb, the remake is a dumb movie convinced that it's smart.

The pretense of deeper meaning and emotional value that runs through the movie is infuriating because everything else in the film, from the narrative to the acting to the editing, is subservient to the idea that this is a "deep" film. And that simply isn't true. At best superficial fluff and at worst mind-numbingly overdone, the core conceit just doesn't work, whether through incompetence or misguidance. They could have suppressed those broken ideas and focused on action and humor, but instead of distracting the audience from the film's issues, they decided to shine a spotlight on them, in the hopes that hammering you over the head with them will blind you to the shortcomings.

It's a facade of intelligence and little more, the equivalent of a child waving his arms at you and screaming that he's got something important to say in an adult discussion, only to blankly recite Wikipedia articles should you dare pay attention.

I've seen episodes of Cheers that said deeper things.
_________________

[Post Count]

I've said it before: the original is a smart movie that pretends to be dumb, the remake is a dumb movie convinced that it's smart.

The pretense of deeper meaning and emotional value that runs through the movie is infuriating because everything else in the film, from the narrative to the acting to the editing, is subservient to the idea that this is a "deep" film. And that simply isn't true. At best superficial fluff and at worst mind-numbingly overdone, the core conceit just doesn't work, whether through incompetence or misguidance. They could have suppressed those broken ideas and focused on action and humor, but instead of distracting the audience from the film's issues, they decided to shine a spotlight on them, in the hopes that hammering you over the head with them will blind you to the shortcomings.

It's a facade of intelligence and little more, the equivalent of a child waving his arms at you and screaming that he's got something important to say in an adult discussion, only to blankly recite Wikipedia articles should you dare pay attention.

I've seen episodes of Cheers that said deeper things.
_________________

[Comment]

I've said it before: the original is a smart movie that pretends to be dumb, the remake is a dumb movie convinced that it's smart.

The pretense of deeper meaning and emotional value that runs through the movie is infuriating because everything else in the film, from the narrative to the acting to the editing, is subservient to the idea that this is a "deep" film. And that simply isn't true. At best superficial fluff and at worst mind-numbingly overdone, the core conceit just doesn't work, whether through incompetence or misguidance. They could have suppressed those broken ideas and focused on action and humor, but instead of distracting the audience from the film's issues, they decided to shine a spotlight on them, in the hopes that hammering you over the head with them will blind you to the shortcomings.

It's a facade of intelligence and little more, the equivalent of a child waving his arms at you and screaming that he's got something important to say in an adult discussion, only to blankly recite Wikipedia articles should you dare pay attention.

I've seen episodes of Cheers that said deeper things.
_________________