While I was never a huge fan of the original series, I think the thing that really killed the first movie's attempts at being a semi-serious movie for me at least was Kurtwood Smith, the main villain Robocop tangles with, being Red from That 70's show. Its actually quite funny to watch
RIP RoboCop Franchise
- Thread starter Weaver
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'm actually somewhat looking forward to it. Will it be as good as the first? Hell no. What I hope it will be is a solid action film with cool stunts and explosions. Everyone loves explosions!
Honestly making him more agile keeps up with standard military / police doctrines, so there isn't an issue there. As for it being PG-13, so what? The excessive violence in the original did nothing to add to the overall plot, which could been done better if they didn't waste time showing excessive limb removal and violence porn and instead tightened the plot around the corporate takeover of the city and the struggle of humanity against outside control be it via drugs or robotic implants enforcing hidden code.
The only real loss for the movie not being R is if they remove the issues of gang violence and the drug economy from it, but frankly those are less of a concern now than they were in the 80s when the first movie was made, so it's possible it wouldn't resonate with audiences nearly as well. Hell, Walter White is considered a hero by some people and he was pushing some very nasty stuff.
The only real loss for the movie not being R is if they remove the issues of gang violence and the drug economy from it, but frankly those are less of a concern now than they were in the 80s when the first movie was made, so it's possible it wouldn't resonate with audiences nearly as well. Hell, Walter White is considered a hero by some people and he was pushing some very nasty stuff.
Echhh. I really wish Hollywood would stop plundering the 80's as a source of movie ideas. Especially from franchises that had effectively run themselves into the ground.
Don't get me wrong - I still thoroughly enjoy the original RoboCop, it's a barrel load of violent satirical fun that is endlessly quotable ('Can you fly, Bobby ?', 'I don't like cops - and cops don't like me', 'I'd buy that for a dollar!' etc). Paul Verhoeven is IMHO a really patchy director, but some strange magic happens when he films sci-fi, resulting in RoboCop, Starship Troopers and to a lesser extent Total Recall.
I'll keep an open mind, but I'm treating this exactly as I treated 'The Thing' remake - it's probably a turd but there might be a diamond hidden in it somewhere.
Having said that - signs are not good. That looks like a 'Power Rangers' suit.
TLDR :- Boo for remakes. Yay for the original. That suit looks cack.
Don't get me wrong - I still thoroughly enjoy the original RoboCop, it's a barrel load of violent satirical fun that is endlessly quotable ('Can you fly, Bobby ?', 'I don't like cops - and cops don't like me', 'I'd buy that for a dollar!' etc). Paul Verhoeven is IMHO a really patchy director, but some strange magic happens when he films sci-fi, resulting in RoboCop, Starship Troopers and to a lesser extent Total Recall.
I'll keep an open mind, but I'm treating this exactly as I treated 'The Thing' remake - it's probably a turd but there might be a diamond hidden in it somewhere.
Having said that - signs are not good. That looks like a 'Power Rangers' suit.
TLDR :- Boo for remakes. Yay for the original. That suit looks cack.
Oh god; don't even talk to me about the TV show. He wasn't even allowed to shoot anyone - he had to take them out with trick shots.Marter said:
- Feb 7, 2011
- 8,802
- 3,383
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
This thread was right above the "anti-rape underwear" thread and at a glance I read the two together as "robo-cop underwear" and got super hyped about reading this thread. Then I reread the title...
But yeah, robocop hasn't exactly been a pinnacle of excellence in quite a long time. The first movie was rad, and the second movie was pretty good, but everything else went downhill from there, and fast.
So far the trailers have been kind of underwelming, but not nearly as terrible as I originally predicted when I first heard about the reboot and saw the first pictures of the new robocop armor. The movie at least seems self aware enough to make jokes at its own expense about making robocop more "tactical" by painting him black. I'm not expecting greatness here but so far it looks like an alright popcorn flick. Not exactly something I'm going to pay $16 to watch in theaters but I'll totally go out and see it once it hits my local dollar theater a couple of months after its initial release.
But yeah, robocop hasn't exactly been a pinnacle of excellence in quite a long time. The first movie was rad, and the second movie was pretty good, but everything else went downhill from there, and fast.
So far the trailers have been kind of underwelming, but not nearly as terrible as I originally predicted when I first heard about the reboot and saw the first pictures of the new robocop armor. The movie at least seems self aware enough to make jokes at its own expense about making robocop more "tactical" by painting him black. I'm not expecting greatness here but so far it looks like an alright popcorn flick. Not exactly something I'm going to pay $16 to watch in theaters but I'll totally go out and see it once it hits my local dollar theater a couple of months after its initial release.
Huh? What is wrong with calling it a modern-day Frankenstein? Sounds like a great description to me. I mean, obviously not in the details, but at the most basic level, science is used to resurrect a human being but then his nature changes and he turns against its creator.Dansen said:
I watched the original again the other day. It's great - pacy, funny, well scripted. But the whole 'it's a satire on consumerism' thing does get a bit blown out of proportion by its fans.
Making him more agile is a good idea, but a wasted opportunity. Do you remember the collective brick the internet shat when we saw Big Dog from Boston Dynamics. Beyond human ability + soulless creature = fear.
But they gave this guy personality from the get-go. We don't learn to love Robocop because he's coming back to himself. There's a lack of Johnny-5's alive here.
And the biggest part of the movie for me as a kid was hearing about how all these robotic plants and stuff would put America out of jobs, and people asking what's next. The fact that Robocop came and said that we'd even police you Robotically, make you a robot to better service humanity... That was a mind fuck.
Now? it's a 'cool idea'. No soul to the message, it's just a cash grab. Uninterested.
But they gave this guy personality from the get-go. We don't learn to love Robocop because he's coming back to himself. There's a lack of Johnny-5's alive here.
And the biggest part of the movie for me as a kid was hearing about how all these robotic plants and stuff would put America out of jobs, and people asking what's next. The fact that Robocop came and said that we'd even police you Robotically, make you a robot to better service humanity... That was a mind fuck.
Now? it's a 'cool idea'. No soul to the message, it's just a cash grab. Uninterested.
I think the armour issue was that it was too heavy for anyone without a solid core of machinery to support...also, OCP basically made Robocop as a publicity stunt when ED-209 ran into "technical difficulties", I don't think they ever meant to mass produce Robocops.carlsberg export said:
And may I add to the R.I.P? This new version looks shocking.
I just found out Paul Verhoeven did the original. That makes a few things about the original make a bit more sense to me. I really don't like what he did to Starship Troopers (if he had his heart set on making a satire fine, but call it something else dammit) but I have to admit, he knows how to put a good and fairly subtle satire together.
OT
Any armour can be defeated. It makes sense that a very expensive investment like a surgically enhanced cyborg is going to have some sense of self preservation. If criminals are out gunning the cops, then adding a sheet of metal to the cop isn't going to help as much as you think.
The original had a lot of deliberate 80s camp and was probably thumbing it's nose a bit at the old Arnie movies like Commando or Total Recall. This is a different time and place in history. New is neither better or worse than old, just different.
OT
Any armour can be defeated. It makes sense that a very expensive investment like a surgically enhanced cyborg is going to have some sense of self preservation. If criminals are out gunning the cops, then adding a sheet of metal to the cop isn't going to help as much as you think.
The original had a lot of deliberate 80s camp and was probably thumbing it's nose a bit at the old Arnie movies like Commando or Total Recall. This is a different time and place in history. New is neither better or worse than old, just different.
I don't see why it would be heavy, especially in the future. I mean BAE systems are already developing liquid body armour.Hoplon said:
Ah but whatever it's fictional so it dosen't matter and you are correct.
Unless.....
The reason robocop walks slow is because he has robot joints that aren't very fluid which means his armour isn't heavy or restrictive?
I'm sorry... but the Amazing Spider-Man blew the first two Raimi movies out of the water? In sales alone the Amazing Spider-Man did the worst. In story? The movie was awful, compared to everything but Spider-Man 3 and only BARELY better.immortalfrieza said:
Box Office Sales:
http://boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=spiderman.htm
Aside from that, there's a chance Robocop could do well. It will never be better in terms of the original, but thats for those of us who watched it and loved it because of its cheesy campy yet surprisingly well done subject matter.
I wish the old story copy routine was back. There was a time when people copied the format of anything that was somehow established and made up a "new" story with that.
That should be done more often.
Instead of the new karate kid with jayden smith they should've made a movie that follows the same formula and call it "kung fu kid". That way they could've done things like they wanted; i feel like people restrain themselves to things that "have" to be in a "Karate kid" movie and then implement them while forgetting other things that would "have" to be in a "Karate Kid" movie.
Like for example... karate.
If they called the movie "Kung fu kid" they'd be free to give a few nods to "karate kid", like with the replacement of "wax on, wax off" with "put jacket on and off".
As it is now, i'd rather watch a Karate kid movie in which ralph maccio is the sensei now and he trains a new underdog to stand up against bullies. Maybe there'd be a scene in which he visits mr. Miyagi's grave...
Maybe ralph maccio's character can have the girl from the fourth movie as love interest and they reminisce about old miyagi
Same thing goes for the robocop movie. There where some odd things in it, like the robot being so extremely slow that i would be able to propel my fat ass around faster if i where carrying the tin can. Or like robocop gets shot up to hell and still.keeps.going.very.slowly.and.dramatically. Moved by sheer bravado and determination.
Does one have to make a new movie to "correct" all that? Most certainly not, lest we'll see a million robocop movies in which "mistake" after "mistake" gets ironed out including some the remakes made and in the end we get the "perfect" robocop movie, about a million years after we got tired of the story.
Again, i'd rather watch a "new" movie, "unrestrained" by things the creators feel have to be in a "robocop" movie.
You could make a movie where a cop gets shot in the beginning, a cop called "Murphy Smith". He "dies" and then he gets implants and an endoskeleton instead of a robotic exoskeleton.
It would still be a "robocop" movie in a way like many Jackie Chan movies are, well, rather similar to one another.
But you'd be more free to include or exclude certain things.
With the "not-robocop" you could be more subtle or more direct with the ethics behind it. Is the not-robocop property of not-ocp because they somehow "bought" a corpse and put a computer in there which is their property?
When would not robocop become something or rather someone unable to be property because he became sentient and/or regained sentience?
Would he then be legally the person he was before or would he be a new person who in any case would be deeply indebted to not ocp because of the procedure which isn't covered by any kind of healthcare the police may or may not offer?
You could make not ocp the good guys or have them as grey as you want to or you could make is as black and white as you please if only this wasn't a "robocop" movie where certain things have to be taken from "robocop".
captcha: heavy metal...
That should be done more often.
Instead of the new karate kid with jayden smith they should've made a movie that follows the same formula and call it "kung fu kid". That way they could've done things like they wanted; i feel like people restrain themselves to things that "have" to be in a "Karate kid" movie and then implement them while forgetting other things that would "have" to be in a "Karate Kid" movie.
Like for example... karate.
If they called the movie "Kung fu kid" they'd be free to give a few nods to "karate kid", like with the replacement of "wax on, wax off" with "put jacket on and off".
As it is now, i'd rather watch a Karate kid movie in which ralph maccio is the sensei now and he trains a new underdog to stand up against bullies. Maybe there'd be a scene in which he visits mr. Miyagi's grave...
Maybe ralph maccio's character can have the girl from the fourth movie as love interest and they reminisce about old miyagi
Same thing goes for the robocop movie. There where some odd things in it, like the robot being so extremely slow that i would be able to propel my fat ass around faster if i where carrying the tin can. Or like robocop gets shot up to hell and still.keeps.going.very.slowly.and.dramatically. Moved by sheer bravado and determination.
Does one have to make a new movie to "correct" all that? Most certainly not, lest we'll see a million robocop movies in which "mistake" after "mistake" gets ironed out including some the remakes made and in the end we get the "perfect" robocop movie, about a million years after we got tired of the story.
Again, i'd rather watch a "new" movie, "unrestrained" by things the creators feel have to be in a "robocop" movie.
You could make a movie where a cop gets shot in the beginning, a cop called "Murphy Smith". He "dies" and then he gets implants and an endoskeleton instead of a robotic exoskeleton.
It would still be a "robocop" movie in a way like many Jackie Chan movies are, well, rather similar to one another.
But you'd be more free to include or exclude certain things.
With the "not-robocop" you could be more subtle or more direct with the ethics behind it. Is the not-robocop property of not-ocp because they somehow "bought" a corpse and put a computer in there which is their property?
When would not robocop become something or rather someone unable to be property because he became sentient and/or regained sentience?
Would he then be legally the person he was before or would he be a new person who in any case would be deeply indebted to not ocp because of the procedure which isn't covered by any kind of healthcare the police may or may not offer?
You could make not ocp the good guys or have them as grey as you want to or you could make is as black and white as you please if only this wasn't a "robocop" movie where certain things have to be taken from "robocop".
captcha: heavy metal...
In terms of plot, pacing, and characterization yes. It had characters that were far closer to their comic book counterparts than any of the Raimi movies and a less campy supervillain. All the sales are indicative of is how many people decided to watch it, not it's quality.amaranth_dru said:
All I'll say here is I didn't find anything particularly campy about the original Robocop movies.