|
I've also seen it recently, and I'm a giant fan of the original. The body horror scene was great, I liked new Murphy though he was underused and the family angle wasn't as bad as I though. I don't think it was a great movie, but it was pretty solid and I was pleasantly surprised.
|
#
?
May 21, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 09:18 |
|
|
It was utter crap. The scenes with the family dragged. The actress who played the wife was bad, one note and unconvincing. Joel Kinneman had as much warmth and affection as Alex Murphy the husband and family man as he did as the robot. He is such a generic bland action hero type there is literally no emotional impact to watching him lose his humanity - because he didn't show any loving humanity to begin with. They had to shove in a (well done, I'll admit) special effects scene showing just how little of his human self physically remains as robocop to hammer audiences with LOOK AT HIS PAINNNNN, HE LOST EVERYTHING . Otherwise he might as well be a do gooder cop who dons an anime exoskeleton (that he stole from an evil corporation) to fight crime. The military industrial complex/drone warfare coming to American shores plot was utterly predictable. It just states the obvious - politicians are corrupt, large corporations are corrupt and the media is complicit without being interesting or subversive. The movie takes no risks. It just seems content to deliver the base story of the original robocop minus any element that made it memorable or interesting. It just seemed so mediocre. There's no humour, no gory nastiness, no satire, nothing. Just another tiresome PG-13 GI Joe/Die Hard 5 (Mission to Moscow!) action movie where the hero gets a robot suit. Remember the main villain in this movie? His name, his motivation, anything funny or cool or violent he might have done at any point to make the film interesting? I sure don't! Contrast this to Clarence Boddicker and his goon squad from the original. Also the bloodless gunfights were especially lame and entirely without consequence or danger. This is the first movie I've seen since Uwe Boll's House of the Dead where the director had the brilliant idea of making gunfights resemble light gun arcade games. Remember when Robocop started getting poo poo, starting with Robocop 3 and the made for TV movie and the TV series nobody ever watched. This bloodless PG13 turd continues that proud tradition. I hope non English speaking audiences in India and China enjoy this, and that the producers recoup their money selling this to TV channels that need to expand their library of inoffensive action/sci-fi movies to show in the afternoons, because that seems to be who this movie was made for. Remember that lame big budget Conan movie that came out a few years back starring Jason Mamoa. What a huge waste of opportunity that was, and how it effectively killed Mamoa's budding rise as an action star and buried the Conan franchise? I see this Robocop movie as a similar failure, but worse, because at least the R rated Conan had tits.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2014 06:54
|
|
|
lynch_69 posted:It just seemed so mediocre. There's no humour, no gory nastiness, no satire, nothing. Just another tiresome PG-13 GI Joe/Die Hard 5 (Mission to Moscow!) action movie where the hero gets a robot suit. Remember the main villain in this movie? His name, his motivation, anything funny or cool or violent he might have done at any point to make the film interesting? I sure don't! Contrast this to Clarence Boddicker and his goon squad from the original. The main villain is clearly Raymond Sellars. I'm not sure why you didn't get that.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2014 07:12
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:The main villain is clearly Raymond Sellars. I'm not sure why you didn't get that. I meant the street level drug dealer thug boss, the Kurtwood Smith equivalent. The guy they picked for that role in new Robocop was abysmally bad and forgettable.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2014 07:43
|
|
|
lynch_69 posted:It was utter crap. The scenes with the family dragged. The actress who played the wife was bad, one note and unconvincing. Joel Kinneman had as much warmth and affection as Alex Murphy the husband and family man as he did as the robot. He is such a generic bland action hero type there is literally no emotional impact to watching him lose his humanity - because he didn't show any loving humanity to begin with. They had to shove in a (well done, I'll admit) special effects scene showing just how little of his human self physically remains as robocop to hammer audiences with LOOK AT HIS PAINNNNN, HE LOST EVERYTHING . Otherwise he might as well be a do gooder cop who dons an anime exoskeleton (that he stole from an evil corporation) to fight crime. For every one good point you bring up criticizing the film's flaws, you complain more about the lack of blood and gore. And honestly, what's more subversive: throwing in a bunch of over-the-top violence just to appease the fans of the original (though it doesn't fit with the motif of violence being sanitized and commoditized), or luring in packs of people for a PG-13 popcorn flick then sucker-punching them by showing them that the big hero is nothing but a few organs, a lie and a corporate logo? This movie was definitely satirical, just not as in-your-face about it as the original. That's not a bad thing. Trying to ape Verhoeven's beats would have been awful.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2014 09:43
|
|
|
Wild T posted:For every one good point you bring up criticizing the film's flaws, you complain more about the lack of blood and gore. And honestly, what's more subversive: throwing in a bunch of over-the-top violence just to appease the fans of the original (though it doesn't fit with the motif of violence being sanitized and commoditized), or luring in packs of people for a PG-13 popcorn flick then sucker-punching them by showing them that the big hero is nothing but a few organs, a lie and a corporate logo? No one can Verhoeven like Verhoeven Verhoevened. It would have been useless to try, plus that kind of over the top gore only really works with practical effects and tends to look absolutely awful with CGI. Just watched this remake for the first time and... eh? Its better than that horribad Total Recall reboot, but that's mainly because Robocop spent like a decade making GBS threads all over itself in its fade to obscurity, Its hard not to break that mold. I have a harder time giving something like this a pass when Judge Dredd covered a ton of the same ground and was a better Robocop than Robocop could ever be. I guess that's my opinion, why watch this when you could watch the new Dredd instead?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 06:50
|
|
|
Spaceman Future! posted:No one can Verhoeven like Verhoeven Verhoevened. It would have been useless to try, plus that kind of over the top gore only really works with practical effects and tends to look absolutely awful with CGI. Just watched this remake for the first time and... eh? Its better than that horribad Total Recall reboot, but that's mainly because Robocop spent like a decade making GBS threads all over itself in its fade to obscurity, Its hard not to break that mold. I have a harder time giving something like this a pass when Judge Dredd covered a ton of the same ground and was a better Robocop than Robocop could ever be. I guess that's my opinion, why watch this when you could watch the new Dredd instead? Something something Dredd isn't about consumer culture but violence in consumer media. Only thing both movies do is they both spend part of their time doing takedowns on our hosed-up priorities in justice and law. VAGENDA OF MANOCIDE fucked around with this message at 23:04 on May 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 23:02
|
|
|
I honestly liked this better than Dredd.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I honestly liked this better than Dredd.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:The gently caress is wrong with you, man? I like how deadpan Dredd is but it's just so slight. Ain't got a lot of purchase for me to grab on, I'm afraid.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
Dredd is one of the best action movies in years. Stylish, badass and straight to the point with memorable action sequences and memorable characters. No matter your feelings on Rebootcop, can you really say the same for it? I didn't like Robocop 2014 myself, but can you honestly say its villain was just as good or better than Ma-Ma?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
Universal Soldier Regeneration is one of the best action films in years. Dredd is just a guy shooting a bunch of guys without breaking a sweat.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 02:00
|
|
|
People have opinions, and people disagree. Ain't no swayin 'em. And that's OK too. But I seriously wish NewRoboCop wasn't so boring. They should not have made it an action movie at all, and made a straight up political thriller with an actually hosed up crime ridden Detroit. NewCop's Detroit was so boring and without any character. It seemed like the safest city in the world.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:Dredd is one of the best action movies in years. Stylish, badass and straight to the point with memorable action sequences and memorable characters. No matter your feelings on Rebootcop, can you really say the same for it? I can use those terms for Rebootcop, but not for Dredd. In that film, the main character has the depth of a Space Marine from Dawn of War, the villain is no different than her thugs, and I can't remember a action scene aside from "Dredd runs from a big gun." The most memorable thing about Dredd for me was it's lack of performance at the box office.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 09:00
|
|
|
Well I'm trying to remember the name of the villain from Rebootcop right now and I can't, at least not without Googling it. Can't remember any particularly exciting action sequences either. So different strokes for different folks I guess v v
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 09:07
|
|
|
The joke is you think the names of the villains are actually relevant. The villain is you.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 13:00
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:People have opinions, and people disagree. Ain't no swayin 'em. And that's OK too. I felt like Detroit not seeming too bad was actually kind of the point. Robocop, and the associated drone invasion, is completely unnecessary.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 13:27
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:People have opinions, and people disagree. Ain't no swayin 'em. And that's OK too. I also wish there was almost no action in this movie as all the other stuff was the stuff I liked.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 14:46
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:I felt like Detroit not seeming too bad was actually kind of the point. Robocop, and the associated drone invasion, is completely unnecessary. Pretty much. The biggest joke in the remake is that Robocop himself is ultimately useless and just exists solely to make the public feel good. I didn't think it was truly a critique of drones at all. It seemed like more a critique of police forces that have become increasingly militarized, faceless and invulnerable while having next to zero net gain in actual crime prevention.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 15:19
|
|
|
Wild T posted:Pretty much. The biggest joke in the remake is that Robocop himself is ultimately useless and just exists solely to make the public feel good. I didn't think it was truly a critique of drones at all. It seemed like more a critique of police forces that have become increasingly militarized, faceless and invulnerable while having next to zero net gain in actual crime prevention. The biggest joke in the remake is that OCP really are the good guys. They and their fellow corporate robber barons already did 99% of the work in making Detroit a safe and vibrant city again by simply relocating to it. Evidence includes you can't sustain the kind of infrastructure the Omni Foundation and its network of medical and computer and rehabilitation research and other facilities without Detroit being literally Silicon Valley 3.0. So when RoboCop kills Sellers and they hold hearings and OCP stock crashes... THEY are the bad guys. Cognitive dissonance much?
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 16:10
|
|
|
Wild T posted:Pretty much. The biggest joke in the remake is that Robocop himself is ultimately useless and just exists solely to make the public feel good. I didn't think it was truly a critique of drones at all. It seemed like more a critique of police forces that have become increasingly militarized, faceless and invulnerable while having next to zero net gain in actual crime prevention. That is exactly the same message as Dredd.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
The one interesting thing in the remake, besides the Reverse Mirror Stage scene, is that Robocop is a great idea!! There's no hidden fourth directive; Keaton simply doesn't realize that his Robocop would actually work as advertised. Although Robocop still doesn't have any way of fighting the capitalist system (as Omnicorp technically isn't doing anything illegal) his actions indirectly harm their stock prices and - weirdly - force people like Keaton to commit crimes that he can then fight. The joke at the end of the film is that, when Robocop is reunited with his family in the new Robatcave, the door is flanked on either side by dudes in military fatigues. Surprise! It's fascism.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
The_Rob posted:That is exactly the same message as Dredd. You're confusing Dredd the movie with Dredd the subversive comic. In the comics he shoots jaywalkers. In the movie he fights a gang of drug dealers armed with military grade heavy weapons and who start a turf war by skinning a bunch of enforcers and dropping them off a skyscraper balcony.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
api call girl posted:You're confusing Dredd the movie with Dredd the subversive comic. In the comics he shoots jaywalkers. In the movie he fights a gang of drug dealers armed with military grade heavy weapons and who start a turf war by skinning a bunch of enforcers and dropping them off a skyscraper balcony. Except the whole film shows how Judges has caused how lovely their whole world is, and you even get the speech from the villain about how even if you kill him or arrest him or anything it doesn't matter because all you are doing is participating in a system that is just a giant meat grinder. So him dying is just as normal as anything else in that society. Not to mention that like in the comic, you don't ever see Dredds face because he is the faceless militarized police force where they can only prevent in their words 6 percent of crime. The movie is pretty subversive.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
The_Rob posted:Except the whole film shows how Judges has caused how lovely their whole world is, and you even get the speech from the villain about how even if you kill him or arrest him or anything it doesn't matter because all you are doing is participating in a system that is just a giant meat grinder. So him dying is just as normal as anything else in that society. Not to mention that like in the comic, you don't ever see Dredds face because he is the faceless militarized police force where they can only prevent in their words 6 percent of crime. The movie is pretty subversive. Nah, it's actually completely inverse of the comic Dredd.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The one interesting thing in the remake, besides the Reverse Mirror Stage scene, is that Robocop is a great idea!! There's no hidden fourth directive; Keaton simply doesn't realize that his Robocop would actually work as advertised. So you're saying Robocop's problem is, he is an agent of peace but programmed to observe capitalism as-is as the 'peace' he's defending?
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 20:31
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:So you're saying Robocop's problem is, he is an agent of peace but programmed to observe capitalism as-is as the 'peace' he's defending? Robocop 2014 is as much a sequel as it is a remake. The joke in the original is that Robocop is explicitly prohibited from policing OCP, so he replaces the 'bad, conservative' CEO (who commits obvious crimes like murder) with the 'good, liberal' CEO who is simply a nice capitalist. 2014 begins with the 'good, liberal' CEO already in place, and there is no prohibition against fighting this specific corporation. Keaton isn't a murderer or anything like that, but Robo is still implicitly prohibited from fighting capitalism. The joke with the dude in the bowtie is that Keaton really does build a robot that feels bad if it shoots a kid - but there is still, at the end, absolutely nothing stopping Robo's programming from taking over and making him do it.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 15:34
|
|
|
There's a fair number of good jokes in this. The code switching Alex Murphy, the "fake turn" by Dr. Norton (which is scored with sinister music, but all comes true anyway in the "happy ending" where Murphy is allowed to see his family flanked by armed guards), the rice paddy.SuperMechagodzilla posted:Robocop 2014 is as much a sequel as it is a remake. The joke in the original is that Robocop is explicitly prohibited from policing OCP, so he replaces the 'bad, conservative' CEO (who commits obvious crimes like murder) with the 'good, liberal' CEO who is simply a nice capitalist. Which is where it needs to start from. Rather than being a satire of 80's excesses, where corporations are essentially alien entities imposing their will on ordinary people (OCP's takeover of the DPD is distressing), in the 21st century we have the paternal corporation, a paramilitary, for profit organization that imposes its political aims on a captive populace. The movie begins with an ED-209 saying "peace be unto you" and ends with an ED-209 with a human face saying "have a nice day". The issue essentially resolves with a token condescension to Murphy's "humanity".
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 18:09
|
|
|
The Robocop statue is being unveiled in Detroit today.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
Everyone who donated should sit on a tack.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
I kept thinking about this dang movie while reading this. "What robot soldiers could do is just as scary, though: Make outright colonialism a practical option again. If guerrillas can’t provoke reprisals by playing on the soldiers’ fear and hate, then there’s only one other player in the game whose emotions can be exploited—the civilian population. That puts the guerrilla in the occupying army’s traditional role. It’s the human guerrillas—as vengeful and unpredictable as most humans are—who become resented, even if the neighborhood agrees, in theory, with their struggle against occupation. The guerrillas are the only wild card, so they are the element to fear and eventually, to hate. Meanwhile, the people running the occupation feed in replacement units and plan how to siphon off whatever it is they wanted in the occupied area, a world away from the shooting. And their machine-soldiers—never homesick, never scared, never angry—can keep this up forever, or until a newer model comes along. No doubt some company will become the Toyota of machine-soldiers, and their commercials will feature a rusty old unit suddenly famous because the guerrilla this veteran unit just killed turns out to be the great-grandson of the first one it neutralized when shipped to the occupation zone as a squeaky-clean product, fresh out of the carton." http://pando.com/2014/02/13/the-war-nerd-googles-big-new-dog/
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
Late to the party but I really liked this movie. A lot more than I thought I would, I've watched it twice so far and finally catching up with the thread makes me want to watch it for a third time. I think the ending with RoboCop being with his family again is on par with the original's ending having RoboCop state that he is Murphy. Because much like RoboCop isn't Murphy no matter how much he'd like to be, Gary Oldman letting RoboCop finally be with his family doesn't change the fact that he's a brain in vat. I really liked how this was repeated throughout the moment when his wife tells RoboCop that "It's all right, we're gonna get through this" when the context makes it perfectly clear that no, you are not going to get through this. What you had is lost, deal with that. I do wonder if that last sentence is a general statement the remake makes about the original, too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2014 10:05
|
|
|
I'm huge fan of the original and I thought the remake was okay, but it had problems. I like that it went a different direction from the original, to allow it to be it's own thing rather than being a redundant retread, and drone warfare is a modern relevant issue to play around with. However the film doesn't have a coherent message about drones at all. The Tehran occupation is a bit too heavy handed in showing how scary militarized streets can be but doesn't really explain why machines are any worse than armed soldiers. The drones seem like an accident waiting to happen but that accident never happens and throughout the whole movie the closest they come to making a mistake is being too fast on the trigger when commanding a child to drop their weapon. The film tries to say "DRONES ARE BAD" pretty overtly whilst simultaneously showing them as extremely efficient and flawless. I mean I like films which show a battle between competing ideologies but I don't think that's the case here - the film preaches one message but what happens on screen really doesn't mesh up with that. Robocop himself is invented as a marketing stunt to sway public opinion in favour of domestic drone deployment and when Omnicorp dehumanizes him so he can match the machines they accidentally create a superhero who singlehandedly reduces Detroit's crime rate by 80%. The "human pulling the trigger" idea that led to Robocop's creation isn't really examined because for the most part it's the machine pulling the trigger with Murphy coming along as a passenger. And Robocop combines a crime database + CCTV monitoring software to automatically find criminals, but it's not clear why he's the only computer who could do this. Just generally it seems like Omnicorp's tech is too good and would quickly eliminate all crime if it was legal. In the original film Robocop starts as a brainwashed blank slate who gradually recovers his memories and reclaims his humanity. In the reboot Robocop starts with a human mentality, but his humanity gets further and further suppressed for the sake of efficiency up until Murphy starts altering his own brain chemistry and finally recovers his identity. But the tragedy of Murphy losing his humanity seems a bit weakened by how dispassionate he is to start with, especially the lack of chemistry between him and his wife (he shows 10x as much emotion in the body horror scene than when he was human). I also think gradually dehumanizing Robocop makes Dennet a lot less sympathetic, Sellars says 'make it more efficient' but it's Dennet who decides brainwashing is the solution (granted, Sellar is pretty happy about Dennet's solution). In fact Sellars doesn't really do anything outright villainous (just greedy) until the last quarter of the movie even though he's supposed to be the main villain. I thought the frantic bloodless action suited the film though. You have this efficient emotionless killer so it makes sense for him to mechanically gun down armies of badguys without the camera dwelling on them. It feels systematic and sterile and under the circumstances I think that works.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
Elite posted:The film tries to say "DRONES ARE BAD" pretty overtly whilst simultaneously showing them as extremely efficient and flawless. I mean I like films which show a battle between competing ideologies but I don't think that's the case here - the film preaches one message but what happens on screen really doesn't mesh up with that. I think the film is making a different argument: drones aren't bad because they're inefficient or flawed; drones are bad because they provide the opportunity for powerful actors to project force -- and suppress and abuse populations -- without consequence, or even awareness. It's also important to remember who is ultimately calling the shots: Dennet comes up with the idea, but Sellars is the one who decides virtual enslavement is the best way forward. Removing yourself from responsibility by pushing unethical decisions onto employees and subordinates is one of the greatest luxuries of power, and can be seen as another manifestation of the ideology underlying drone warfare.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 01:38
|
|
|
Elite posted:In fact Sellars doesn't really do anything outright villainous (just greedy) until the last quarter of the movie even though he's supposed to be the main villain. Yes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
vseslav.botkin posted:I think the film is making a different argument: drones aren't bad because they're inefficient or flawed; drones are bad because they provide the opportunity for powerful actors to project force -- and suppress and abuse populations -- without consequence, or even awareness. It's also important to remember who is ultimately calling the shots: Dennet comes up with the idea, but Sellars is the one who decides virtual enslavement is the best way forward. Removing yourself from responsibility by pushing unethical decisions onto employees and subordinates is one of the greatest luxuries of power, and can be seen as another manifestation of the ideology underlying drone warfare. Robocop is basically piloting a drone the entire movie, the difference being that he's controlling it directly instead of from a distance like the antagonists. I'm not really sure how much you can read into that, but it just struck me during the body horror scene - Robocop is basically just a head and lungs (and a hand) and the 'body' is the interchangeable drone. Hell they probably had 4 or 5 bodies worked up and would just install him in a new one when one needed repairs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 04:06
|
|
|
Elite posted:Robocop himself is invented as a marketing stunt to sway public opinion in favour of domestic drone deployment and when Omnicorp dehumanizes him so he can match the machines they accidentally create a superhero who singlehandedly reduces Detroit's crime rate by 80%. The "human pulling the trigger" idea that led to Robocop's creation isn't really examined because for the most part it's the machine pulling the trigger with Murphy coming along as a passenger. And Robocop combines a crime database + CCTV monitoring software to automatically find criminals, but it's not clear why he's the only computer who could do this. Just generally it seems like Omnicorp's tech is too good and would quickly eliminate all crime if it was legal. His creation is not accidental at all, Dennett is the one who wants him to retain some semblance of humanity/personality, but Sellars wants to accomplish that as minimally as possible. He wants zero independence, literally, a drone with a human face. Dennett's "rescuing" of Murphy is a tragedy, because he knows Sellars has gotten exactly what he wanted - despite retaining something of a personality, he can never not be Robocop. To spend time with him, his wife and son have to visit him in a lab under heavy guard. How long do you think that would last? He can't go home and be a father and husband, doesn't need to sleep or eat, etc. Unlike most movies of this type, the so-called superhero is explicitly promoted as a tool of perfect control, something only implied by other superhero flicks. Public acceptance of him can allow the "good" corporation under Dennett to have a monopoly of violence and effectively replace government.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 14:33
|
|
|
Oh yes, it's examined more than enough. The movie draws a line from one to the other all the while showing how the humanity behind the trigger is successively and successfully neutralized just like it is in real life with real soldiers/cops. It's really deft what Sellars sells--the human in the machine is the trojan horse, then he takes the human away: putting the shining knight in silver in tactical black, getting Robocop reprogrammed to run combat from the computer and just pretend to the brain that it's in control (as an aside: read Blindsight), then when having a human in the machine, even that becomes inconvenient, take away all emotions and family contact entirely and just leave a full robot in its place. VAGENDA OF MANOCIDE fucked around with this message at 14:59 on Aug 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
I will read Blindsight if you read that op-ed about Boston Dynamics BIGDOG.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 15:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 09:18 |
|
|
I could well buy that as the actual goal but the gaps between here and there are so vast that it's far more likely to become a bigger moneypit with no escape than the F35. Hence why Robocop is more cautionary science fiction, even if the opening occupation scene is pretty much describing the middle passage of that op-ed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 15:52
|
|