test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Robocop 2014: Playing Devil's Advocate
cybersoldier1981
Posts: 2,501 Arc User
It's that rare time of year where I top off my flask and convince some lady of negotiable virtue to accompany me to the movie theater- only because I want to put my tupperware of spaghetti in her purse and eat it while I'm in there.
So, I've always liked the Robocop movie. Even the sequel was all right. The third Robocop movie is right there on that list called 'Things I keep hearing about but refuse to believe exist' next to the Indiana Jones & the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and Star Wars prequel movies.
I was pretty stoked about hearing that Robocop being re-made. And when the trailer finally dropped- man, I was cool with it. I'm pretty stoked, but I'm not going to sit and say 'it's gonna be awesome!'. I tend to determine whether a movie is good or not after I see it, and it's just my opinion- I don't need a movie to be the great cinematic masterpiece to consider it 'good', I just want to enjoy it and find it 'fun'. I shamelessly admit to enjoying the Transformers movies, even if they were lacking in a lot of ways- because all I wanted was to see Transformers beating the crap out of each other. So, there- you have my mindset about this.
Now, let me get to the meat and taters here- a lot of people are lashing out at this new Robocop. And I'll address that below, and tag in my responses and points of consideration.
It will never be as good as the original! No kidding. This is kind of a silly thing to say, because the original will always be a favorite. But I think people fail to realize that when a 'remake' is made, it's not trying to outdo what came before. I think of it almost like friends- I've had friends die, move away, and that sort of thing. I make new friends. Those new friends don't replace my old ones. They're different. For a reference- go watch Lethal Weapon 4, the end scene where Joe Pesci's character tells Mel Gibson's character about his childhood pet 'Froggy'. In a dumb way, it makes perfect sense.
Ugh! Black? Why'd they change the look? The original armor was perfect! Well, no it wasn't. In the 1980's, the idea of a 'robot' being like that was cool AND believable. But, let's face it... in the time Robocop walked up on you and drew his pistol, you could be a block away eating a hot dog. He couldn't run (and yes, cops have to be able to do that) and he had the agility of a rolling toolbox. Hell, even his gun was lame- it was a Beretta M9 with a piece of metal slapped on the end.
Now, we've had multiple innovations- 'metal' isn't the end-all and be-all of armor technology, as we've developed metamaterials and plastic polymers that are lighter, more flexible, harder, easier to replace, and even cheaper than Robocop's Titanium armor. After all, there's a reason the military isn't dressing soldiers up in metal and sending them to war.
As I'll mention again, the original Robocop was also a sociopolitical satire of the times- and apparently, so is the new movie. The 'black' armor was an idea to make him look more 'tactical'. Now, since this movie seems to be following the satire as its source did- have you seen cops lately? Many police officers are shifting toward 'tactical black', much to the dismay of many citizens- as the police now resemble 'SWAT commandos' more so than 'Peace Officers'. So, there you have it- satire.
Why'd they change ____ ? Robocop was NOT _____!!! Well, I'm going to drop a pretty wild statement out here, and tell me how crazy this sounds: Maybe, just maybe- completely remaking exactly as it was before is completely pointless and stupid. I tell you what, if you ABSOLUTELY want the original Robocop from the 1980's? I'll give you my copy for half the price of a movie ticket. It has remain unchanged since the 1980's. I'll even negotiate selling you my original VHS copy. Times change, culture changes, and tastes change- otherwise we'd still be wearing stonewashed jeans and mullets. Nothing disgusts me more than someone shrieking about a remake being different than the original- because, really- only an idiot would pay to see the same thing with special effects dressing it up (looking at you, CGI spliced in the classic Star Wars).
Look, let's face the facts here- The original Robocop was not 'just an action movie'. It was Sociopolitical Satire dressed up as an action movie- and in truth, it went over a lot of peoples' heads then, and still does to this day (Ask Jonsills, he can tell you because he's certainly old enough to remember). And when you start looking at the movie itself? It was ideal for the times. Back in the 1980's, the big fear was rampant crime. Now? People have different fears. Violent crime rates are going down, according to the FBI- so the 'lawless dystopia' is not only unlikely, but would take more suspension of disbelief than most people can muster once you consider the advancements in law enforcement and crime prevention technology and methodology. Drone warfare in the US? Surveillance out of control? Police being an elite force of black-clad commandos? These are modern American fears. In this case, the movie stays true to its source.
It's not even Rated 'R', it will suck.There's a part of me that shakes my head. Boobies and foul language do not a good movie make, otherwise my average Tuesday night would be a work of art. Now, a fun little fact- movie rating standards do change. What was rated R in the 1980's might not warrant an R rating today- after all, in the 1990's, they managed to slip the 'F' word into a few PG-13 movies and still do. And truth be told? Robocop originally almost had an 'X' rating. Nowadays, because things have changed- PG-13 movies are the safe bet. Theaters make tons of cash off teenagers, and in order for the movie to survive- they kinda have to cater to that market. There aren't as many R-rated movies in theaters these days, either- especially compared to the 1980's. I personally don't need rampant violence and blood and guts and boobs and dirty words to make something a good movie- that's a requirement for a good weekend.
And did you watch the first Robocop? He arrested ONE guy (Clarence, after pretty much raising the bar for police brutality) and pretty much murdered everyone else. He threw an election candidate out a window. He shot a potential rapist's junk off. He was actually the worst cop ever.
What's with the stupid bare hand? I went to the Omnicorp website. Robocop's gun is some kind of hi-tech thing that uses the firer's fingerprints to verify user authorization and stamp the shots with the ID. I would have done it differently, but at least this makes some sense. Also, there's probably tons of things in the setting that require fingerprints and the like. Also- hard to dig boogers with a gauntlet.
So, for what it's worth? I'm not trying to slam the original and make the new one seem 'better'. I'm trying to say it's different, and maybe worth watching. Who knows? You might like it for the same reason you loved the original.
So, I've always liked the Robocop movie. Even the sequel was all right. The third Robocop movie is right there on that list called 'Things I keep hearing about but refuse to believe exist' next to the Indiana Jones & the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and Star Wars prequel movies.
I was pretty stoked about hearing that Robocop being re-made. And when the trailer finally dropped- man, I was cool with it. I'm pretty stoked, but I'm not going to sit and say 'it's gonna be awesome!'. I tend to determine whether a movie is good or not after I see it, and it's just my opinion- I don't need a movie to be the great cinematic masterpiece to consider it 'good', I just want to enjoy it and find it 'fun'. I shamelessly admit to enjoying the Transformers movies, even if they were lacking in a lot of ways- because all I wanted was to see Transformers beating the crap out of each other. So, there- you have my mindset about this.
Now, let me get to the meat and taters here- a lot of people are lashing out at this new Robocop. And I'll address that below, and tag in my responses and points of consideration.
It will never be as good as the original! No kidding. This is kind of a silly thing to say, because the original will always be a favorite. But I think people fail to realize that when a 'remake' is made, it's not trying to outdo what came before. I think of it almost like friends- I've had friends die, move away, and that sort of thing. I make new friends. Those new friends don't replace my old ones. They're different. For a reference- go watch Lethal Weapon 4, the end scene where Joe Pesci's character tells Mel Gibson's character about his childhood pet 'Froggy'. In a dumb way, it makes perfect sense.
Ugh! Black? Why'd they change the look? The original armor was perfect! Well, no it wasn't. In the 1980's, the idea of a 'robot' being like that was cool AND believable. But, let's face it... in the time Robocop walked up on you and drew his pistol, you could be a block away eating a hot dog. He couldn't run (and yes, cops have to be able to do that) and he had the agility of a rolling toolbox. Hell, even his gun was lame- it was a Beretta M9 with a piece of metal slapped on the end.
Now, we've had multiple innovations- 'metal' isn't the end-all and be-all of armor technology, as we've developed metamaterials and plastic polymers that are lighter, more flexible, harder, easier to replace, and even cheaper than Robocop's Titanium armor. After all, there's a reason the military isn't dressing soldiers up in metal and sending them to war.
As I'll mention again, the original Robocop was also a sociopolitical satire of the times- and apparently, so is the new movie. The 'black' armor was an idea to make him look more 'tactical'. Now, since this movie seems to be following the satire as its source did- have you seen cops lately? Many police officers are shifting toward 'tactical black', much to the dismay of many citizens- as the police now resemble 'SWAT commandos' more so than 'Peace Officers'. So, there you have it- satire.
Why'd they change ____ ? Robocop was NOT _____!!! Well, I'm going to drop a pretty wild statement out here, and tell me how crazy this sounds: Maybe, just maybe- completely remaking exactly as it was before is completely pointless and stupid. I tell you what, if you ABSOLUTELY want the original Robocop from the 1980's? I'll give you my copy for half the price of a movie ticket. It has remain unchanged since the 1980's. I'll even negotiate selling you my original VHS copy. Times change, culture changes, and tastes change- otherwise we'd still be wearing stonewashed jeans and mullets. Nothing disgusts me more than someone shrieking about a remake being different than the original- because, really- only an idiot would pay to see the same thing with special effects dressing it up (looking at you, CGI spliced in the classic Star Wars).
Look, let's face the facts here- The original Robocop was not 'just an action movie'. It was Sociopolitical Satire dressed up as an action movie- and in truth, it went over a lot of peoples' heads then, and still does to this day (Ask Jonsills, he can tell you because he's certainly old enough to remember). And when you start looking at the movie itself? It was ideal for the times. Back in the 1980's, the big fear was rampant crime. Now? People have different fears. Violent crime rates are going down, according to the FBI- so the 'lawless dystopia' is not only unlikely, but would take more suspension of disbelief than most people can muster once you consider the advancements in law enforcement and crime prevention technology and methodology. Drone warfare in the US? Surveillance out of control? Police being an elite force of black-clad commandos? These are modern American fears. In this case, the movie stays true to its source.
It's not even Rated 'R', it will suck.There's a part of me that shakes my head. Boobies and foul language do not a good movie make, otherwise my average Tuesday night would be a work of art. Now, a fun little fact- movie rating standards do change. What was rated R in the 1980's might not warrant an R rating today- after all, in the 1990's, they managed to slip the 'F' word into a few PG-13 movies and still do. And truth be told? Robocop originally almost had an 'X' rating. Nowadays, because things have changed- PG-13 movies are the safe bet. Theaters make tons of cash off teenagers, and in order for the movie to survive- they kinda have to cater to that market. There aren't as many R-rated movies in theaters these days, either- especially compared to the 1980's. I personally don't need rampant violence and blood and guts and boobs and dirty words to make something a good movie- that's a requirement for a good weekend.
And did you watch the first Robocop? He arrested ONE guy (Clarence, after pretty much raising the bar for police brutality) and pretty much murdered everyone else. He threw an election candidate out a window. He shot a potential rapist's junk off. He was actually the worst cop ever.
What's with the stupid bare hand? I went to the Omnicorp website. Robocop's gun is some kind of hi-tech thing that uses the firer's fingerprints to verify user authorization and stamp the shots with the ID. I would have done it differently, but at least this makes some sense. Also, there's probably tons of things in the setting that require fingerprints and the like. Also- hard to dig boogers with a gauntlet.
So, for what it's worth? I'm not trying to slam the original and make the new one seem 'better'. I'm trying to say it's different, and maybe worth watching. Who knows? You might like it for the same reason you loved the original.
Post edited by cybersoldier1981 on
0
Comments
c'mon ten characters ? Who has time for ten character ?
'Caine, miss you bud. Fly high.
I have no problems with how the new Robocop looks. I do love the new red visor and I'm fine with the tactical black body armor.
However IMO if there's one thing that the original Robocop movies did right for the character, it's how stiff he walked and how jerky his bodily movements were. The point of the original Robocop is to show the audience how Murphy has seemingly lost most of his humanity and him acting like a true robot, even talking like one, is something important and impactful. The audience is made to feel sympathetic towards his dilemma, especially with how he could never be reunited with his family ever again.
Yes the old Robocop couldn't run, but I think it was established in the films that it wasn't that important. He was slow, but methodical and deadly efficient, especially with his aim.
From what I've seen from the 2014 trailers, Robocop didn't come across to me as a part-human part mechanical being, but rather an actual human being in technological power armor. He didn't come across to me as a tragic character at all. However I can't judge the film as a whole without actually watching it anyway so I'll wait and see I guess.
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
The old gun itself is an icon of it's kind. You recognize it once you see it. The new gun, looks something from ..Judge Dredd movie...And he's now akimboing.
Oh and Rorschach is in it.
But then again, it's 'Switch Your Brain Off' entertainment. So it's cool.
But still, just like most of remakes; something we could have managed without.
And playing by myself since Aug 2009
Godtier: Lifetime Subscriber
I also like the look of I, Frankenstein it looks super dumb
Nepht and Dr Deflecto on primus
They all thought I was out of the game....But I'm holding all the lockboxes now..
I'll......FOAM FINGER YOUR BACK!
I think people forget how things have changed! Sociopolitical satire will be totally different from a 1980's perspective and almost 30 years later.
People also expect improvements! Robocop now a days, just can't keep that slow pace we saw before. Audience would expect more speed.
The new Robocop feels like a bit of a sociopolitical satire to me. You have a corporation trying to sell a law enforcement officer to the people. Paint him black! That help sells him! Keep the one hand human! Makes him seem to retain a bit more of his humanity.
Watching the trailer, I wouldn't be surprised if it was someone in the corporation who blows up Murphy's car.
I am sad to see there is no Anne Lewis
Also, Michael Keaton! *SQUEEEE*
Point one- the 'Fingerprint Gun' is not a 'Judge Dredd' idea. You'd be surprised how much push there is to get this installed on firearms in the real world- and it's not a new concept by any means.
Point two- The old gun is recognized once you see it... as a Beretta 9mm with some cheap kit thrown on the receiver. Anyone who's seen an action movie after 1987 can easily recognize it. Not to mention, the 3-round burst was exaggerated and impractical.
Point 2. And when someone sees the 'Robocop gun' he immediately goes 'Oh Sweet! It's Beretta M9!'. Right.
And it's Beretta m93R, a machine pistol.
And playing by myself since Aug 2009
Godtier: Lifetime Subscriber
However.
Part of me is a bit annoyed at seeing so many recent remakes. Maybe it's the fact that I was a child of the 80s and part of me feels like my childhood is being stomped on...
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
No, but we are talking about a movie that satires modern sociopolitical issues, and gun control/regulation is one of those particular issues, alongside surveillance, drone warfare, the police state... so, it's not a stretch.
Right, of course. Mind you- it's pretty much the same gun- with a few different bits and options. Either way, anyone that has seen a Beretta (And they've been all over movies since then) easily calls out Robocop's original handgun as 'A Beretta with some stuff slapped on it', just like Blade's pistol is easily identified as 'An Ingram with some stuff slapped on it'. Either way, the gun needed an upgrade. I'm sorry, but it's a remake- you can't get ticked off when something changes, otherwise 'remake' would be pointless, you could simply go enjoy the original. I intend to enjoy the original (it is a favorite movie) and give the new one a fair chance.
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
However not one thing in this OP that I saw really touched on the true thing even shown in the trailer that has me shake my head and know the movie wont be worth ever watching.
The way Officer Murphy was brutally killed in the original. That hugely traumatic event, with the merciless and sadistic humor taken in shooting him down, is a large source of what fueled Murphy clawing his way back to himself mentally and emotionally. Not just the love for his family, something he knew deep down he had to keep a distance from and let go, but not the anger, not the need for personal retribution, the purest form of justice.
In many ways it was the modern retelling of the classic folk lore of the Revenant a form of undead that arose fueled by a need to bring justice to those who took their life.
A cop walking out and being blown up by a car bomb, while certainly physically traumatic, also means an almost instant KO and general unspecified to a specific region forms of brain trauma.
Originally Murphy was shot in one specific part of the brain, with a fairly casual and off the hip shot so to speak, one of the little things that let him not only live, but logically need a compute chip integrated into the brain to help replace the damage.
It was these things that helped make him fit the term robo cop. Where as the new one really should be called cyber cop. Unless his brain was actually damaged he shouldnt even need a internal computer anymore as an external device like a smart phone can be linked to and be the brain even now in real life users of advanced prosthetics and things like the on the horizen google glasses show all that we can be a form of cyber enhanced human without the need for internalized devices.
All I really see this new version as is some guy with a few artifical limbs and fancy body armor. That does not equal the icon of the 80s that is robo cop.
Also the original robo cop gun was meant to be something of a blend of the Beretta 93R a machine pistol popularized by The Executioner novel series by Don Pendleton, and a Desert Eagle 50 cal.
Personally to me a 20 round 50 cal hand cannon seems like a damn fine weapon for an 80s robotic arm to be using and something few if any mere humans could use without destroying their hand.
Could it have been better? Yes. Was it by any means 'bad'? No. I thoroughly enjoyed it.
The plus points"
-Some clips of the original theme song.
-Blatant cultural satire.
-The 'pistol' was a tazer. But he still had a 3-round burst 50-Cal SMG (That fired Beowulf rounds, HOLY GOD!)
-The 'Silver' armor was present and looked very cool, but the black still looked pretty awesome.
-There were some emotionally gripping moments (when they show Murphy 'what is left').
-Robocop's abilities were expanded- he's now capable of viewing CCTV feeds and working as a 'walking crime database' (which makes a lot of sense).
Overall, it was worth watching and I don't feel cheated at all.
Here's what I found out recently, from a Peter Weller interview. The Robocop in the original was supposed to be sleek and fast, but the suit they designed was just to restricting, forcing them to rethink Robocop's whole look & feel.
So the slow, methodical, mechanical movements were serendipitous. Yeah, it was a flaw, but it was such a perfect flaw I couldn't imagine Robocop without it. That flaw was what made Robocop feel like a man trapped in a machine.
Thus, I'm much more receptive to a new take. I won't so much compare as contrast the 2 films.
More action at Champions Online Comics @ http://co-comics.webs.com
Much like the old movie, it's a real cyberpunk one, just like Gibson envisioned. It touches modern social problems without being just a display of special effects and computer graphics. The tone is different, because society and problems are slightly different than when first Robocop movie was made.
But then, I liked Adams Star Trek movies, while still liking old TOS ones.
And I kinda liked Bayformers as a new take on Transformers (well, if they only had less camera shakes). Their graphic designs were making much, much more sense than old G1 ones.
'Caine, miss you bud. Fly high.