|
I really loved how he was able to tap into CCTV to put together plans of attack. And his HUD was very well designed in my opinion. I almost feel like a traitor for liking this film so much!
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 10:29 |
|
|
Speaking of CCTV, I know its presence is what makes RoboCop so useful and its probably been in place so long that people are used to it, but I don't really buy that criminals would just sling drugs and commit crimes out in front of them without giving a poo poo. But they flat out show you this murderer rapist dude who's been at-large for YEARS, so they're clearly telling you cops don't get around to everything. It just makes the entire police force look corrupt instead of a few players, which I think is a misstep. The CCTV system is wholly useless until RoboCop shows up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:I really loved how he was able to tap into CCTV to put together plans of attack. And his HUD was very well designed in my opinion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 17:06
|
|
|
http://geektyrant.com/news/2013/7/26/badass-robocop-geek-art Here's a nice piece of art. I like the helmet better here amongst other things.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
I watch Robocop 2 today because someone mentioned the sequel being better than I expect late-eighties movie sequels to be, and HOLY poo poo. It's amazing. The satirical elements were even better than the first. I'm surprised that a film that became so popular and well-known is so good in so many ways at once. I love the way they contrast Robocop willingly frying himself to become free to enact actual justice with Cain seizing his own control device to authorise his freedom in order to simply take more drugs. I will never watch Robocop 3 because I already know it doesn't involve Robocop burning OCP to the ground and heralding a new age of egalitarian freedom, and that is THE ONLY end to this saga there can possibly be. Does any movie legit have that kind of ending? Elysium?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:I'll admit, I did like seeing quite a few shots with the red lines at the top and bottom of the screen like you were looking through Robo's visor. Didn't really dig the rest of the HUD design, though. I didn't really find anything there to like. It just looked like the film went anamorphic and had some trajectory graphics or a crosshair now and then. 80s and 90s era film HUDs with scrolling nonsense text and color overlay and scanlines got this one beat in that regard. Well I guess the criminal background check things came up too, and that was pretty cool.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
Gatts posted:http://geektyrant.com/news/2013/7/26/badass-robocop-geek-art
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:I will never watch Robocop 3 because I already know it doesn't involve Robocop burning OCP to the ground and heralding a new age of egalitarian freedom, and that is THE ONLY end to this saga there can possibly be. Does any movie legit have that kind of ending? Elysium? Fight Club sort of?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
Let's not forget the funniest line in the film, paraphrased: "I can tazer you, causing you to flop around like a fish and cause you to poo poo and piss yourself, then arrest you. Or you can tell me where my target is. (Beat) Then I arrest you. "
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 19:05
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Let's not forget the funniest line in the film, paraphrased: I don't know I thought "That was totally justifiable" after Murphy tazers Biggs when he has a hand grenade and he blows up was better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 19:12
|
|
|
Jay Baruchel was the best person to cast as far as "we need a guy to say funny stuff." Prior to seeing the film I was like "Well, Jay's in it so I'll enjoy that at least."
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 19:16
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:Jay Baruchel was the best person to cast as far as "we need a guy to say funny stuff." Prior to seeing the film I was like "Well, Jay's in it so I'll enjoy that at least." "I'm just in marketing!" Personally I loved Michael Keaton more than I knew I would. My favorite line was his response to Jay: "Well, that's just...embarrassing."
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
"What happens if I tazer an exoskeleton with a little rear end in a top hat inside?" "I think we'd all like to find out."
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:I will never watch Robocop 3 because I already know it doesn't involve Robocop burning OCP to the ground and heralding a new age of egalitarian freedom, and that is THE ONLY end to this saga there can possibly be. Does any movie legit have that kind of ending? Elysium? You literally described the ending of Robocop 3, even though as a movie its pretty bad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 20:30
|
|
|
Yeah, one of the reasons I think Robocop 3 doesn't work is because it's got too much wish fulfillment in taking down OCP. I haven't seen the film since I was 11, and maybe the badness got in the way, but it just felt...dishonest.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 21:07
|
|
|
The main reason RoboCop 3 doesn't work is because its loving boring!
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:I'm not surprised that people are complaining about Robocop not fighting more crimes. There's a certain type of person who thinks that if we didn't see it, it absolutely never happened. Go check out the Man of STeel thread where dozens of posters say that since Superman barely helped any normal civilians during the times of crisis that it 100% did not happen. In 1987 violent crime was at an all time high in the U.S., so the basic premise of needing a Robocop to fight crime might have made more sense. Since crime has declined significantly since the early 90s, they're probably just dancing around this conundrum.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
Some Other Guy posted:In 1987 violent crime was at an all time high in the U.S., so the basic premise of needing a Robocop to fight crime might have made more sense. Since crime has declined significantly since the early 90s, they're probably just dancing around this conundrum. It still makes sense, just that in the modern day it's to reduce cost via automation rather than having a super soldier that criminals can't take down.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
You don't need a crime epidemic to justify a robocop, but what I mean is this is probably why you don't see him fighting a lot of crime in the movie. Or maybe no I don't know
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
Violent crime has declined dramatically, but incarceration has not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
Well that's already the premise of Demolition Man
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
I would love to see what would happen if they remade Demolition Man.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I would love to see what would happen if they remade Demolition Man. They'll try to modernize the President Schwarzenegger joke and it will be emblematic of the failures of the film.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
Some Other Guy posted:You don't need a crime epidemic to justify a robocop, but what I mean is this is probably why you don't see him fighting a lot of crime in the movie. Or maybe no I don't know A crime epidemic was not why Omnicorp wanted robots, they wanted them nationally for peacekeeping duties. And profits.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
So, yeah, just got back from this, not sure if I liked it or not but it was DEFINITELY worth seeing. Some things to make note of: -This movie is not meant to work in the same context as the original, it takes the base concept and runs with it in a different direction. Comparing the two on a point-to-point basis doesn't really work. -This film is not satirical, it's allegorical. It's all about Authoritarianism, control, corruption and power. Note the repeated references to Robocop's porgramming as "the system." I'm definitely gonna need to rewatch this, but all in all I think it was a lot meatier than expected, it's less about "being robocop" and more about another take on the idea of a Robot Cop in a corrupt system. I can't say for sure if it succeeded but in general this is the kind of remake people SHOULD be trying to do.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
Barudak posted:They'll try to modernize the President Schwarzenegger joke and it will be emblematic of the failures of the film. I think the only way it would work is if they tried to make it all gritty.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
So the impression I'm getting from the thread is that it's at least worth watching with friends?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 05:28
|
|
|
mr. stefan posted:-This movie is not meant to work in the same context as the original, it takes the base concept and runs with it in a different direction. Comparing the two on a point-to-point basis doesn't really work. Comparing them thematically can be fun, though. In the original Robocop Dilbert-esque incompetence is a significant factor. OCP is constantly being ruined by dumb programming errors and loopholes, right up until the ending. In the remake, it's very clearly established that robots are totally perfect at their jobs- way better than people. But the corporate people are still done in because now instead of reacting to incompetence they're just smugly assuming invulnerability. It's honestly kind of hilarious that the OCP only figures out near the end of the movie that Robocop could easily use his magic murderer-catching technology to finger their involvement in all sorts of shady criminal underworld enterprises. It's just not something that's ever come up before since up until that point it had never occurred to anyone to utilize the technology that way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
Just saw it. drat, was NOT expecting to have enjoyed it as much as I did. I'm just glad they didn't try to go the same style as the original. It is definitely it's own thing. I will say this. I did cringe when they shoehorned two classic lines from the movie, but that was honestly the only "ugh" part. It's a good film. Go see it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 06:42
|
|
|
Tommy 2.0 posted:Just saw it. drat, was NOT expecting to have enjoyed it as much as I did. quote:I'm just glad they didn't try to go the same style as the original. It is definitely it's own thing. I will say this. I did cringe when they shoehorned two classic lines from the movie, but that was honestly the only "ugh" part. It's a good film. Go see it. Sure Rorschach was as close as we got, but due to his position it's not that unbelievable for his character to be formed as such, and still the way he was written most of his anger seemed to be disgust at what he saw as meddling in a program he truly believed in and had his ego heavily invested into, as compared to say the SA mercs in Elysium who were true bug-eyed frothing psychopaths. Love how Oldman's character is slowly corrupted in increments and the congnitive dissodance he communicates so well as he keeps going further until his moral barometer finally pops. I tells ya, that kid's going places! He's gold, baby - gold! They also avoided the downfall of many films with kids as a prime motivator for the hero "breaking th system" - most can't act, so they wrote the kid as basically a mute born through shock and confusion which was the right choice IMO. One things for sure, never was a fan of Roeper but sweet gently caress after reading his review I'm reminded of a Patton Oswalt bit where he tells a story about realizing the point you know you absolutely have to leave a small town is when the only local film reviewer is completely befuddled by virtually any modern cinema that isn't absolutely literal. Roeper was seriously confused as to the point of Samuel L. Jackons character, and felt the film was too "cynical". You've got to be loving kidding me - it's cynical because it should be given what's happening with the media, the militarization of policing and the military's use of private contractors currently. Yes it's a "cinematic trend" but it's a trend for a reason. Samuel's character was just a more honest O'Reilly with a slightly more blatant corporate propaganda network, in 10 years if things keep at their pace it will barely be able to be seen as parody. He basically comes close to calling the film Anti-American.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 07:24
|
|
|
Honestly, I really liked it. I found it really disappointing in social commentary, but the added just sheer loving horror of what was done to him and the emotion and man vs. machine was great. I wish that it had stronger villians and I still don't understand some things Wait , why was it bad that he talked to the press? Why did they want to kill him? Because he exposed corruption? He readjusted his own dopamine and was in control again? I'm still unclear on the motivation to kill him because it seemed to me that he got better once he overwrote his own programming. I dunno, just wish it had better villians Very different movie in tone and scope, it was really more drama and I enjoyed that. Maybe not as great as the original, but still I enjoyed it. Also, the technology level was totally loving believable and the first scenes of Gary Oldman's character was fantastic the whole loving rehab clinic. The tech in the film was completely believable , it was not just "magic". The CCTV thing was loving insanely scary when you think about it. Also HOLY poo poo The scene, you know which one. Where he's just a loving head and lungs and hand. Holy poo poo! That was loving gruesome and terrifying Hollismason fucked around with this message at 07:52 on Feb 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 07:44
|
|
|
computer parts posted:It still makes sense, just that in the modern day it's to reduce cost via automation rather than having a super soldier that criminals can't take down. The 80s version was equal parts Gordon Gecko styled 'we're gonna sell a FUCKTON of these' and 'unstoppable mantank takes back The Streets'. With the American Built subtext, its also a dig against Japanese murderterminators destroying America. The thing about Fighting Crime in the Verhoven version is that it absolutely shows what a ridiculous overreaction a RoboCop is to societal(economic) problems. He stops a rape by shooting a dude in the nuts (badass!) And gives a hysterical victim a generic 'please hold. Your mental sanity and emotional well being are important to us' that is practical but soulless. I'm thinking, especially with CCtvision, its more of a 'look at how pervasive modern technology is we hardly notice... And its cheap!' approach.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 07:49
|
|
|
if they really wanted to make a socially accurate version along the lines of "what works" at effective crime control, robocop would just be an automated prison system. that's probably already a movie too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 07:54
|
|
|
The more I think about the film the more I like it, because while yes Michael Keatons character got a little cartoonish toward the end there. Pretty much everyone in the film were pretty much well competent The fact is though is that the technology worked. It was working, the whole point of the movie isn't to make a super robot to stop crime, they can do that fine. They just wanted political points. Just like Robocop the original was based around the excess of the 80s, this one was exactly about our culture today and there by really it's a perfect reboot reimagining whatever. Because it fits the time. I think that's why people seem to have trouble with it. It's all about how interwined corporations are in our lives now and persistance of the surveillance state. It's a drat good film, it has a few low points but its really good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 08:07
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:Honestly, I really liked it. I found it really disappointing in social commentary, but the added just sheer loving horror of what was done to him and the emotion and man vs. machine was great. I wish that it had stronger villians and I still don't understand some things It seemed like the screenwriters realized they needed a big third act climax, but couldn't quite fit the necessary pieces together to make it work. I think taking down the head of Omnicorp would have worked better in a sequel, instead of forcing it in. That way they could have actually developed Keaton's character more and given the audience a reason to hate him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 09:26
|
|
|
There's actually only one screenwriter for this movie- Joshua Zeturner. Which I think goes a long way to explaining why there's such an unusual amount of narrative cohesion here for a studio film. It makes sense when you consider the franchise. Robocop's a big name, sure, but how exactly do you design it by committee when the appeal of the original is so difficult to discreetly quantify? A lot of it's just in how the concept sounds really cheesy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 09:30
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I think the only way it would work is if they tried to make it all gritty. Yeah, make the Demolition Man be resurrected in a time where society has gone all super-fascist and the police routinely arrest, shoot, extort and torture people with little justification and accountability and he's brought back in because the only law enforcement officer who has a memory of what proper police work actually was (even though he's a loose cannon that followed his own rules). He has to take apart a system in which he himself created through his actions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 10:54
|
|
|
One little thing I liked is when Murphy gets in the suit and runs away Oldmans orders "Murphy come back" isn't announced with the usual *krrrzt* style radio transmission signifiers. Its crystal clear to the point where it just sounds like a conscience in Murphys head or something.Hollismason posted:Honestly, I really liked it. I found it really disappointing in social commentary, but the added just sheer loving horror of what was done to him and the emotion and man vs. machine was great. I wish that it had stronger villians and I still don't understand some things That was the problem, he got better a robocop who lowers crime rates by shooting gang members in the face is one thing. A robocop who's good enough to actually investigate crime higher up in the system is another. massive spider fucked around with this message at 11:40 on Feb 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 11:22
|
|
|
I have to disagree with goonsensus here. This movie was hot garbage. all the dark humor and bitter violence of the original has been replaced by lukewarm melodrama between Murphy and his wife. The original robocop is not a perfect movie: it raises existential questions that it doesn't know quite how to answer, but the production as a whole is so strong that you hardly notice. Great villains, terrific lead, great pacing. This movie lacks all of that so when it struggles to decide if it's a philosophical debate on national security or an action movie it fails at both. When it needs a joke to lighten the load, like the ED209 tripping down the stairs, it instead tries to tug at your heart strings. When it needs someone to get ripped in half with an automatic rifle because it would be cool, instead it gives you a limp shoot out between robots as endless bullets ping off their armor indicating nothing. It reminded me of the Indiana Jones remake, its almost in line with what made two of those movies good but missed that critical ten percent which gave scenes weight. The new Robocop is joyless as a viewing experience and lacks thrill or threat to the characters you're supposed to care about. Long story short, this is its own movie. And if the original did not exist I think everyone would recognize that this is a movie with good ideas wasted on a weird production. The best bits are Oldman and Keaton but they can't hold this thing together.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 11:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 10:29 |
|
|
echronorian posted:Long story short, this is its own movie. And if the original did not exist I think everyone would recognize that this is a movie with good ideas wasted on a weird production. The best bits are Oldman and Keaton but they can't hold this thing together. Thats pretty much how I see it now, its just that I'd prefer to talk about the things I liked than the parts that failed in comparison to the original.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 11:42
|
|