RoboCop (2014): It might not suck

Why does he have a human hand?

What did they paint a police robot black?

Why did they Jet Li-up an 800 pound cyborg?

The original Robocop worked because it was dark, gritty ("They predicted Fox News!") and the protagonist (Peter Weller) portrayed a sense of duty that would be necessary for his survival in that situation.

Robocop 1 and Robocop 2 are serious high brow action flicks. Robocop 3 (with its different lead) was campy fun.

This? I worry.

...

I will see it for no other reason than I love Michael Keaton's acting. And potentially to hear Samuel L. Jackson scream "Motherfucker!" in yet another film.

...

I really, really hope that the ED-209 in the reboot makes the same distressed pet noise when it gets knocked over that it did in the original.

...

Total Recall was kinda "Meh" because Colin Farrell is a pretty boy. And because no Mars. Good movie on its own, but shouldn't have been called Total Recall.

Dredd was pretty good because of the over-the-top violence and because of how Clint Eastwood-esque the hero was the whole damn film. Righteous.

 

Lot of great actors in it. Doesn't mean it won't flop, but I'll definitely be watching.

 

I'm sorry, I live RoboCop every day since I'm in downtown Detroit.

Really though, this is one reboot I might actually go see.

 

I agree about the Total Recall remake, though it wasn't so much Farrell's pretty boy-ness that put me off, it was lack of any kind of sex appeal of two of the sexiest actresses out there, Jessica Biel and Kate Beckinsale.
Haven't seen Dredd yet. Don't know if I can handle no Schneider. *sobs*

 

I hope you twirl your test tubes before you holster them in their stand.

 

The original Robocop's physical presence was more impressive because he was slow and deliberate. He was also a dude in a heavy rubber suit with a dressed-up Beretta 93R.

CGI aside, I'm not big on turning Robocop into a cyborg ninja. It's boring. I liked the original guy, taking trick shots and walking around, well, like a 800 pound robot.

The more I watch the trailer, the more I realize that I'm going to see this film in theaters and will probably enjoy it, but that I won't see it as a faithful reboot.

...

I found their lack of sex appeal to be refreshing. They were supposed to be female warriors and the film did better than most as portraying them as such. I recall like 98% less boobs-'n-butt w/ combat cleavage poses than most action flicks.

Well played.

And go watch Dredd on Netflix, it's pretty darn entertaining.

 

Indeed. Everything gets faster. Robots. Zombies. Goddamn pirates do Kung Fu and we've got werewolves and vampires that look like underwear models.

What's next? Xenomorphs doing the Harlem Shake and Ron Perlman as a rapping mummy?

/crotchety old man

 

Call me anything you like, the screenwriter for this film, it's his first job.
The director's last job was four years ago on a film you never heard of. (See credits at end of above trailer.)
That, and based on only seeing the trailer makes me completely uninterested in this Robo-reboot.

The most outstanding thing about RoboCop was the story combined with the exceptional man-in-a-machine performance by Peter Weller.
IDK. I'm biased because Weller floored me with his ability to go from a confused, memory-erased, left-over parts human to a fully-realized human stuck in a robot body. It was the heart that RoboCop had, the beating human heart, that drew me in and brought me back to rewatch many times over. His performance brought tears to my eyes.
For the time, the tech stuff was good. Would tech snobs/ the kids of today make fun of it? Maybe. Probably. IDK.
But do we really need to keep feeding modern movie-goers the film equivalent of crack--HUGE CG effects?
There is a glut of super hero franchises, an excess of franchises, period.
Is this film a necessity or simply a way to get asses into theatre seats and sell games and other tie-ins?