Robocop 2014

It wouldn’t be fair to hold Robocop up to its predecessor. Not only is the 1987 version a cult classic and susceptible to fan defensiveness, but after thirty years we can assume not everyone in today’s audiences holds an nostalgic candle for it. Besides, the last thing the world needs is more gnashing teeth over a remake. Alas, as the score suggests, Robocop doesn’t need Verhoeven’s film to drag it down. It does so quite comfortably on its own.

Robocop 2014

In the near future Omnicorp is doing well selling robots for crowd control in distant places, as displayed by a dramatic opening sequence in Tehran. But the U.S. is not all that keen on having robots apply lethal force on home soil, leaving a major market untapped. If you think this sounds a little like someone playing on contemporary drone-related issues, perhaps lazily lifted from newspapers stacked on the studio conference table…well it kind of is.

To overturn a law that prohibits having giant chaingun-firing robots in local neighborhoods, Omnicorp boss Raymond Sellars – surrounded by the prerequisite cold-hearted lawyers and marketing types – decides that they need a man in a robot suit.

Such a man presents himself in Alex Murphy, a Detroit cop who gets blown up by a local mobster’s bomb – assassinated because he was getting too close. Curiously his bedridden partner is not considered for similar treatment – this is one of the film’s many plotholes, several of which Robocop will have to overcome with sheer willpower. The movie then cunningly skips any sense of construction with a ‘3 Months Later’ caption and we are presented with the titular hero. This kickstarts an exciting set of sequences of Robocop being tested, exciting in that way only pointless tests could be. As if caught in some corporate R&D hell, Omnicorp’s flagship product struggles to get the stamp of approval.

Robocop 2014

Robo is eventually unleashed upon Detroit. It took an hour or so to get there: the movie’s pacing is inversely proportional to Robocop’s unlikely-looking ability to jump. This is mainly thanks to loads of needless dialog, designed to shunt along a convoluted storyline that is not sure what it wants to tell the audience. Are we wringing hands over domestic drones? Is this about man vs. machine? Are we dealing with Murphy’s anguish as a robot? Police corruption? Sam Jackson occupying the CNN set? Partisan media? Omnicorp’s incredible lack of any clear direction? Murphy’s right hand? In case you wonder, that hand is never explained or, if it was, it’s brief enough to miss.

The new Robocop – as in the character – is cool. But the insistence of showing his face as often as possible really fails to sell Robo as a cyborg. Instead he feels like a guy in a fancy suit – that same weird sense you get when seeing Batman without his mask. It is very hard to pin your interest on a specific character. Robocop doesn’t really come across as a robot, there is a lack of a clear overarching villain and even stalwart Gary Oldman’s doctor keeps shifting moral gears on the audience. Robocop’s biggest problem is that it is a well-made textbook movie that pulls out all the expected tricks. But it lacks any sense of imagination or adventure, then gets hamstrung with a script that tries to cover its lack of direction by piling on nonsense through contemporary themes. Once the makers of this film start blaming each other, it won’t be hard to accept that there was extensive studio meddling. Robocop is covered with a committee’s fingerprints.

Robocop 2014

One comparison has to be made with the original. Robocop 1987 was like a masterful boxer, punching when you didn’t expect and tap-dancing around the rest. This is not unique – you can find this formula of simplicity and grace in everything from Aliens to Bourne. Robocop 2014 is a drunk bar brawler who goes in swinging and hopes it does damage. If anything it shares a room with Robocop 2, also a lumbering fist swinger filled with needless themes and paper-thin characters handicapped with a ridiculous script. In fact, the two are so similar in many ways that you might wonder if the makers didn’t watch the wrong film by accident. But at least Robocop 2 had a psychotic, drug-addicted robot as a bad guy. The new Robocop has… well, the marketing guy’s beard was starting to become unnerving…

Robocop 2014

Last Updated: February 10, 2014

4

37 Comments

  1. I so badly wanted to know about that hand…
    Great review.

    Reply

  2. Weanerdog

    February 10, 2014 at 11:56

    This is, unfortunately, exactly what i thought they were going to deliver.

    Reply

  3. SheHulkNigri

    February 10, 2014 at 12:31

    Roboflop this seems to be then… I also got the distinct idea they were going for Iron Man 2.0 with this imagining of Robocop, especially when you mentioned the insistence on showing his face as often as possible.
    Plus, it was this weekend as I was picking up a loaf of bread at my local Spar that I spied the reason why we are getting Robocop light: Toys. Proudly displayed on the shelves: Robocop action figures. Robocop masks… All designed to fit a 9 year old!
    Yay Hollywood! Crap on another cinematic Holy Grail…

    Reply

  4. T-paul Moloto

    February 10, 2014 at 12:45

    People need to comparing this to the original. Even a blind person can see that this one tries to make it self not look like the original (PG 13)…. If you want to see people getting their dicks shot off while Robocop delivers some cheesy one-liners, go watch the original. I personally liked this one and the suit was awesome and so where the actors.

    Reply

    • James Francis

      February 10, 2014 at 12:53

      You’ll note that apart from the final paragraph, I reviewed the movie entirely on its own merits. And it still stank.

      Reply

    • Grant Hancock

      February 10, 2014 at 13:05

      Agree … acting was superb (so great to see Michael Keaton in decent role!, Gary Oldman once again superb as a rarely seen character that is not good, not bad, not conflicted but human! ..full of self interest and inconsistent sense of morality… Sam Jackson was gold as well)

      Reply

    • Skyblue

      February 10, 2014 at 16:53

      Agreed on this. Huge fan of the original and I actually really enjoyed watching this with my kids. This goes against the very grain of the original but I kept wondering how they were going to keep the camp satirical humor and they… just didn’t which was actually a good thing. I also felt the emotional connection between Murphy and his family was far stronger than in the original.
      I was disappointed that there was no details of the “new” firearm but the action sequences were FAR superior to the original.
      Overall, it wasn’t the original Robocop which I thought was a good thing and Robocop is STILL cool.

      Reply

  5. Norm

    February 10, 2014 at 12:57

    Very sad. I was looking forward to a fresh new Robocop that was worth watching.

    Reply

    • James Francis

      February 10, 2014 at 13:01

      Want worse news? If they only stuck with making a close remake of the original, this film might have worked very well. The efforts to distance themselves from the original without having any clear reason to do so is what really hurts this.

      Reply

      • Norm

        February 10, 2014 at 15:12

        Too a point of a ludicrous storyline…
        :<

        Reply

  6. Grant Hancock

    February 10, 2014 at 13:01

    I thought Robocop was fantastic !? … don’t know what movie you and a lot of other reviewers have been watching.

    Reply

  7. James Francis

    February 10, 2014 at 13:02

    Something I forgot to mention: the film is loaded with easter eggs referencing the original. They are everywhere – the script even takes care to explain why you never see Louise

    Reply

    • James Francis

      February 11, 2014 at 18:09

      Just a correction – Lewis is in the movie, but is different and played by Michael K. “Omar” Williams.

      Reply

  8. Alien Emperor Trevor

    February 10, 2014 at 13:09

    Still want to see it. Probably would have yesterday if not for the inexplicable reason that it’s not showing @ Tygervalley.

    Reply

  9. xdvd

    February 10, 2014 at 14:23

    James, the script does explain what happened to Lewis, but only in the beginning. Lewis is actually his partner that was injured and was in the rest of the movie (Anne Lewis now becomes Jack Lewis – nice gender swap). As for the movie itself, I do think it is a decent movie that features a cyborg policeman, has great acting and great character development. Is it as good or as iconic as Robocop 1987? No, but I do feel it did enough to exist in its own right. I consider myself to be one of the biggest Robocop 1987 fans out there, currently owning the Robocop trilogy dvd boxset, The Robocop Criterion Edition dvd, the Robocop bluray, the live action tv-series, the Prime Directive tv movies as well as the animated series. I was also expecting the worst, but director Jose Padilha (of Elite Squad fame) has restored my faith after seen the movie. I do miss the humour and violence from the 1987 version as well as characters such as Clarence Bodiker and Dick Jones, but Robocop 2014 didn’t suffer because of it. I am also bothered by his right hand, though. Does he need it for fingerprint scanning? What is going on?

    Reply

    • The D

      February 10, 2014 at 14:35

      Padihla did explain the right hand idea a while back, as a method to make the Robocop idea easier on public relations. Imagine this: A robocop wants to shake your hand. Would you feel more at ease shaking a flesh and blood appendage, or a cold metal hand that could crush yours easily?

      Reply

      • James Francis

        February 10, 2014 at 14:54

        The film fails to bring that across, even though it can’t help but stick marketing cliches in the marketing guy’s mouth every time he opens it. So it had plenty of chances to make the point. But it doesn’t. Also, it doesn’t matter what is said outside the film. I don’t know what Charles Dickens said outside of Oliver Twist. The work at hand is the only thing to be judged.

        Reply

      • James Francis

        February 10, 2014 at 18:30

        Another problem with this explanation is that the scene with the guitarist kinda contradicts the whole notion. If they can make a hand that can play classic guitar, one would think public opinion in the film isn’t all that worried about being crushed by a handshake.

        Reply

    • James Francis

      February 10, 2014 at 14:51

      Okay, another comment that seems to assume I compared the film to the original. Did you guys actually read the review or just guess what it was about? Other than the final paragraph, which only make a broad stylistic comparison (and mentioned other films that do the same), I do not compare the two at all.

      Reply

  10. xdvd

    February 10, 2014 at 15:32

    True, you did review the movie on it’s own merits for the bulk of your review, but the fact that you did compare the entire movie (and not one specific area) to the original and Robocop 2 in the last paragraph, does make it seem that you are making comparisons. Comparing it to Robocop 2 is also a stretch as Robocop 2014 did not have a weak script, weak story and unsympathetic characters and really left a bad taste in people’s mouths (so much so that the Director Irwin Kirschner – who gave us SW Empire Strikes Back – never directed another film since then). Oh D, thanks for the info. It all makes sense now.

    Reply

    • James Francis

      February 10, 2014 at 15:59

      Look, you didn’t bother to read my review before making your first comment. Now you are trying to misconstrue the context I laid out before I made those brief and final comparisons. That is not cool. Either read something properly or at least have the decency to admit you could’t be bothered to.

      Reply

      • xdvd

        February 10, 2014 at 16:10

        I did read your review (twice actually). I could also say the same for you that you did not watch the movie properly since you didn’t even know that Lewis was in the movie the whole time.

        Reply

        • James Francis

          February 10, 2014 at 16:19

          Then you may have noticed that I mentioned Lewis in a comment, not the feature. And if you did read it properly before making your comment, you’d not have felt to need to laundry list all the Robocop stuff you own, as it would have been irrelevant. The review does not compare the two films, bar a generalisation in the final paragraph. You had something to say and were going to say it regardless of the article.

          Reply

          • xdvd

            February 10, 2014 at 16:38

            If you actually read my first comment then you will see that not once did I mention that you compared the 2 movies. I myself made the comparison because I am sure that is the question most people are asking. As for the Robocop laundry list, I mentioned that to illustrate that I am a huge Robocop fan and for someone like me to think that the reboot is good (if not exceptional) surprises even me. At least not as bad as what your review says, but you know we are allowed to have our own opinions and all that.

          • James Francis

            February 10, 2014 at 16:44

            Okay, true, you actually did not make that conclusion about my review until your second comment.

          • xdvd

            February 10, 2014 at 16:57

            Which was only a response to your initial reply.

          • James Francis

            February 10, 2014 at 17:00

            Yes, thank you for pointing that out, Captain Obvious.

          • Skyblue

            February 10, 2014 at 23:54

            LOL, hmmmmm, how them grapes tasting :-p

          • James Francis

            February 11, 2014 at 07:20

            Just about right for the vinegar 🙂

  11. Skyblue

    February 11, 2014 at 01:53

    Whatever Mr Francis, sounded like you hated this movie before it was released.That’s fine, each to their own.

    Hope Gareth Evans gets drafted as an “advisor” for the sequel.

    Reply

    • James Francis

      February 11, 2014 at 07:31

      Not at all. I’ll admit I went in not expecting much, but I long ago took a position that I don’t have a problem with remakes. If they exceed the original, great. If they do not, oh well. Yet this was not a good movie and could have been much better. My girlfriend actually fell asleep and the group of noisy 20-somethings in front of me all also soon soured on it. It’s the kind of film where you start checking your watch.

      If you wanted a straight comparison to the original, it might have reviewed slightly better. I liked all the easter eggs – from the quotes to Murphy’s son playing with a coin. I liked how Sam Jackson’s character is a tip of the hat to the Media Breaks of the original. I liked that the prime directives are gone and a new system is in use. I liked that they brought Lewis back, as xdvd indicated. I liked that the movie went for a different story and approach. I liked Robo’s hud, his slip-down visor, that they added a tazer to his arsenal, that he has a bike, the other robots and more. The combat scenes were okay, though a lot of them reminded me of Gamer.

      You may think I had a bone to pick – this is as far as I’ll go to convince you otherwise. But at the end Robocop is a poorly executed movie. That’s that.

      Reply

      • Skyblue

        February 11, 2014 at 09:24

        I did think the pacing of the film was a bit off but otherwise enjoyed watching it with my kids (as stated above somewhere). I of course never watched it for critique purposes though so maybe that’s why I enjoyed it. Was a far superior remake to some of the other dreg out there atm.

        Reply

        • James Francis

          February 11, 2014 at 11:39

          Yeah, it wasn’t a bad remake. But considering how bad many remakes are, that doesn’t say a lot. And it is entertaining, so I’ll agree that I’m casting a rather critical eye on it.

          But I do think that matters – this movie could have been a lot better. Instead it got caught by the usual mediocrity that emerges when a big budget is given to a less-experienced director. It’s as if nobody paused and considered the world they were creating and what they were trying to say. I’ll contrast it with one of last year’s big bombs: After Earth. It is a deeply flawed movie, but at least you get the sense that a lot of thought and care went into creating it. Robocop feels like they expected it to ride on the reputation of the franchise, yet at the same time they worked hard to try and stand apart from it. It’s exactly what derailed stuff like the Friday the 13th remake.

          Think of it this way – Django Unchained was in many ways a remake, but one that had no fear about what it was doing, because it knew what it wanted. Had Robocop been made with that spirit in mind, it would have been fantastic.

          Reply

  12. Justin Hess

    February 11, 2014 at 17:43

    Very good review

    Reply

  13. Pravesh Valab

    February 13, 2014 at 18:07

    I thought there were alot of good ideas that were just not implemented well. It wasn’t great by any means but there are a few scenes like the Samuel L Jackson stuff that will stick in my head for a while

    Reply

    • James Francis

      February 17, 2014 at 15:18

      I enjoyed his scenes too, though I felt the script was a bit lazy, using him to push one of the main themes instead of playing the more glib role of the media in the original film. But I agree – there were a lot of good ideas. This past weekend someone described it to me as having great ingredients, but a lousy recipe.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Check Also

Twelve Minutes Review – Stuck in a Mystery Time Loop

We’ve all experienced deja vu a few times in our lives, but what happens when you ha…