User reviews

Which is not to say it was necessary.

Indeed, of all movies made in the 80s, Robocop would have been considered as a very unlikely candidate to be remade at all. The original was a fantastic, gorefest, schlock-filled action hit and that toxic melt sequence lives long in the memory. To reboot it was nothing more than a money-making exercise, but if we overlook the morality of the affair, is the movie any good? Well, it isn't bad, put it that way. Like the original it's set in a dystopian future, and like the original it features Alex Murphy's remains brought back to life in a robot, but it changes a great deal about the story, not least Lewis' gender (Battlefield 4 players will recognise Irish's voice returning as Murphy's partner).

The plot focuses on the Dreyfuss bill which bans the use of robots for law enforcement in the US, because it's felt the absence of emotion makes them unsuitable, despite the success of their deployment everywhere else in the world. Samuel L Jackson's wildly OTT Novak obsesses over that on his night-time soapbox show the Novak Element, and fully supports Omnicorps' Sellers (Keaton) bid to get their product on the streets of the US, Detroit especially.

Murphy's Robocop (built by Oldman's Dr Norton) is a way around that, and thereafter it's a case of 'where it all went wrong'. That very cliché is used constantly but this isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Fans of the original movie should enjoy this, even if it feels slightly pointless. The visual effects are pretty extraordinary in truth, and the action sequences thoroughly enjoyable.

The first review on the page does make a good point - there is no one obvious outright bad guy - unlike the original's brilliant Kurtwood Smith, Murphy isn't up against a particular enemy. However the side issue here is that this kind of misses the point - the change in this movie is that a combination of Omnicorp, his killer, and one or two other characters leads Murphy to a pursuit of avengement. There doesn't need to be a big bad guy - just like video games don't always need a boss fight, movies don't always need a nemesis.

For me the way it's structured doesn't detract.

Fundamentally it's a different movie to the original, a homage which is frankly well made but goes in its own direction.

Whether you like that or not is up to you, but I have personally seen far worse movies.

By 7, it really means a 7.5/10. Not sure what's with the negative reviews, but I enjoyed the movie very much. It's well-executed and the direction was clear and crisp. There's no distinct feel-good actions scenes because the pacing is kept constant throughout and I don't see why there's an issue with the pacing being that way. It's hardly flat, it's just a very honest, straight- flushed story-telling, and it fits the themes that are underscored by the movie. Alex Murphy is a reluctant hero and he's ultimately a father and a husband whose personal agenda serves as his existential core. I like how these themes are teased out and zoomed in upon throughout the movie. Also, there are some absolutely delicious production details and CGIs that are just absolutely feasts to the eye. Not to mention the superb cast and the wonderful performances. I think this is a honest and loyal reboot that will appeal to fans of Robocop who fell in love with the story precisely for the moralistic themes it explores.

I am always wary of remakes of classic films but at the same time try and keep a clear mind in that just one day they might get it right.

I question if this is actually remake of Robocop or a new film with Robocop as our lead. Are there comparisons, well there is Murphy (Robocop) , Lewis (now male) and the bad guy. The role of the owner of the business is much different to that of the original.

The storyline is excellent and the transformation of Murphy to Robocop is explored much more deeply than in the original, however (and this is not a spoiler) you can guess which bit will be included in the conclusion. The emotional transformations are excellent as Robocop evolves . The scenes where the action kick in have kept the violence levels down compared to the original , which still has one of the best scenes ever with our melting man, but I still think this film has been lucky to achieve a 12a .

A good watch , is it better than the original said my 12 year old ? Genuinely I don't know , the original is great as it set the benchmark, this new version has more modern special effects and the telling of the story is better.

Whatever watch this.

Up front I'll confess. I'm one of those curmudgeony dinosaurs who takes it as a personal affront to my long gone adolescence whenever anyone dares to remake an 80s flick. I mean, heck, movies aside, NOTHING can compare to how stylin' I was in my parachute pants & moussed up hair as I strutted in that movie theater with my gallon of Fresca, pop rocks & Fruit Stripe gum back in '87 to watch the cinematic event of the decade, Robocop. That alone, plus the fact that they don't make gum with real sugar anymore (communists!), makes me want to thumbs-down every remake of today.

But you know what? This movie sorta rocks. I'll tell you why.

First of all, the story is COMPLETELY different, so it can't even be considered a remake. I'm a firm believer that, much like Jimi Hendrix did when he covered "Hey Joe", if you're going to revisit someone else's work then do it completely differently. That's what the director did here. Only the basic premise remains: a lone, half-computerized "Everyman" decides to take on a criminal/corporate colossus while simultaneously struggling with his lost humanity.

First off, Robocop 2014 is a much broader, more family-friendly film. Gone is the extreme, in-your-face violence and criminal depravity that worked so well in the original which was intended to disturb viewers on an emotional level (Veerhoven is king of cinematic satire). Whereas the old Robocop was known to pump lead into perpetrators' private parts, in this version Robocop uses a taser gun to take down most threats. Granted, it's a taser gun that packs enough juice to take down the jolly green giant, but the point is we don't see quite as much blood & guts.

Instead of disturbing violence and hard-hitting satire, we get some very interesting political and philosophical spins. The idea of a robot police force is cleverly tied in with military drones and smart-warfare technology that's already in use today. The question being posed is: when we turn this same technology on ourselves (America) to police our own people, suddenly it seems bone-chillingly sick.

Another new & interesting spin is the idea that Robocop is the personification of the existentialist debate. Do we have free will? Or is there some governing force that has written out our lives and "choices" already, and we are merely as Shakespeare said, a bunch of actors playing out roles? Robocop 2014 touches on this with the idea that Robo is actually hard-coded to behave as a machine with only the illusion that he has conscious will. THAT was a great philosophical angle which I actually wish the movie had spent another hour exploring. But I guess that would've taxed a lot of viewers' attention spans, so it was kept under the surface. Still it's something to ponder heavily as the movie unfolds.

Special effects, action, costumes & gizmos are eye poppingly great. And I don't mean over-the-top cartoonish, either. They're great because the film does a nice job of keeping things real enough to make you think this scenario could actually happen. In the "Behind the scenes" bonus, a point is brought up that the director nixed a bunch of really cool scifi ideas (such as a motorcycle that transforms into a shell around Robo) because he didn't want the viewer to get lost in too much fantasy. The result is more of a straightforward crime drama or even political thriller than it is scifi.

The acting. OK, for real, how can anyone fail with Michael Keaton (the first movie Batman) and Gary Oldman (Dracula) and, in a peripheral but awesomely hilarious parody role Samuel L Jackson (Pulp Fiction!) as the rabid fascist foul-mouthed host of a cable "news" show called The Novak Element. Oh gawd, fans of Veerhoven's satirical skewerings will LOVE this character. Relative newcomer Joel Kinnaman (Robo) does a great job, and old Robocop fans might notice some deliberate homages he makes to the original Peter Weller performance such as the way he always turns with his head first, then shoulders, then feet.

I also must add a quick note about the music used in this film. There are several great homages to us aging fans with selections such as The Clash "I Fought the Law" and a great shoot-em-up scene that uses "Hocus Pocus" by Focus. And I think that approach sums up what this film is all about. It's not attempting to trample on our memories of the original Robocop, but rather, it acknowledges old fans while presenting something completely different and, in my opinion, worthwhile. Now if someone would only acknowledge my cool parachute pants I be flying high.

Robocop tells the story of an injured man then declared that would be need to go through a series of surgeries to recover from his critical condition. RoboCop proves itself sharper than many studio reboot, remake, or sequel in recent memory. Setting in 2028 and society has become so advanced, even though mechanized peacekeepers have proved effective in the Middle East. Robotics manufacturer Omnicorp stands to make billions in the homeland security market if CEO Raymond Sellers (an oily Michael Keaton) can sell the government and the American people on the idea of a non-human police force. Captivating throughout, the film definitely brings a sense of urgency and imagination throughout. Although the idea is great, the film could have been better than its final product.

While it is fair to compare it to the 1987 original, each of them is able to stand on their own because they have different angles and way of approaching the core concepts. The story has stayed basically the same. Alex Murphy is a cop who is nearly killed, but is brought back as a human/cyborg hybrid. Whereas the original dealt with issues of corporate corruption in an over-the-top satirical way, this "remix" (as I'll call it) raises more philosophical and ethical questions than it does at trying to shock the viewer with graphic violence. Granted, there is violence, but it's mostly clean and tactical. Director Jose Padilha, famous in his native Brazil for ELITE SQUAD and its sequel, has dealt with issues like urban warfare before and he brings that sensibility to this film as well. This particular approach lends a sort-of authenticity and realism to what was presented in a cartoonish (but still sophisticated) fashion in the original. Each of them have their strengths, and the advantage that this one has over the previous installments is this heightened reality which has become the fashion with today's action pictures, post-DARK KNIGHT. There are also vastly improved special effects. Still, the narrative has issues and these include a protracted third act which over-complicates things by trying to use misdirection as to who the real villains are. In the original, there is no question as to who the "bad guys" are intended to be. And while having things in black and white isn't necessarily a good thing, the way in which they reveal things through twists isn't handled as good as it could have been. Still, I got almost as much as enjoyment out of this new version as I did the old one, just for different reasons. Another area that definitely improved was the caliber of acting involved. Joel Kinnaman is serviceable as the title character, but it's Gary Oldman and Michael Keaton who stand out from the rest, as a scientist and the CEO of Omnicorp, respectively. Overall, I think this was a decent movie, and somewhat unfairly maligned by people who desperately cling to the past. Even if you hold the Verhoeven original close to your heart, it wouldn't hurt to give this a shot. And just as a side, there are nods to the original peppered throughout.

It's the year 2028 in futuristic Detroit. Advanced Robot technology is spearheaded by a massive corporation: OmniCorp. Their drones are utilized heavily overseas by law enforcement, but the market is becoming saturated. In order to grow the company and please shareholders, the only option remaining is to utilize their robots at home. But their efforts are met with heavy resistance, as politicians and the American people struggle to accept the idea of robots enforcing the law without any human reasoning. An OmniCorp scientist (Gary Oldman) is left at a standstill; how do you put a man inside a machine? When police officer Alex Murphy (Joel Kinnamon) suffers a horrific accident, it provides OmniCorp with an unprecedented opportunity.

What am I missing here? This was panned by the critics, yet to my surprise I enjoyed it. I haven't seen the original RoboCop in some time, so I went in without any biases or expectations; I viewed this as it's own film and didn't compare it to the original. I thought it had a great balance of action, great special effects, meaningful drama and believable characters that made it resonate. Joel Kinnamon (Alex Murphy), Gary Oldman (Dr. Denneth Norton), Michael Keaton (Raymond Sellars) and Abbie Cornish (Clara Murphy) all put in some very good performances; the cast was very strong and they made the film better than it probably should have been.

The film takes some time to add some depth to Alex Murphy; his conflict between duty and his family was palpable and effective. The re-imagined soundtrack was very impressive and there were some interesting social commentary on the lengths we're willing to go for security (as did the original film). It's not perfect however. Samuel Jackson's pro-gun Pat Novak was just way over the top and it did have a few plot holes (the script could've also been a bit better). Some things also didn't quite make any sense; even in this futuristic world, the parts of Alex Murphy's body that they were able to be salvaged and reused seemed a bit implausible (to say the least). Having said that, watch it with reasonable expectations and I think you'll enjoy this quite a bit. I thought this was a pretty good reboot and worth watching. I definitely saw enough to be interested in the new franchise going forward.

Enjoyed my review? Keep in touch!

Blog: www.themoviesnob.ca

Facebook: www.facebook.com/TheCanadianMovieSnob

Twitter: @the_movie_snob

With Hollywood at a loss to make original movies, it was inevitable that the Robocop franchise would eventually get the reboot. In 1987, the original Robocop became an instant box office hit with its mixture of witty satire and over the top violence as well as top notch acting by Peter Weller, Kurtwood Smith and Ronny Cox; the deciding factor in what made that movie so fresh at the time was the addition of Dutch director Paul Verhoeven who seemed to understand what the audience at the time needed: a high tech cyborg (artfully designed by special effects whiz Rob Bottin and its robotic suit would become a cinema icon) who fought crime in a near future world overwhelmed by greed, hypocrisy, corruption and excessive, almost cartoonish violence.

In this reboot, the studios were able to acquire the services of Brazilian director Jose Padiha (who directed Elite Squad and its sequel, two intense police thrillers set in his native Brazil) but unfortunately they forgot to give him a good script to work with (there were rumors during production that Padiha had a lot of ideas that were nixed by studio bosses. Figures.). The other reason why the original movie also worked was because its R rating worked in its favor: the enormous amount of bloodletting added to its satirical view of the future as well as that of American culture which really spoke to the audience. With this reboot aimed at more family friendly crowds, the PG-rated violence is filmed using rapid jump cuts which makes it totally confusing, its like watching a video game on fast forward so that by the time your mind registers what's going on the scene is finished.

The movie itself also suffers from pacing problems- just when the narrative is about to steamroll forward, the scenes abruptly change so that any emotional momentum is lost because there just isn't much characterization of the main parts; everything that should have an emotional impact is glossed over by a jump to a new scene with way too much focus on explanations of what the characters are doing so that the audience fails to gain sympathy for anybody.

I can't really judge Joel Kinnaman's acting in the title role since there really isn't much for him to do other than walk around in the Robocop suit and utter a few words every now and then- he seems to spend too much time bug eyed and in shock more than anything else. The supporting cast also seems wasted, with Michael Keaton and Jackie Earle Haley's screen time largely limited to trying to explain whats going on rather than actually doing anything. Even Michael K Williams seems lost as Robocop's sidekick. Patrick Garrow as the heavy is pretty much a cardboard villain compared to the 1987 version with the menacing Kurtwood Smith and his gang of killer psychos. Gary Oldman's performance is pretty much average since he's also got nothing much to do.

Alas, the biggest disappointment is the movie's absence of any sort of humor: the 1987 film had boatloads of wacky commercials that interrupted the narrative yet provided a great view on how that future world was set up as well as crazy, sadistic villains and a pun on the name of the chief baddie (Dick Jones- best name ever). Instead, we get snippets of a news media show run by Samuel L Jackson whose presence in this movie is also wasted since he spends more time recapping what we already saw and his jokes fall flat.

The only good scene happens right at the beginning with a battle between Iranian insurgents and the robot army but soon after the movie quickly loses momentum and never regains it. Better to skip this one and wait for the rental, or better yet, watch the 1987 version- its way better.

I really don't understand all the hate this movie gets. Yeah, I get it, it's a reboot of a perfectly good 80s movie that nobody really wanted, but it's a really good one! I expected a mindless Micheal Bayian action movie and what I got was a really smart, interesting and entertaining look at trans-humanism, the freedom of choice, politics and recklessness in corporate leaders.

This movie really dives into the question of how a person could live his day to day live with almost all of his body amputated and stuck inside of a machine. So when people complain about the uncomfortable scenes between Murphy and his wife, I can only imagine they mean what happened after his transformation, and that felt exactly the way it was supposed to!

So yes, the original is way more graphic and still holds up to this day as a gruesome action flick, but this one is smart and interesting and really is a good movie in it's own right.

And by no means is it as bad as people say it is!

Dear fellow movie buffs and Robocop fans! Let's make something clear at the beginning: I'm a huge RoboCop fan, absolutely LOVE the original movie and I advice anybody who feel otherwise stop reading this review further because it is gonna be about something you do not care about: the new RoboCop movie! I watched the RoboCop remake Saturday evening with my other half and as usual I came here to IMDb to check on the reviews and what other people thought of it. I do not write a lot of reviews but this time I absolutely felt the need to write one, as I was shocked to see how people bashing this movie into the ground. Of course it is the usual drill: comparing it to the original, what the new one missed out, the new robo design... etc. I just do not understand most of these people. When I heard that there is gonna be a RoboCop remake I was very happy to hear the news. And it is NOT because I dislike the original! It is because there were no RoboCop movies made for over than 2 decades and I love the material. I wanted the story to continue or something. And we finally got to what I wanted to say! This RoboCop movie is by NO mean bad! When I went to the cinema both me and my girlfriend - who also a fan of the original - were ready to be disappointed and we absolutely loved the movie. This is a different "new age" story of the now famous character. When I saw some of the reviews I just cannot believe that those people watched the same movie! Either that or I have low standards... which I don't think so.

People I'm not saying that this remake was not created because the studios wanted to make some quick bucks! Most probably it was! What I'm saying is that they did care about the material, and they took the time to create a new and exciting vision. I go even that far that the message of the movie is different slightly from the original, and that is absolutely fine! The acting is amazing, it was great to see Michael Keaton on the big screen again, he is a very underrated and extremely talented actor in my opinion. Gary Oldman, Samuel L. Jackson, and I gotta say Joel Kinnaman was an awesome and very emotional Alex Murphy! The new RoboCop designs were something scared me off a bit at first too when I saw the first on set shots, but do they look awesome in the movie! The action was great and the special efx of course are something have to work in a movie this caliber so no surprises there: fantastic job! There is one thing though other reviewers also mentioned is a little bit dissatisfying: there is no real enemy. But then again, this is a different story. This one is more about a guy who's being thrown around in this crazy futuristic world where he tries everything to maintain his humanity, even though they constantly shut him down, or overload his brain with information. He is us! And finally let me say that much: yes the original is a classic, and it is indeed different, but this new one is not only enjoyable but has the promise of starting the franchise over again with a first class cast, emotional story, and great effects so sit back and enjoy the ride! This is by no means resembles the hollow empty, unoriginal, and completely pointless Totall Recall remake! So just give it a brake and let's hope that there is gonna be a second part!

I'm a fan of the original 'RoboCop' movie – I find it to be fun, satirical, enjoyably violent and overall very good. Naturally, I wasn't very thrilled when I heard it was getting a remake. I was even less thrilled when I heard the remake will be rated PG-13. I mean – how can you make a 'RoboCop' movie without excessive violence and blood squibs? Now that I have seen the movie, I can freely say that the PG-13 rating is the least of this movie's problems. Initially, I didn't want to compare the remake to the original, I wanted to view it and review it as a stand-alone movie. Now that I have seen it, I think I'll have to compare the two movies after all, since the remake possesses none of the qualities that made the original such a classic, and by simple comparison I can easily explain why the remake is an utterly flawed and ridiculous movie. The movie opens with a political show, called the Novak Element, led by the host Pat Novak (Samuel L. Jackson), during which we see a news footage of OmniCorp droids (including the famous ED-209 and the freshly introduced humanoid drones called ED-208) patrolling and inspecting the streets of some Islamic state. Novak compliments the droids and then starts attacking The Dreyfuss Act – a law that forbids the deployment of such drones in the USA. We are then introduced to Raymond Sellars (Michael Keaton), the CEO of OmniCorp, who is trying to find ways of tricking The Dreyfuss Act and start deploying his products in the USA. He gets the idea of incorporating both man and machine into an ultimate law enforcement product. We are then introduced to our protagonist – Alex Murphy (Joel Kinnaman) – who is soon heavily injured in an explosion and is used as a guinea pig in this newest OmniCorp program. Like I said before: the 'RoboCop' remake lacks everything that was good in the original movie. First of all, there's no worthy satire in the movie. Society is sometimes mocked through the character of Pat Novak, but the satire isn't very subtle nor intelligent – actually, I'd say it is very primitive and expeditionary. Second of all, the nature of Robocop's character is very different from the original movie; he's not a robot, but more a man in a robotic suit, and his family plays a fairly big role in the movie. And I would be perfectly fine with these changes if the main actor, Joel Kinnaman, didn't have the charisma of a paper bag and could, as a matter of fact, act (!), and if Abbie Cornish (who plays the role of Alex Murphy's wife – Clara Murphy) wasn't so irritatingly bland. The revelation of the RoboCop suit and the suit itself were also poorly done. In one scene, Michael Keaton's character criticizes the suit design that appeared in the original movie by saying something along these lines: the original suit wasn't tactical enough. Well, at least the original suit didn't look like a black dildo! The villains in the movie didn't get a much better treatment, either. Among the several villains that appeared in the movie, none was memorable or even remotely interesting. But, to be fair, not everything sucks about the 'RoboCop' remake. Some of the acting was OK (mostly by experienced actors like Jackson, Keaton and Oldman) and the special effects did look really good. But what's the use of awesome special effects when the majority of the movie's boring and tedious? Add to all the aforementioned flaws the PG-13 rating, which destroyed the potential of some scenes, and you'll get one weak and forgettable movie. In the original, one of the most memorable lines goes 'I'd buy that for a dollar'. In addition to butchering everything else, the remake also butchered this line. In one scene, Jackie Earle Haley's character Mattox bashes the concept of Robocop saying he 'wouldn't buy that for a dollar'. As for myself, if I knew upon purchasing my ticket what horrors were awaiting, I wouldn't have bought it for a dollar. Rating: 4/10

In 2010, acclaimed director Darren Aronofsky (THE WRESTLER, BLACK SWAN) was originally attached to direct the ROBOCOP reboot. Frankly, I thought he was the right choice to reboot the once-popular franchise back in the late '80s. Unfortunately, he quits the project and Brazilian director Jose Padilha (ELITE SQUAD, ELITE SQUAD: THE ENEMY WITHIN) was brought in as his replacement. WHAT IS IT ALL ABOUT? When police detective Alex Murphy (Joel Kinnaman) is critically injured during a car explosion in front of his home, CEO of OmniCorp Raymond Sellars (Michael Keaton) sees him as a golden opportunity to make him feel alive again by turning him into "Robocop" -- a cyborg police officer which is touted as the future of law enforcement in America. However, OmniCorp doesn't realize that Murphy still has a personal vengeance in his mind to pursue the criminals who nearly caused him dead. THE GOOD STUFF Like the first two ELITE SQUAD movies, director Jose Padilha delivers the same raw intensity that gives ROBOCOP a quasi-documentary feel to the action sequences. Even though Padilha utilizes shaky camera-work, at least he doesn't make the scene so wobbly until the viewers unable to see what's really going on. The special effects are spectacular, while the costume design for the all-new Robocop in a black tactical body actually looks quite nifty. Swedish-American actor Joel Kinnaman (best known in the US for TV's The Killing) delivers an emotionally engaging performance as Alex Murphy and Robocop, while Michael Keaton steals most of the spotlight as the slimy CEO of OmniCorp Raymond Sellars and Gary Oldman gives a perfectly restrained performance as the sympathetic Dr. Dennett Norton. Other minor roles -- including Abbie Cornish as Murphy's wife, Clara; Jackie Earle Haley as the military tactician Mattox; and Samuel L. Jackson as the media host Pat Novak -- are all equally impressive. MOST MEMORABLE MOMENT(S) The brief but intense battle between Robocop and a small army of ED-209 during the climactic finale. THE BAD STUFF The biggest weakness in this ROBOCOP reboot is Joshua Zetumer's captivating but bloated screenplay. First of all, the story drags too much with Murphy's personal family matter with his estranged wife Clara (Abbie Cornish) and son David (John Paul Ruttan). Then there's the underwritten plot involving Murphy's personal vengeance against Antoine Vallon (Patrick Garrow), who is responsible for the car explosion. Even the so-called social commentary involving the "robo-phobic" issue quoted by Samuel L. Jackson's Pat Novak doesn't really say much that worth a debate. FINAL WORDS While the new ROBOCOP is far from a genre classic by any means, at least Jose Padilha's version isn't as bad as most people might have expected. Just put your mindset of the Paul Verhoeven's original 1987 version aside, and treat this as an entirely new movie altogether.

I'm gonna keep this brief. Normally I do NOT bother writing a review when there are over 500 frigg'n reviews already, BUT... I honestly think that this film just has to be looked at as a stand alone film, based upon it's own merits. And NOT compared to the Classic film it is patterned after.

First and foremost, the visuals and effects were excellent. And, I hafta admit that the story line's variance from the original's was done pretty well. When you get into the 'Drama' of the family and his 'Feelings', etc. I would think that it would be EXTREMELY easy to overdo it and COMPLETELY screw it up. BUT... the director did not do that. I REALLY liked where in the few 'Family' scenes, especially after his restructuring, the director kept it BRIEF and simple, NOT going on and on with all this syrupy emotion and crap that a lesser director could EASILY have fallen into doing. I was impressed that there really were NO PAINFULLY phony and drawn out scenes between Robo and his wife or son. What was done was actually done quite well in a restrained and believable way. So, THAT was nice!

I think the way the story was structured was fine and it was developed in a competent way. I liked the rivalry between Robo and the Techie guy who kept giving him a hard time. Again, something that could have been WAY overblown and ruined, but I feel that it was handled well.

About the ONLY thing about the film that I felt detracted from it at all, and this is probably just a personal preference on my part, but afterward I was thinking, 'What was it that is bothering me...? What is it that didn't seem quite right?' Well, I THINK what it was, is that the film, to me anyway, was just a little TOO polished. Everything was just a little TOO smooth and slick. I KNOW that every Sci Fi film can't look like 'BLADE RUNNER' or 'ALIEN' or anything, but to me, his suit particularly and some other things just looked too slick to me. I think perhaps just leaning a TAD more toward a gritty Future Industrial look would have been better. Maybe that is just me...

Anyway, the movie is quite good, very entertaining, has NICE eye candy, and appears to be written and directed very well. I wasn't THAT wild about the leading guy as Robo, but he sufficed (He kept reminding me of a young Keith Carradine, which was a bit distracting...) But, overall, I felt that all the elements were in place to present a superiour, fun Science Fiction film!

The scourge of the internet is that hatred travels faster than anything and that kind of puts you off. I watched Robocop after having read scathing reviews and watched it without any expectations and you know what, I liked it.

The majority of people have been hating on this movie even before its release. Trashing the cast, the suit, comparing it with the original series . Its a remake, but its a new movie. I love watching movies and I appreciate the effort, scale and technology that goes into making them. I appreciate Jose Padilha for making that effort.

Overall the movie is a good watch, what it lacks is layers and development of other characters. Robocop 2014 is all about Alex Murphy. Joel Kinnaman looks fantastic in the suit and looks like he was meant for it. I would have liked a more deeper insight into his character both before and after he turned into Robocop and that's the part where I guess the director lost the opportunity to add more value to Alex Murphy. None of the other characters had enough screen time to be developed. The CGI and tech shown are great and the bike is a welcome addition.

Watch the movie for what it is. Give it a chance. There is a lot of work ahead to develop a sequel that covers its characters more deeply. Joel Kinnaman's is worthy of reprising this role and for him and him alone along with the promise of coming sequels, this movie is worth a watch.

Taking Robocop as a work of science fiction means that it should be interpreted not only as a warning sign of things to come, but as an an allegory of what is happening right now. In this reading, the figure of Alex Murphy as an individual collects together our fears of what we've become collectively: dependent of and controlled by the intricacies of the systems we've created. To this end, the setting up of the movie works well and picks up themes not present in the original. It is chilling to see Murphy in his condition, and think "that's us".

However, from here on the directions taken are less than satisfactory. Robocop does not seem to say anything really new or insightful about this human condition. The message is that we can go far, but should not go "too far": a science-fiction cliché. Most of the opportunities for true commentary are missed. The irreverent humour of the original is missing, replaced with a tired critique of USA as the world police something-something. Surely an acceptable target by now. Any real religious, philosophical and societal issues that might emerge are instead tactfully ignored or merely hinted at.

I did find Robocop to be an enjoyable ride on the whole, but it could have been more. It is hardly the turkey some reviewers have made it seem, though.

I have only seen the original Robocop twice, maybe three times, with that said I was never a huge fan and never saw the sequels. I enjoyed the original for what it was but never thought it elevated past another good action movie. The new remake is more of a reboot than anything. At heart it is paying homage to the original, and does not shy away from certain aspects of the original, but at the end of the day it is making a different statement. It is not trying to imitate or do a shot for shot remake, and for me this works to make one solid and fun movie.

The acting in this movie is one of the highlights. There are no Oscar winning performances, but in no way is that a criticism. This is not a movie made for the Oscars. The key and best performance is by, you guessed it, Gary Oldman. He has a great character here that changes and is dynamic throughout the movie, and feels as if he grows with Alex. He fires up when it is appropriate and has small nuance when called for, just Oldman being great at his craft. Michael Keaton here plays the capitalistic and, "will do anything to make all the money" type president of OmniCorp. He does great in this role. I loved watching him on screen and he carries himself very well. The main thing I liked is that he is the "villain" of the film but never felt like a campy or out of place evil villain. Joel Kinnaman nails it as Alex Murphy/Robocop. He has the voice, look, and presence down to a science. He gets extra points for being able to handle the direction the movie chooses to take his character. He also has the benefit of Abbie Cornish as his wife, who was good, but I wanted to see more interaction between her and her husband given the tone of the film. I only wish I had been able to see just a little more of her.

The whole direction and tone of the movie is a bit different than the original. There is a large focus on the mental and emotional toil of a man's soul and consciousness being joined into a machine. I thoroughly enjoyed exploring this part of the world. Alex is tortured fighting to maintain his humanity and the robotics are exactly that. I will stop there because this is some of the best stuff in the movie and where it shines bright as being its own entity. The last thing is the violence. The original had the reputation of being needlessly violent. I won't go so far as to say that, but I will say certain scenes seemed over the top. Here the violence exists, but due to the world that is established in the movie the main brawls are between Robocop and machines, and his encounters with humans are justifiably one sided. With modern special effects Robocop is more super human than ever so humans are not much of a challenge; hence the battle being between other robots and the robot part of himself. So it is less a violent action movie and more a political drama of sorts with lots of action.

All in all I enjoyed the hell out of Robocop and much more than the original. The only thing that I was not 100% on board with was the politics of the movie. The political aspects of the movie fit and work well in the world established and Samuel L Jackson is in his element as a political talk show host; however a part of me could not help but feel this was all a bit secondary. I could have done entirely without his character and had a greater focus on Alex and Clara. I will definitely see this movie again and recommend it to others, however if you are a hardcore fan of the original this may not be what you were hoping for. Go to see a side of Robocop you have never seen before, some amazing performances, and one specific astounding fight scene. This is a new, sharper, and more personal Robocop and, "I'd buy that for a dollar!"

For more see, http://chrisancarrow.wordpress.com/

Yes, they've gone and remade another classic. Whether you loved or hated the original Robocop movie in the eighties (and, let's face it... most of us loved it!), you'll find it difficult to deny that it was popular. And one of its major traits was how deliciously over-the-top violent it was. It contained numerous scenes of graphic violence and interlinked them with (no so subtle) social commentary, making it a sheer delight to watch (assuming your cup of tea was watching an indestructible cyborg brutally wiping out scores of scum-bags).

Now, twenty-five years later, it gets rebooted (not including the pretty poor showings which made up Robocop's sequels and TV spin-off show). And, the first thing you need to know, is that it's no longer an 'adult' movie. Due to the film-makers wanting to claw back as much of its budget as they could, they've gone and made it a PG-13/12 certificate. So, what we're left with is the cyborg-action equivalent of World War Z (a mainstream big budget zombie film with no violence or gore).

This is the major 'flaw' in the film (which most people seem to dwell on). It's fair to say that this reboot hasn't performed as well as the producers would have liked it to (I'll bet they were hoping this would be the springboard to launch a lucrative franchise off of). However, if you get over the die-hard fans and their shouts of disapproval because no one gets melted in a vat of toxic waste, you may actually enjoy it.

Yes, the action is greatly reduced, but what's there is still pretty cool. Plus the cast is excellent and what it lacks in fight scenes it makes up for in commentary on today's modern way of life and how much computers (and in this case robots) intrude and may well intrude with our day to day existence.

If you ask me which Robocop is better (1987 vs 2014) I would say the original, but simply because it was just that – the original. Plus I have never ending nostalgia for one of my favourite childhood movies. However, if you can put any bias you have to the back of your mind and look at this one as a completely fresh tale which simply borrows major plot points and situations from its source material, then you may just find an enjoyable movie in there somewhere.

Thank you for your cooperation.

http://thewrongtreemoviereviews.blogspot.co.uk/

Is the reviewer writing the review the IMDb member is reading -- or is the member reading the review he was looking for, regardless of the text actually used? I ask because clearly that sort of thinking, that sort of dialog, was near and dear to the writer of this oddball film, yet, paradoxically, it is this very strangeness that gives the film historical worth, and the chance (however slim) that it may be remembered fondly by viewers of the the far future.

We will skip the metaphysical question as to why a remake was done of a perfectly serviceable and timeless classic? What the original may have have lacked in CGI, it made up for in heart, and in its almost unique satirical POV on modern corporation communications (which led to a series spin off on Canadian TV, BTW) But Hollywood likes reimagining stuff. Even Vincent Price as THE FLY was reborn as the forever self-aware Jeff Goldbloom, and we sense this was what was intended here too.

Reviewers notes: 1. Strange casting. A-List supporting cast (including the under-used Jackie Earle Haley) yet the lead himself seems uncomfortable in the role.

2. The references to Wizard of Oz are doubly ironic since the movie itself suffers as much of an identity crisis as the main character. Since this is clearly no longer an action film with embedded satire (the "origins" go for a full hour!) then what is it? Sci-fi? Horror? Fantasy? The viewer is left to decide.

Bottom line: not entertainment as we know it. More of a film school essay topic, along the lines of what was intended ... and why was this greenlighted?

This is a disgrace to the original, at the time it was a groundbreaking and very shocking film, with great actors very original and well done ideas and such an original style to it, well this crap is exactly the opposite, terrible story line, very slow to start I would go as far as saying boring, and for the actors in it got to give it to the director the whole film is just all terrible acting, the overall very bad crime feel in Detroit doesn't come across, where are the crazy adverts, where is the infamous bad guy, and the setup to murphys story? All missing, why mess with the story line from the original which was excellent anyway, this is nothing short of an epic fail, it just manages to scrap 1 star rating as robos HUD view is quite cool but that is literally the only good thing I have to say, I can't remember the last time I was so disappointed with a film, please director don't do any more films, a complete waste of what could of been a brilliant opportunity