Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Multiple sources chattering about this.

Seems everyone’s favourite Cyborg is to return to the big screen, and Neil Blomkamp is to direct.

Currently confusion as to whether this is a direct sequel or soft reboot - but seems unrelated to the 2014 attempt (a flawed film, but still better than its reputation for my money)

I for one am excite. I think Blomkamp’s style would suit RoboCop down to the ground. Gritty, but with a satirical edge.

Considering the last remake and Neil Blomkamp has made one good movie, I have little faith. Oh well, I can always watch the original anytime I want.

Seems it’s the original writers behind the script. Possibly dusting off and polishing off their original sequel?

Eh the last remake kind of missed the whole point of Robocop I felt. I recall watching and just thinking that it was very off, I think partly because the writers are approaching the story itself with so little mystery to it themselves that they don't build any of the mystery or suspense into the story.

There was no "who is this" and instead we knew who Robocop was; there was none of him finding himself or having to deal with repressed memories. Instead they kind of tried that with a whole "Lets just mind-control him" approach that I feel didn't do the story or concept justice.



Also I feel that they missed in capturing the original feel of the films; the gritty war-torn police world where its one cop against the world; one division standing as the last bastion of law and order in a world gone mad with poverty, Almost a 3rd world USA approach to the districts that created a fantastic divide between the Law and Order enforced by the power players and companies; and the Justice and Rights of the people (something totally missing from the reboot).



Honestly a lot of the remakes and reboots and late sequels just miss the original mark. It's kind of sad that Mad Max is about the only one that actually managed to recapture and be made in modern times and yet feel so much like the original films (even though by the prevalence of guns, its clear that its moved several years on from the original films)

Mad Max: Fury Road is a lot prettier than previous Mad Max movies due to the vibrant orange/blue contrast (the sand and sky), bigger budget, better special effects, improved cinematography, higher image quality, etc. That being said despite being prettier (due to technological advances and

deliberate aesthetic choices), it still feels like just as much of a Mad Max movie as the others and not that out of place with the rest of the series as they had a good understanding of how a Mad Max movie should feel and play out.

Robocop is all in the casting. You need someone who can do machine man as well as Peter Weller, while delivering palpable threat.

Is Karl Urban available?

 Cheesecat wrote:
Mad Max: Fury Road is a lot prettier than previous Mad Max movies due to the vibrant orange/blue contrast (the sand and sky), bigger budget, better special effects, improved cinematography, higher image quality, etc. That being said despite being prettier (due to technological advances and

deliberate aesthetic choices), it still feels like just as much of a Mad Max movie as the others and not that out of place with the rest of the series as they had a good understanding of how a Mad Max movie should feel and play out.

They also didn't try to change the character or resolve previous story arcs. If anything they added some mystery by the inclusion of the girl in the dreams to him; something that hints at an event between the new film and the previous three but which is totally unresolved by the end of this film. And just like in the others, come the end, he steps into the background and walks away.

It captured that rock-n-roll hind of madness in a twisted world gone crazy near the end. Heck they had a guy with a flamthrower guitar swinging around on flight lines for half the film. You can't get more 70-80s rock-n-roll than that.

Don’t see why Peter Weller couldn’t reprise.

If it’s a proper sequel, there’s no issue or need to de-age. The suit might be a bit much, but SFX should be able to fix that?

Nevermind, got it wrong

 Overread wrote:
Eh the last remake kind of missed the whole point of Robocop I felt. I recall watching and just thinking that it was very off, I think partly because the writers are approaching the story itself with so little mystery to it themselves that they don't build any of the mystery or suspense into the story.

Honestly, it was very different movie. Intentionally as far as I can tell. First one was more of the view from the outside, the reboot was more about the questions about what happens inside.

That said, not what many people expected from it, so it generally gets maligned for it.

The remake came at Robocop from the other direction. Thinking you’re in control, but not.

Whilst it didn’t land quite right, it was going for the modern era of personal data and that.

I still think it’s an enjoyable film. Perhaps if it didn’t have the Robocop monicker, it would’ve done better?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
. Perhaps if it didn’t have the Robocop monicker, it would’ve done better?

Thing is there's a lot of films that would benefit greatly from being their own thing. Heck the recent Peter Rabbit film is in no way shape or form Peter Rabbit (in fact the first 10seconds of the first trailer even goes as far as to basically show the middle finger to the source material in as much as they can in a kids flim). IF it were called "Dave the Rabbit" it would have likely gotten a much better overall reception.

Thing is you can't easily get a multimillion £/$ budget for "Dave the Rabbit" which results in writers/directors hunting after other IP that they can steal the title and names from to get the "look here its got a huge market following already" which helps get them the budget from the producer/investors which then lets them make the film.


Robocop is the same; they wanted to make a film about something that wasn't Robocop but was a robotical cop. But you can't get the budget for a "no name robot cop" as easily as you can for a "lets reboot Robocop" .

Actually there's a big thing in hollywood where often original scripts are turned into reboots/sequels for established franchises.

I'm pretty sure one of the 'Die Hards' that sucked was one of these scripts. But yeah it's a common problem when the guys with the money get cold feet at the thought of doing something 'original'.

Let's be honest, the original film was a "classic" but in the same way a bunch of other awful action films were. It wasn't beautifully written, scripted, acted, or delivered...it was just delivered on cool, and violence.

Because of this it means the franchise is entirely open to being rebooted into something genuinely good. I doubt it though.

TBF, while undoubtedly heavy in elements very much of its time, the original was also dripping with satire and even slightly prophetic.

It wasn't just another 80s action movie, the ones that have lasted, even improved with age, invariably have something more to them than that. Robocop 1987 is one of those, neither the reboot nor the sequels have that, hence nobody talks about them in the same way.

I think the reboot has plenty to say thats relevant to now. Its just that we are so horrendously polarized that nobody wants to hear it.

I can't honestly say I see that. I wasn't in the least polarized, I watched it with an open mind, as any reboot invariably attracts criticism from 'fans,' largely because they seem to fail to grasp that a reboot isn't a remake, and while it didn't receive an overwhelmingly positive reception, there were still plenty of sources at the time that praised it for what it did well.

With that in mind, I still didn't find much about Robocop 2014 to be particularly insightful, it was like they'd successfully duplicated the mechanics of 1987 without capturing the soul.

Tagging the 2014 remake with a PG-13 meant it had to skirt around many of originals themes, it's not a terrible movie (although still think the Keaton is an outright baddie subplot got editted out) but like others have said not Robocop

As for Neill Blomkamp I remain unconvinced but admit he could surprise me

I find myself agreeing with the other opinions on the 2014 effort.

As I said before, it at least tried to explore Robocop from a 21st century perspective, and asked questions about the nature of autonomy and free will.

Sadly, it didn’t quite work, but I still admire the effort that went into it.

The 1987 film is an absolute classic and easily makes my top 10 movies ever (for reference: Commando makes the cut too). The second one is okay, I guess. I've only ever seen the third one once, it was painful. Apparently there were a load of TV movies, but you'd have to be a real glutton for punishment to subject yourself to something like given the trajectory of the films before.

I didn't give the 2014 film the time of day to be honest. Remakes, reboots, re-imaginings... ugh. I long stopped watching them. I'm not rewarding studios for their cowardice with my cash.

Riquende the TV series for Robocop was decent. It was very much of its age and was less violent/bloody than the films; but it did very well I thought. It certainly gave more room to actually explore a lot of the themes and conflicts that Murphy had to deal with as Robocop; his repressed memories and all.

 Elbows wrote:
Let's be honest, the original film was a "classic" but in the same way a bunch of other awful action films were. It wasn't beautifully written, scripted, acted, or delivered...it was just delivered on cool, and violence.

Because of this it means the franchise is entirely open to being rebooted into something genuinely good. I doubt it though.

This is pretty much how I feel. But I did like some of Blomkamps past movies so who knows this could turn out at least better than the other robocop movies...which is at least something. I'm still not exactly thrilled about the idea of another robocop movie though. Mostly cause I just keep asking...why? I mean out of all the things Blomkamp could do, i'd almost rather see him do something more original.

Well if their going to use the "original sequel" to America's Jesus, maybe it'll be as the Second Coming story line. Robocop + Revelations, what could go wrong? Lol

 Elbows wrote:
Let's be honest, the original film was a "classic" but in the same way a bunch of other awful action films were. It wasn't beautifully written, scripted, acted, or delivered...it was just delivered on cool, and violence.

Because of this it means the franchise is entirely open to being rebooted into something genuinely good. I doubt it though.

This.
Because of this thread, I rewatched both the original (for the first time in over two decades) and the 2014 reboot over the weekend.

Now, I'm not an intellectual athlete like some of you guys, but I don't think the original has aged all that well (How could it? From '80s stop-motion to current SFX...). Yes, some of the satire is as relevant now as it was then (same goes for Starship Troopers and Total Recall), but I don't feel it was a "great" movie in the first place for some of the reasons Elbows mentions. It was a Verhoeven SF flick. You pretty much know what you're gonna get. I still enjoyed it, though. I really didn't "like" Weller in it. In fact, I didn't like anyone except for Kurtwood Smith (who totally reminds me of an older Walton Goggins ... in a good way).

I "enjoyed" Robocop 2014 more, but I say that with the caveat that I have a bit of a boner for Joel Kinnaman ... and for columns of exquisitely rendered, textured & animated ED209s I thought the casting was top-notch all round. The focus was totally different ... way more introspective and "intimate". The topics it covered were (obviously) relevant to our age. I'll be honest, I really missed the gore, but not to the point that it devalued the film in any way.

Having said all that, I don't really "get" why it was made ... The original was a good OTT '80s SF flick. The remake was a different kind of movie dressed in the same (albeit graphically enhanced) clothes.

Man, I thought the US Politics thread would have the most depressing opinions on Dakka.

RoboCop (1987) was a parody - not of anything in particular, just of schlock American action cinema generally. What we call the "remake" is more like someone wondered, if the '87 had been parodying a specific movie, what would that movie have been?

This is also the danger of making a serious film adaptation of Starship Troopers.

I think RoboCop has aged into a masterpiece. This is partly because 70s-80s schlock film has a pleasingly naive character compared to the soullessness of contemporary cinema, and RoboCop - even as it lampooned the excess - understood there was also heart.

In contrast to Elbows, I think RoboCop is a beautifully shot movie with a killer script and a lovely score.

Oh man, the score!

I'd forgotten that, and I'm a (somewhat lightweight and superficial, admittedly) score nerd.

That theme with the industrial mechanical backing is superb. In fact much of the sound design around Robocop himself (all the clunks, whizzes and various other noises) is excellent and is ultimately what makes him feel so substantial when watching.

I suspect that the 2014 Robocop was made because someone had a spec script, and someone else liked it but figured it would make more if it was attached to a popular name (like I, Robot for example). I think they could have better explored the themes without the spectre of the original hanging over them, though.

Actually, the original Robocop was supposed to be much more fluid in its movement - Peter Weller spent ages training with a mime artist to perfect the movements, IIRC - only for the suit design to be huge, bulky and cumbersome.