The problem I see with too much detail in the construction of RC is that they might stray too far into Iron Man terrority like I mentioned a while back.. he's meant to be small-scale law enforcement not superhero standard. I hope they don't go that way although the vs boards would love that
Roboninjas were awesome, the damaged one at the end looked very deranged with the screwed up face and rictus grin.
This has been downloaded 73 time(s).
'RoboCop' was never designed to have a sequel according to the film makers, it was a one off story that encompassed a whole arc of tragedy, rebirth and revenge. Or like Verhoeven says 'a Jesus story' with Murphy's death and ressurection to pass judgement.
The sequels just tried to copy Verhoeven's style, social commentary and wit, failing miserably. They had no punch or hook IMO.
Sequels to great stand alone movies have been worse though, 'Highlander' for instance.
I would not like there to be a remake, but a faithful and respectful sequel that is set somewhere in the RoboCop world after the first film, not really referencing the other sequels (ie. 'Predators').
The second movie was fine, did some different things for sure but I don't agree it was entirely pointless. It continued the theme of the first with respect to OCP's designs on re-building/controling Detroit the way they wanted it and what they were prepared to do to achieve it.
The scene in the first movie where the police chief is barking at his men that 'police officers don't strike!' is strangely prophetic as that is what they DO end up doing along the line. It accomplishes progression in that sense and that what sequels are meant to do. Could the execution have been better? Certainly with the third going way off base with the 'OCP military wing' arriving to take over a whole city. That was laughable but even the third has good moments.
Come on, sequels are not inherently bad, many people including myself like some sequels better than the original. In fact there are many originals that don't register with me at all but I've liked how someone else has made a sequel more exciting or expansive while still retaining some of what went before.
You don't like sequels but you want it be a sequel rather than a re-make?
(Predators was a flat and an average film imo and added absolutely nothing to the series, I really can't get your example there)
I know people who like RoboCop 2 better, no problem, just didn't work for me.
I never said I didn't like sequels. ALIENS, Spider-man 2 and Evil Dead 2 are some that are in my list of all time favourite films.
'Predators' was an example because it did not reference 'Predator 2' or the 'AVP' films in any measurable way and just made mention of the original. Just based in the world of the franchise.
Could even be based before P2, I remember reading that somewhere, but thats a different subject.
Well I'm not sure why Predators skipped any mention of P2 (probably wanted to retain it's own identity), I love the first two equally in fact, especially how P2's director captured the firsts atmosphere but changed the environment and the make-up of the characters involved.
Well personally, I wouldn't say that. I watched both AVP movies back to back last year and I got more enjoyment out of that than I did watching Predators. It was okay, but it didn't really retain any suspense or real memorable characters. Royce was the best thing to come out of that movie by a long shot.
I think its unnecessary.
What could they do better? Effects (do a Lucas and redo the effects for a re-release instead LOL)? Look? Feel? Make it more 'gritty' and 'realistic'? Make it more emotional? Add a love story between Robo and Lewis?
I have not yet seen a remake I have enjoyed. Films work so well because all the right elements come together at one time. That cannot be replicated to make a buck or 'reinvent' a classic.