SnoReptilePlenty Memorable, crazy movie

Smartorhypo Highly Overrated But Still Good

Moustroll Good movie but grossly overrated

Freeman This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

kurolikesgames RoboCop was a great movie. After earning critical success amongst both critics and casual moviegoers and earning a profit of around forty million dollars, it only made sense for Orion Pictures to follow up with a sequel. Does RoboCop 2 hold a candle to the original? In a way, yes.RoboCop 2 takes place about one year after the events of the original film. The RoboCop project was a success, and OmniCorp, the creators of the project, begin research and development for a successor. Meanwhile, Alexander J. Murphy, also known as RoboCop, continues his duties as a Detroit police officer. However, a new addictive substance sweeps the city. Nuke. Created by Cain, a fanatical cult leader hopelessly addicted to his own drug.The plot is interesting, but it's not perfect. A lot of plot points introduced near the beginning are all but abandoned. RoboCop's relationship with his wife and and the doubt of his own humanity are threads that would have held weight and kept the plot interesting. However, they are dropped rather quickly, instead focusing on OmniCorp's attempted purchase of Detroit. The movie still contains most of the comedy that made the original funny, but quite a few are rehashed from the original.This film was made on a budget of thirty-five million dollars, a rather large upgrade from the original's, and it shows. Animations that seemed charmingly clunky in the original are smooth and get the job done. The use of CGI is done sparingly and doesn't feel awkward or out-of-place, and the practical effects, such as RoboCop's suit, continue to hold up today. However, that doesn't mean that it's flawless. The CGI used on RoboCop 2's digital "face" consists of low-quality, flatshaded polygons that look downright terrifying at points, and it doesn't even look remotely like the person it is trying to portray. It could have been much more appealing if they simply filmed actor Tom Noonan and superimposed his face onto the cyborg's facial screen. This film is still gory, but not to the extent of the original. They were holding back, with no real reason too. Once again, the acting is great. Peter Weller slides back into his character like a knife into butter. The moments he expressed pain were especially impressive. Nancy Allen also provided a good performance as Officer Anne Lewis. Noonan was decent as Cain, but was a little too "hammy" at times.Overall, RoboCop 2 is a good film, and a worthy, albeit flawed, successor to the original. It may be more difficult for people unfamiliar with the series to enjoy, but fans will have fun. It's above-average and better than a few of it's competitors. If you're a fan of the original, give it a try.

stormhawk2018 As a film is very bad, as a sequel is embarrassing. Such are the Many people who did not directly understand the motivations of Paul Verhoeven when he made the mythical movie Robocop (1987). So even more controversy produced the sequel to this movie, produced three years later, and directed by Irvin Kershner (the director of the mythical Empire Strikes Back). It is true that Robocop 2 (1990) does not live up to its predecessor, but what we have to leave today is to underestimate a movie that, had it not been for other circumstances (other than the film) would have considered cult.Yes, it is not Verhoeven. Does this mean that the movie is a mere copy intended solely to make money? The truth is that the sequel directed by Kershner has a soul of its own, which gives it its own singularity. Surely, because we have to keep in mind that the project involved the famous comic writer Frank Miller, who gave a totally personal touch. You just have to see the numerous outputs of tone that the film presents. Those who have seen it will forever remember the contortionist fiddler, no doubt, although they are constant.The first RoboCop showed us a Detroit that could be mired in corruption and delinquency, but maintained a certain dignity. However, the story that Kershner presents us goes much further, both aesthetically and thematically. To begin with we must point out that the Detroit that we have before our eyes is much darker. In fact, one can even intuit the influence of Gotham that only a year ago had presented Tim Burton, with his Batman (1989). Detroit has something of a comic, but not of those 60's comics that did not intend to break any moral barrier, but quite the opposite, of the hooligans comrades by which the adolescents were able to make their parents angry. The crazy and suicidal tone of these comic strips is also reflected in the film itself, from the humorous moments (which are not few and pretend at all times to show that the film is not at any time seriously), through the language used or even with one of the protagonists, who is a child (although arms take, in fact the film breaks with the preconceived idea that there can be a child doing bad). The street gangs, the corruption, the Detroit that presents the sequel is just as well thought out (or maybe in this aspect, even better) than the one of the first delivery. And it is certainly because it is where the hand of Frank Miller is most noticeable. Maybe, where he could also work more freely. Not to ignore that the film charges its inks against corporate corruption (our villain is an entrepreneur who seeks to destroy the public sphere to seize all the power of the city). An exaggerated a priori hyperbole but in reality is totally in tune with the real Detroit (and if not, let's see what it has become at the moment).The problems Robocop 2 has had are several. To start with it is a sequel. And you know that you can forgive the sagas (although as we all know, in some cases are endless) but not the sequels. But unfortunately, we also have many internal problems.The assembly does not work. The story seems to stumble and give the feeling or that they either put scissors, or cut the wings to creativity. The final third of the movie with the fight between Robocop and Cain is too long compared to what is really being told. The action sequences are eternalized and never seem to end. In addition, although the film pretends to disguise what it is through numerous strokes of humor (that eye, some are tremendously effective) in fact the story is not quite conventional (as for plot we mean) and is not able to develop the crowd of issues that could have been exploited. In fact, Robocop 2's packaging far exceeds what it teaches us inside.Also the film has enough problems with the design of special effects. At that time the go motion was being tried, and the film abused this resource in excess, causing that half-third end of the film is actually a tedious spectacle of these FX, which to make the matters worse, seen today are somewhat dantesque .

brandon-tyler-328-43902 It's fair to say that I hate "RoboCop 2." It's a nasty, horrible and mean- spirited mess of a film that lacks a clear narrative and an interesting story. The acting is woeful, the musical score is disastrous and the script is nonsensical and witless. Peter Weller is completely lost and confused as the character he played in the first movie is so badly characterized that you'd think that this was a different RoboCop to the one we saw in the first movie. Even the brilliant Lewis character is nothing like she was in the original film. The direction lacks flair, style and identity; sometimes it feels like a TV movie that Channel FIVE show on weekday afternoons. Avoid RoboCop 2 like the plague. I can't believe that they thought this would be an acceptable way to follow up such a great film like RoboCop. 2/10

leplatypus This sequels has clearly not the punch of Verhoeven's original ! Right from the start, you can feel that the franchise gets down from anticipation-philosophical-tragic-acid movie to simple fun, action-packed one ! By chance, the production is skilled and experimented so you can watch the movie : Kershner and Tippet really put Robocop on spotlight, Bauer is a memorable shrink but at the end, the big disappointment is the star of comics, Frank Miller who wrote a story that is just too similar with the original : so Miller wrote about an OCP ambitious corporate who wants to be number 2 with a new Robocop project: already told in 1987 ! He wrote also about a gang leader whose hideout is a derelict factory : already told in 1987 ! We have Robocop making an assault in a drug laboratory : already told in 1987! We have a street exploded by criminality: already told in 1987 ! we have Robocop going into the leader hide-out and being badly wounded and later coming back and arresting him : already told in 1987 ! At last, the finale is Robocop battling the other OCP robot in an OCP building and that was already the ending in 1987 ! So it's really hard to find the creativity of Miller here, especially when he later wrote the excellent Robocop / Terminator story ! Things gets really bad when this gang leader is played ridiculously with a stupid bunch as well (a teen, a sort of Elvis, a sort of Elektra !) So it's a disappointing sequel and honestly, this blue metallic Robocop is a bit too much too and we miss greatly Poledouris!