Yo, where’s the Crysis suit in that pic?
I’ve seen it a few times and always thought it was shit (although it’s a masterpiece compared to 3), but I saw it again on TV last week and it really dawned on me how much potential it had. While not even occupying the same dimension as the original as far as entertainment and incisive biting satire, the sequel was in some ways more ambitious. Opting to tackle multiple themes not touched by the original and flesh out preexisiting ones to their logical road map was a noble attempt however, it reveals itself as not secure with it’s new ground by adhering too strictly to the original’s plot structure almost halfway through. Overall I place it on the pyre alongside countless other corpses that had potential to be immortalized in filmgoers memories, but was bludgeoned to death by an uneven hand.
I get the idea to emphasize that Murphy’s right hand and leg had survived the blast by showing his right hand without a gauntlet but don’t tell me you’re gonna paint a tin can black, call it tactical and then leave that hand exposed. Otherwise I am heavily interested but expect this to deliver the same way the Total Recall reboot did. I’ll be spending just $5 on the matinee for this then. Figure I’ll break even.
Even though I’d rather buy it for a dollar. ::hyuck-hyuck-hyuck::
Does the original still exist in a form you can watch? OK, so what’s this for again?
yeah, thats how you know the movie is gonna be dumb as fuck, when they go out of their way to show his humanity by keeping his one saved hand bare and open for damage. im sure at some point in the movie its going to work its way into the plot somehow in a dumb way.
im finna download the old robocops right now just to refresh my memory say i can hate harder on this over the coming months. lol
Sorry SRK, the whole PG-13 vs R thing is stupid, ya’ll need to let it go, especially when in this day and age, our PG-13 is closer to old school R (I admit they aren’t the same, but approaching). Anytime the quality of a movie is ‘hinged’ on R verse PG-13, then something is wrong…a lot more goes into a good movie - unless its the Saw series or any of the current crop of ‘horror’ movies that are nothing but Gore-pr0n.
Being rated R wouldn’t have made any of the Batman’s better, or Pacific Rim. If the movie looks dumb, leave it at that.
With that said…“meh”. It looks cool and has Sam Jack…with hair…so that’s possibly watchable. They got ED-209 in there…close to his original look. The new suit looks like a streamlined more flexible version of the old one.
Being honest though I just don’t care - it’s not an original concept anymore, and he wasn’t ‘epic’ in the first place…so I’m not really interested short of…well Sam Jax
- :bluu:
Not really, it’s all down to bums on seats and merchandise sales. I wish t hinged on quality! A lot of films that go for the R rating are just “gorep0rn” are by shit directors. Looking back at Batman and Batman returns the R rating certificate is a joke. I think Begins, Dark Knight and Rises would be better with a higher rating not necessarily an R rating but a 15 would be the perfect balance. You see movies like Cloverfield’s script get completely nerfed by the PG-13 (12A) rating. Some directors know how to cope with the low age rating (Nolan*) some don’t (JJ Abrams). Subject matter can have a huge effect on how the script can be played out on screen.
Would films like Jaws, Alien 1 & 2, all rated R back then still get a PG13 rating now, I doubt it, Jaws would probably get a 15.
*Re Nolan, 15 rating would have helped Dark Knight, Batman is meant to be very physical but none of the fights or action really played out in such a way that you felt the physicality and threat (although I was impressed how the first Bane fight was done with no soundtrack). If the subject matter requires violence then the subject matter should be held over the dollar, unfortunately that’s not the world we live in.
Wonder if they’ll do a “Bitches leave” or callbacks to any of the other dozens of quotables from the original film?
looks like shit
R rating didn’t stop Dredd 3D from being good.
Anyway I don’t like how neat this design looks when his helmet/visor is removed. Looks less like a cyborg and more like a dude in a suit. The original where you could see the machinery going underneath his skin was a lot more grim looking, and let you know this guy was truly fucked up.
With all due respect to the “R”, Batman does not and should never be an “R”. A good Batman story doesn’t need an “R” rating or environment. Now as for RoboCop, original Murphy death scene ALONE = “R”. Everything else in that movie is just gratuity. From what you can see in the trailer, Murphy getting blown to bits (and completely obstructed from view) by a car bomb is definitely “PG-13”. If it wasn’t bad, nasty and graphic in that one pivotal scene, I don’t see the rest of the new flick going into “R” territory unless Michael Keaton is a sadistic prick.
EDIT: all the 89-90s Batman movies were PG-13 in North America.
You misread, I’m saying that the rating of a movie doesn’t by default make it good or bad, no matter the genre. I don’t think Aliens 1 & 2 would have been worse off with a lower rating. I also don’t think a higher rating would have made Batman better. Too much is read into it ‘most’ of the time. Robocop being blown up vs disassembled - that’s beyond the 'point; to me.
- :bluu:
Robocop needs to be fucking violent. That’s part of the fucking universe. It’s a dark and fucked up place and a man/machine/jesus (Verhoven’s words not mine) are it’s savior. It’s a great contrast. A PG13 Robocop -even if PG13 flicks get away with a lot more these days then back in the day- is a betrayal and shows the producers didn’t understand what made the original work.
This movie was doomed the moment they lost Aronofsky… I think that Cracked article about the impending blockbuster movie apocalypse is more prophecy than satire at this point.
I don’t agree that Alien 1 or RoboCop would be as good if they were censored according to PG-13 guidelines, but that’s not the point really. My protest with PG-13 vs R is Hollywood putting R off the table completely if the movie is big budget. A lot of R rated movies don’t “need” the rating, and that’s great, because it means the movie’s vision wasn’t compromised for arbitrary standards of decency, or to support a studio’s bottom line. Cussing, gore, nudity, doesn’t make a movie good, I just want to see the film that the creative staff wanted to make without insane studio meddling (as depicted in lots of making-of documentaries).
It’s weird how society has become so uptight, with less tolerance for artistic expression and creativity. “Well such-and-such won’t turn a profit. Think about those poor entertainment giants!” and “but it’s offensive!” are the common arguments. Pryor and Carlin were offensive, and you can make a case that the US is better off because of people like them. It’s funny that video games from the big publishers are less restrictive than the typical Hollywood release these days. Although feminists are patching that at the moment.
I’m just ranting.
watches the reboot trailer
Ok, I guess.
Biggest gripe:
LOSE THE ARM!!!
Perhaps there’s a part in the movie where it gets shot off.
“Nenenenenenenene”
the showed 70% of the film in the first trailer.