RoboCop 2 (1990) Poster

(1990)

User Reviews

Review this title
239 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Underrated sci-fi action flick - Defending an Underrated Sequel
ivo-cobra812 April 2017
Why does this film get's so much hate? Why do I keep hearing that Robocop 3 is better than this, that Robocop (2014) remake is better than this. I don't understand that and I never will. I mean is this good as the first film? no of course not, is it worthy sequel? yes it is! This is an entertaining action film yes. It R rated blast it is yes. I do wish that this movie would come out over the summer I do really miss this kind of action films. Robocop 3 and Robocop remake are not and will never be better than this sequel. I grew up watching this movie it defines my childhood. This was really my first film of the trilogy before I even watched the original. I was entertained in here we have RoboCop VS RoboCain monstrous robot who is addicted to drugs, has mass a machine guns annihilation people blowing up cop cars, killing cops, van's, ambulances. Killing news people, this big battle between Robocop and RoboCain fantastic.

RoboCop 2 (1990) is rated R! RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR not PG-13 It Is violent, action gore adrenaline sci-fi flick not for kids. I am defending my favorite sequel that has Peter Weller and Nancy Allen in it! I don't wan't to see Robert John Burke or even Joel Kinnaman who suck dicks in the whole movies! I love this movie to death the end is the best at all. In this movie RoboCop jumps on a back of a monsters addicted robot, rips his brain out, smashes in to the ground to the pulp.

Plot: RoboCop 2 is the 1990 sequel to RoboCop. Peter Weller returns as the cybernetic law enforcement officer, who now battles an even more sadistic gang led by a deranged killer known as Cain (Tom Noonan), while mega-corporation Omni Consumer Products prepares to take private ownership of Detroit and unveil a new, more powerful law enforcement unit.

This is a prototypical "good" action movie -- intense, perfectly executed, original action, shown to the tune of a forgettable and occasionally insulting story.

I am giving an 8/10 -- an outstanding score. And the gunplay is delivered in perfect Miller style (as opposed to the slo-mo John Woo-style) -- you'll see lots of heavy automatic and explosive weapons, and you'll see them used well. The film is bloody you can see how the gang cut's Robocop to pieces and it is bloody. There was a kid Hob in the film and no he wasn't annoying, he did a good job playing the bad guy. Not annoying kid and I think he did a good job. Robocop shot a guy in the eye.

Nancy Allen as Lewis has much to do like she drives an armored SWAT van the one they used in Die Hard and smashes in to RoboCain, she shots three bad guys, she kicks ass. RoboCop saves a baby.

I don't mind the music score everyone complains about Leonard Rosenman and his music score. I know they should use Basil Poledouris music score but they used different music score and I never mind it, I thought it was an okay song.

The film was directed by Irvin Kershner (The Empire Strikes Back and Never Say Never Again) from a story written by noted graphic novelist Frank Miller. Irvin Kershner did an excellent job directing this sequel I know that Paul Verhoeven suppose to direct this movie but he never direct sequels before and he wasn't sure if he should do it, Hollywood needed a sequel so Irvin Kershner went to directing it. This is his last movie and it is really a shame he is no longer with us anymore R.I.P. Irvin Kershner.

They don't make movies like this one today! I wish I would had sci-fi action movies like are this one today!! I really wish! This is a solid damn sequel that has an action scenes while RoboCock (2014) has no action scenes they can't effort it, it is a PG-13 rated family film. I have this movie on Blu-ray screw Robocop 3 and the remake I will watch this movie. I love action movies this is an action movie that's how they do it right! Is Tom Noonan better bad guy than Kurtwood Smith no. But he does an excellent job as the evil bad guy and he is a cult leader.

I know Peter Weller and Nancy Allen were disappointed with how the movie come out and they don't care for this movie. But honestly it was a pretty damn good entertainment, I wasn't bored with it. I would be proud on this movie.

Rambo III (1988), Missing in Action (1984), Cobra (1986), Predator 2 (1990), Blade: Trinity (2004), The Matrix Revolutions (2003) are so fun underrated action films that are getting so much hate and bashed this days for it, that is horrible. I still love them all.

RoboCop 2 is a 1990 American cyberpunk action film directed by Irvin Kershner. Set in the near future in a dystopian metropolitan Detroit, Michigan, it is the sequel to the 1987 film, RoboCop.

It's a good continuation of RoboCop story. There is nothing new here , but it's well executed. In the end it's one of those rare satisfying sequels. They do there own stuff they don't copy the original film just like Predator 2 they do their own stuff and i love that. Sue me I love RoboCop 2! I give it 8/10 it doesn't deserve the hate!
92 out of 98 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
And now...a word on nutrition
CuriosityKilledShawn10 February 1999
Warning: Spoilers
RoboCop 2 is probably the most under-rated and most harshly criticized sequel in history (tying with Predator 2, which came out the same year). Because of a few missing elements from the first and a slightly more cartoonish approach to the violence, the critics and public alike were not pleased and opinions and feelings toward the franchise nosedived with the just plain awful RoboCop 3.

Don't con yourself out of a good movie though. RoboCop 2 still has the same savage sense of humor, cynical social commentary and character pathos of the first film. It's a hyper-realistic vision of an America populated by gun-loving psychos, a democracy owned by big business and the poverty-stricken addicted to drugs dealt to them by peddlers believing themselves to be the second coming of Christ.

Far-fetched could be the typical way of describing it. Completely-over-the-top would be more appropriate. Empire Strikes Back director Irvin Kershner chucks in as much sadistic violence, deafening gunfire, endless destruction and loss of human life that the film just begs you not to take it so seriously.

Some of the blame was placed on writer Frank Miller for the film being more cartoonish than the original. I don't think this is very fair. I read Miller's original script when I was in high school and it is rather different and, dare I say, unfilmable. RoboCop 2 himself was not Nuke Lord Caine, the psychotic hippie with delusions of Godhood. He was called Kong, a psychotic cop who pretty much killed everybody he came across. Sgt. Reed and the Old Man died too, and there wasn't much humor. Screenwriter Walon Green was hired to doctor the script and much of what appears on screen is actually his work. Frank Miller's original ideas are pretty much just left as the framework for the whole movie and some of his story was recycled into RoboCop 3 (don't blame him for that one either). Miller was obviously upset with this but was still a good enough sport to appear in the film (keep a lookout for him playing Doctor Frank), though he vowed not to work in Hollywood again for fear of being taken advantage of. Until Robert Rodriguez promised to make good on his Sin City graphic novels.

Verhoven may be gone but Irvin Kershner tries hard to deliver the same mix of mirth and magic and actually does get it right. Basil Poledouris' brooding score is also gone (it returns in RoboCop 3) but new composer Leonard Rosenman creates a wonderfully heroic and upbeat theme that suits the film more than Poledouris' moody, tormented score to the first.

There have also been many complaints that the humanity of RoboCop and his relationship with Lewis was neutered along with too many other ideas fighting for screen time. I get why most would be annoyed by this but you have to remember that films need to be economic when it comes to length. If every single idea was fully explored and fleshed-out RoboCop 2 would have been 4 hours long. In my opinion each thread has just enough for keen viewers and fans to appreciate. Lazy viewers only see what they want to see and I feel that this has led to many of the negative reviews the film has been met with (which usually comment on how "offensive" the character of Hob is-sheesh, gimme a break). And don't give me that the "humanity" of the first film is gone. Murphy has not resigned to being a machine. He lies to pacify OCP. Pay attention to the very last line of dialogue in the film if you want proof.

Filmed once again in Texas, Houston this time, you really have to feel for Peter Weller walking around in that Robosuit. It must have weighed a ton and he'd be sweating bucketloads inside. There is a particular scene in the film where Murphy is tortured into near-death/destruction that is very hard to watch. But it does lead to him getting a brand-new makeover and those crazy new directives put into his head. The bit where he lectures the Little League kids and scolds the youngsters playing by the leaky fire hydrant (after quoting some very suspicious philosophy) is hilarious.

RoboCop 2 is a great movie. Despite harsh critisisms of the script and story and some slightly dated stop-motion effects it's a brilliant sequel that lives up to expectations. Do listen to the nay-sayers. I don't know what kind of film they were expecting.

And thank you for not smoking!
105 out of 146 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Not as terrible as some make out, but still a disappointment.
mentalcritic27 February 2001
If you believe the video game that was made out of RoboCop, it was set in the same year that RoboCop 2 was released. RoboCop is simply one of the best films ever made, and it brought me much relief from a very sorrowful childhood. Which brings me to the point I am trying to make here: anything was going to be something of a letdown. Another rebuke I would like to make of other critics of this film lies with their complaint that the movie was too mean-spirited and had too much violence. Let me quote Paul Verhoeven's commentary about the original: "the whole style of the movie is 'too much'".

The real failing of this sequel lies in the story, which is full of threads that are either resolved badly (the attempt to reprogram RoboCop with new directives) or not resolved at all (RoboCop's memories of his wife). Considering that not a single second in the original was wasted when it came to drawing the viewer into the hero's mind or building some emotional connection, the lack of sympathy one feels with even Lewis or the Sergeant is worrying. Then there's the villian. A film with a superhero, like Robocop or the Bond series, is only as effective as its main villian. Cain is not an effective villian, and gets very little development in the bargain, the exact opposite of the situation with Clarence Boddicker in the original.

The mock commercials are something of a hit and miss affair. The OCP Communications commercial was hilarious, but the Sunblock 5000 commercial was just plain tasteless. The use of children in RoboCop 2 also counts against it. There were no children in the original, reflecting the fact that the film just wasn't made with children in mind. The use of children in RoboCop 2 smacks of a cheap attempt to appeal to the children who are allowed by their parents or whomever to see the film. It doesn't work because the writers are trying to transplant adult dialogue into a child's mouth. Similarly, the attempt to transplant the manner in which the Christian Coalition think children talk into Robocop fails.

All in all, RoboCop 2 is a passable sequel, but it pales in comparison to the harsh perfection that is the original. Give it a chance because it does have some entertainment value.
64 out of 87 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Terrible reputation for a great film
LSBeams18 July 1999
I'm amazed at how bad this movie has gotten trashed over the years. The sequel to one of the best sci-fi movies ever, it was killed by critics and fans alike. I just don't understand why though.

In many ways Robocop 2 is better than its predecessor. For instance, the many subplots. We have the subplot involving Robocop getting put back together, the subplot of Robocop 2 itself, the subplot of whether or not Robocop is human or machine, the subplot of nuke/Cain and his thugs, and the subplot of overall power and corruption.

The mix of dark satire and graphic violence are once again showcased in Robocop 2 and in grander fashion. We get lots of jokes and lots of gore, mixed together flawlessly. All the performances are good. Peter Weller once again does a great job as Murphy, and Tom Noonan makes his Cain character a three-dimensional psychopath.

The score is much different from the score of the original. Instead of the dramatic/sad theme from Robocop, we get a much more heroic/dynamic theme from Robocop 2, and it works quite well with the movie.

Another thing I have got to comment on is the usage of stop motion. Once Cain is transformed into the monstrous Robocop 2 ( the title character ), we get an explosion of stop motion special effects that look fantastic! Stop motion doesn't get any better than this.

All in all, this is one of the best sequels of all time, but got a bad reputation because it was 'too violent'. Don't listen to some of the naysayers. Robocop 2 is a masterfully done film from the director of Empire Strikes Back and shouldn't be missed by any sci-fi buff out there. Check it out now on Widescreen for the DVD.

4 stars out of 4 ( reviewed by Scott Beams )
168 out of 242 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Not worse than "RoboCop", just different
dee.reid5 December 2002
"RoboCop 2" , the sequel to 1987's ultra-violent "RoboCop", is not quite up to par with its predecessor. The film still manages to entertain on a large level. I know that a lot of people do not like this movie, but I personally think it is still pretty good. I'm not writing a review of this movie, I am just expressing my thoughts on it.

First off, this movie is a lot more violent than the first "RoboCop". You get scenes of bloody shootings, grisly scenes of torture, and a surgery which I'd rather let you see for yourself than describe here. Paul Verhoeven does not return to shock his audience with graphic violence and ultra dark humor, which has since become trademark in his films. The director this time is Irvin Kershner, who made "The Empire Strikes Back" nearly ten years before this movie. Kershner seems to focus a lot more on action, rather than story.

Second, the movie's villain, Cain (Tom Noonan), to me is a direct opposite of Clarence Boddicker (the villain from the first film who was played by Kurtwood Smith). Cain enjoys giving people pleasure (through his highly addictive designer drug called Nuke) while Boddicker was a sadist who took pleasure in the death and suffering of others. (Though after Cain's "transformation", none of this really matters).

Lastly, this movie does not exploit children. The kid in this movie, Hob (played by Garbriel Damon) is Cain's twelve year-old side kick. He is a violent, foul-mouthed little child who runs errands for Cain. The writers for this movie did this intentionally, to show that crime holds no age barrier. Regardless of age, crime is crime.

Like I said, "RoboCop 2" is not trying to be better than its predecessor, it's just trying to be something different.

8/10
78 out of 124 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Excellent Sequel! Great film!
LebowskiT100015 November 2002
I don't think anyone is going to argue that the first Robocop film in the series is, by far, the best! But, I still think this installment is very good and has a lot of good things to offer. The story is quite interesting and pretty well thought out. The characters are pretty much the same as the first film, nothing terribly new there. The special effects are absolutely superb and the action is done rather well throughout the film.

Like any film, this film has some flaws. One thing that really bothered me is that they made Robocop more of a Blue-ish color instead of a silver or grey color, it would looked better if they had stuck to the original color. Also, there are a few scenes that are meant to be comedic, but just didn't pull through. Other than that, I thought the film was rather good.

The new cyborg in this film, aptly named "Robocop 2" is astonishing in every way. I thought it was a phenomenal design and beautifully done! The weaponry on this cyborg was quite impressive as well.

The actors in this film did a fine job, I can't think of any that I disliked and the direction of Irvin Kershner (The Empire Strikes Back) was quite good as well.

Even though I liked this film a great deal, I still wouldn't recommend it to everyone. If you saw and liked the original RoboCop, then I think you really ought to see this one, I'm not saying you'll like it, I would hope that you do, but you still may not (as many reviewers on this site have made clear). I would say that if you like a good sci-fi film, then you should check this film out, and I hope you like it. Anyhow, thanks for reading,

-Chris
74 out of 120 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Oh dear
pstevensondyolfknip27 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I was a huge fan of the original Robocop.

But to say I was disappointed by this first sequel would be an understatement.

The problems are many.

Glossy though the film may look there are plenty of bloopers on screen for all to see, wires, cameramen etc, something I find wholly unacceptable from someone of Irvin Kreshner's pedigree.

Robocop has become a robot. There is no spark of humanity to be found in the character here. A true disappointment when one considers that his "soul" had returned by the end of the first movie. Here his attitude shows no human side and makes him hard to sympathise with.

Caine is a poor villain. OK I know Boddiker from the first film was better than the average, mainly thanks to Kurtwood Smith's performance, but the usually solid Tom Noonan creates a character who you couldn't care less about one way or the other.

What's happened to the Old Man????. I appreciate that he didn't get to where he is by being "nice" but the change in his character here is nothing short of dumbfounding. In the first movie it's made clear he despises Dick Jone's tactics and attitude and yet here he's no better than Jones. It makes no sense.

Doctor Faxx is a poor replacement for Bob Morton's charismatic, if unpleasant, OCP resident genius.

The action sequences, save the sequence where Murphy is stuck to the side of Caine's truck, are harsh and nasty and repel rather than entertain.

And finally. What is with the musical score?. Don't tell me Poledouris couldn't have done it simply because he was working on Total Recall at the time. A series (TV or Movie) soundtrack is part of its personality. Part of its character. When you remove that it harms the familiarity of the characters we're watching. So it's bad enough but shame on Leonard Rosenman. His score here is lurid, camp and downright cringe worthy.

The story has its moments to be fair. There's a lot of originality in here. But it tries too many new things to take in with one film. Hob is a well realised villain and the only truly dis likable "villian" in the move, Thumbs up to Gabriel Damon there.

The final showdown between Robocop and Robocop 2 is fun as well.

But for the vast majority of its overlong running time this is a serious disappointment.
27 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Insulting, hateful, tasteless, gratuitously violent mess!
the_mysteriousx19 August 2004
Warning: Spoilers
The first Robocop had a sense of cynical wit and a sick sense of violence. It was a fine line to walk, but Paul Verhoeven pulled it off and the film did so well, they made a sequel. How awful. (Possible Spoilers ahead - though anything that could spoil this is beyond me).

Irvin Kershner is not the director for this type of film. He clearly did not understand the humor of the original and as a result the massive over-the-top senseless violence looks really bad - and worse is very distasteful. Even worse is the musical score. Leonard Rosenman was an old man from another era and the heroic, light music does not match the images on the screen at all! What was he scoring?! The Great American Hero?! Worst of all, he completely eliminated Robocop's theme from the first film, which was so memorable and perfect. Can you imagine a Superman film without John Williams' fanfare, or Indiana Jones, etc.? How could he do that?!!

The plot is just a collection of ideas that don't gel. In beginning we see Robo "stalking" his old wife. Fine, good idea. But, they completely drop it after that. Then, there is this a stupid idea of the company reprogramming Robo to be nice. That's thrown in for 10 minutes and then is immediately dropped. Or, the silly idea that the repulsive 10 year-old drug lord reminds Robo of his son - Once again, a weak motif that is shown briefly twice and dropped. This may work in a comic book, but not on film and Frank Miller was unfortunately too inexperienced at the time and threw every idea in along with the kitchen sink. It doesn't work as a whole.

Some people here seem to be praising the corporate bashing in this film and the privatization of the police. That is the best part of the film that is consistent with the first. However, in the original, the old man was a tough business man out for a profit, but ultimately fair in the end. In this film, he is just pure evil in his lust for money and power. You can't just change characters like that for no reason. And Nancy Allen's character is useless in this film, whereas in the first she was essential to Robo's search for himself. She is as gratuitous as the violence in this film.

And the violence, yes the violence. I enjoy many violent, bloody films when they serve purposes and are meant to tell a story. Irvin Kershner seems to get off on human beings being blown to bits, shot to pieces, children lusting for death and torture and peoples' desire for drugs. He doesn't know when to stop. Do we really need to see every last innocent bystander (even people trying to help others) get shot up???? It is inferred when we see the bad Robocop shooting repeatedly! Instead Mr. Kershner proves he has very little taste for this type of work and creates an abominable mess that is a terrible piece of pop art and worse, a disgusting message of violence for any young person watching this film.

No, this film isn't meant to be message-y and I certainly don't watch Robocop movies or Alien or Predator movies for that reason. However, when you go too far and cross the line, much of what you do must be put into question. And as for this film, in the words of the evil kid drug dealer's last words as he lay dying, "It still sucks".
39 out of 64 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
One Awesome Action-Packed Sequel.
Master_Wayne24 November 2004
Robocop 2 is a very amusing movie that is often times unfairly criticized. It is obviously not as good as the first film, but its still a darn good sequel. This movie, just like the first, always gets made fun of and I can't see why. I think these movies are just so entertaining. Here's my two cents.

I am a huge fan of these Sci-Fi/Action movies, and Robocop is definitely one of the coolest in the genre. The first film is a classic, but most people don't seem too fond of it's sequel. Robocop 2 is dark, cruel, and gruesome, but it never misses it's chance to fit in a joke. The humor in this movie is just as good as the first's, if not better. The acting is a little poor at times, but you can't expect too much out of a film like this. Robocop 2's story is less diverting, but the special effects are superior to the first. This movie has a much better climax than the original, and the final moments of violence at the ending have some of the best special effects I have ever seen(without the use of cgi)in a movie.

My problem is that people always accuse films like this of not being realistic enough. What should you expect from a title like 'Robocop 2"? People need to just sit back and suspend disbelief for a movie like this. The Robocop movies are pure bloody fun, that's all. I recommend this movie to anyone who likes violent 'machine vs. machine' warfare, and being a fan of the first movie couldn't hurt either.
32 out of 54 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
"Oh my, this isn't very nice"
revival051 August 2008
Warning: Spoilers
For most people, RoboCop 3 is the film that really is the big disgrace for the Robo series. It has few fans, and most people hate it for it's shameless commercial PG-13 approach. Now, I'm not going to say that RoboCop 3 is any good. Frankly, it pretty much sucks. But as far as being a properly shot and executed film, it surpasses this piece of circuit chaos. Yes, the truth of the matter is that RoboCop 2 is the worst of two bad and unnecessary sequels to a near-masterpiece. So what if RoboCop 3 turns Robo into a cartoonish super hero in a ultra mainstream production for kids to enjoy - at least it's doing it openly. I don't know where RoboCop 2 begins and ends, I don't know what or whom it's about, I don't understand what's going on in it, I don't understand which jokes are deliberate and which aren't, I will go insane if I try to understand the characters, I see nothing of any value in anything anybody is saying, I can't believe anybody looked at the shooting script and figured it would work and I can't believe that Irvin Kirshner saw the finished result and figured that he liked what he see. He probably didn't by the way, neither Miller, nor Weller nor Allen did. It's not hard to see why.

Now, RoboCop 2 has it's fans, I know this. Mostly they belong to this league of absolute anti-pretensions, dismissing anybody who expected any depth, or subject matter from the first film, as academic Roger Ebert Sith apprentices. It's just a lot of fun, a good piece of action and great entertainment, the argument goes. Yeah well, I guess if you just don't listen to what any of the characters are saying you could fool yourself that we might as well have Arnold in the suit instead of Weller. Don't get me wrong, I like a good action film, with pure entertainment value as it's only - most satisfying - virtue. But RoboCop 2, sir, ain't no such thing.

Look at the first couple of scenes. This horrible actor makes Robo repeat that he's just a machine, and then goes into this operatic speech about how he could never be a man, where-after Murphy's wife (who's suing OCP for robot-stalkings) walks in out of the blue and have this sad little moment with him, and then is never heard of again! I surely would like to go in to this film scene by scene, because every one has these kind of absurdities in them. It's like a twelve year old fan boy has done the screenplay, the characters act totally random and first say this, then say that. OCP wants to stop crime with a new Robo, especially this drug called "nuke" but then it seems they really just want to become this big capitalist empire and control the entire city – politics are abandoned I guess, understandable given the comic relief mayor, The villain (played by Tom Noonan, who did a better version of this in Last Action Hero and that's saying a lot) is an addict, but is still used for this machine. The woman behind it all has an agenda which is impossible to understand.

Speaking of twelve year olds, this film has the infamous role of "Hub", this mad kid who swears and kills people, played by a child actor. I'm not going to be all moral about it, it's a free world and if you want a psycho kid in your action movie, go for it. I don't know how much of Frank Miller's original vision was put into this, but the credits at least acknowledge him as conceiver of the "story". And, if I zoom out, I could see this as being quite a cool character. It's grim for sure, to have a maniac killer kid but then again this is the world of RoboCop and who would be surprised? This whole business with the OCP trying to become this giant monopoly over everything, is properly dystopian and good as well. Also, the idea of RoboCop getting in touch with his wife and kid, having them embedded into the story somehow - would also be great, and as far as I can see a natural and logical step if they now had to make a RoboCop sequel.

But, of course, these are just ideas. As many people have already said, the screenplay is 100% mess. The kid has one scene (the torture scene) where it's hinted that he in fact is just a stereotype messed up kid, and then we have this unimaginable scene where he is dying and gets all soft and friendly towards ol' tin head. Why doesn't he just take up his uzi and try to take him down with his last breath? Isn't that what his character would do? Does he give his life a little second thought there on his death bed? Not necessarily, given that his last words are "it sucks", so why? It really makes no sense, and this can be said about everybody, no everything, in this film. IS there a strike in the police force? IS RoboCop machine or man? What's the deal with turning Robo into this community service machine for 10 minutes? I mean, sure, it's pretty funny I wouldn't deny that. But why build it up, and then discard it? And why the hell is Allen so criminally underused? and what is it Weller has an obvious urge to express with his character and yeah, well, the threads are many and the mess is enormous.

This review is just as messed up as the film. The only reason I give an extra star up there is because of the actors from the first film, I'm sure they had good intentions with it. I mean it's something somewhat stable, some kind of anchor in this sea of bad movie making.
15 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
In my opinion, RoboCop 2 is grossly underrated.
ichabod814 June 2004
Warning: Spoilers
I love this sequel. RoboCop 3 is literally on my bottom 5 list of all time, but I don't understand what the big fuss is about #2?

RoboCop 2 has a very unique atmosphere and is loaded with top notch action. The climax battle between RoboCop 2 and.. well, with pretty much everybody else, is so awesome. Also, I simply love the design of the monster robot. It really looks extremely menacing. Sure the stop-motion effects are clearly outdated, but so what? You don't go bad-mouthing Alien's guy in a suit either.

As far as the storyline goes, there's nothing unique about it, but I do admire the filmmakers for the character of Hob. Putting a gun in the kid's hand and waisting him later in a hale of gunfire takes some balls in the commercial Hollywood. In my line of work I get to read a lot of reviews and that's the one thing this movie has been criticized. Hello people, that's the way it REALLY goes in the real world!

RoboCop 2 is simply one of the best and uncompromising sequels around.

**** / *****
22 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Could have been so much better...
BStalker10 November 1998
There was no way this was ever going to be as good as Robocop but they could have done so much better. What's really missing is Basil Poledouris' wonderful fanfare theme tune. In its place we are giving some appalling brass'n'percussion with a chorus singing a ridiculous 'Robocop' theme on top. It's amazing how much music can change a film, and really, a decent score would have improved the film immensely.

Also, Rob Bottin's ultra-violent effects were sadly missed. The film is full of violence but it's mainly of the long-range bullets-hit-bad-guys type: the only thing close to the original's over-the-top nature was the brain removal and the stomach-slicing.

Phil Tippett is on hand, luckily, to deliver some entertaining stop-motion action scenes which really liven up the final scenes of carnage.

Sadly, the bad guys never come across as meanly as Clarence Boddicker did in the first, OCP seem unnecessarily annoying and the little kid is just annoying. It's not a TERRIBLE film but we really could have expected more from the man who brought us 'The Empire Strikes Back'.
12 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
An OK movie, but Verhoeven's absence is quite apparent, and it is nowhere near as great as its terrific predecessor...
MovieAddict201630 October 2003
Warning: Spoilers
***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS***

"RoboCop" is one of my all-time favorite guilty pleasures, the type of rare action movie that takes no prisoners and never lets up for a single moment until the ride is over, and when the credits start to fill the screen you just let out a big sigh of relief--not because it was a bad film, but because you survived the ride.

"RoboCop 2" is a bit different. Gone is Paul Verhoeven at the helm of the film and filling in for his absence is Irvin Kershner ("The Empire Strikes Back"). The film is violent, perhaps a bit more so than the first in certain areas overall, but it lacks the hard, almost unexplainable solid edge the first film had--the sharpness that pierces you as you watch the film like a knife blade. "RoboCop 2" has a dull blade. The first has a great effect. This does not. There's violence without reason, reason without explanation, and explanation without effect.

Detroit is worse off than it was in the last film--men bash little old ladies with cars and steal their loot; hookers stab men in the eye to steal cash; stores are blown up and rampages by little league players and the captain of the team even occur. Police are on strike because they claim the city is screwing them over--only RoboCop (Peter Weller), Lewis (Nancy Allen), and a few other policemen/women remain.

There's a new drug on the rise called "Nuke," manufactured and sold to the public by Cain (Tom Noonan) and his young apprentice (Gabriel Damon), who looks about 11 or 12 but talks with the language of a Quentin Tarantino character and kills innocent human beings mercilessly. Oh, but when he dies we're supposed to feel sorry for him because then he's a cute little mortally-wounded boy.

RoboCop chases down Cain and, after what seems two hours into the film, finally catches him. But Omni Corp, the corporation we saw in the first film, wants a new RoboCop, so they shut down life support on the dying Cain, take his brain and stuff it into a new RoboCop, referenced to so originally as "RoboCop 2," hence the title of the film. (My suggestion is that in "RoboCop 4," they should create a cyborg called RoboCop XP, and he can have lightning-fast reflexes and a built-in wireless broadband modem so he can check his e-mails and surf the 'Net while he's on the go.)

And putting a homicidal drug dealer's brain inside a giant-sized robot law enforcer with machine gun capabilities and weapons of mass destruction probably isn't a very good idea, but the thought never crosses the minds of Omni Corp. The chairman of Omni Corp (Daniel O'Herlihy) produces RoboCop 2 to the public, but RoboCop already realizes RoboCop 2 is dangerous and so he appears at the unveiling armed with a huge gun.

RoboCop 2 goes haywire and kills everyone. The entire sequence is done in cheesy Godzilla animation but, to be quite honest, it didn't look all that bad. He and RoboCop duke it out on top of buildings and in elevator shafts and on the ground outside Omni Corp, where an uncountable number of police officers (hey, weren't they on strike?) are left firing at this indestructible--and very bulletproof--machine that unfortunately does not have an OFF switch in sight. ("Turn it off!" he says. "I can't!" she says. "You idiots!" I say.)

So many loose threads are left dangling in "RoboCop 2," and so many subject matters that I wanted sorting out after seeing the first film. But there isn't any hope in sight. After a brief moment that hints towards the central idea that RoboCop may still be human after all (wasn't that sorta established in the original?), everything is dropped for the action set pieces to move in, such as a car chase with RoboCop and Cain, or the end finale that goes on too long. But RoboCop is seen spying on his wife in the beginning, and we find out that she has gone through serious trauma over this whole thing. She confronts him at the police station and out of decency he insists her husband is dead. But we see the look of remembrance and remorse in his eyes.

That's the storyline I would like to follow. I'd like to follow RoboCop's journey to find himself again, to recover lost memories floating around in that big brain of his. To confront his wife and tell her that he remembers her, to add a human element to the story that was so clearly demonstrated in the original but completely lost here. Kershner obviously wants to mimic Verhoeven. But Verhoeven knows how to equally balance action and excessive gore with social satire and the ongoing human battles, relevant to the action battles. Remember in the first film when RoboCop went through his house and his eyes started to flood with past images and faded memories? Nothing like that is done here. We simply get some cheesy flashback in the beginning when Alex (pre-RoboCop) is laughing with his wife in a very non-candid and dubious sort of way. As I saw this sequence, I just sat in my seat waiting for the word "Hallmark" to appear in gold font across the screen.

As for all the loose threads left open in this film and supposedly not touched in the third movie...let's all hope that when Paul Verhoeven said he wishes to return to the series he wasn't lying. I'd love to see this franchise closed in a more honorable fashion. "RoboCop 2" is an OK movie for a Friday night crowd, but in comparison with the original, it's about as cold as RoboCop's facial tissue and as cloudy as RoboCop's memory.

2.5/5 stars.

  • John Ulmer
15 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Thank you for not smoking.
davydteather22 June 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Robocop 2 is the action packed, fast paced sequel to 1987 hit movie Robocop. Their is more violence, more blood and more gun fights. Everything a sequel is supposed to have. Peter Weller comes back playing the title character yet again. And their is more body count. The look of it is very outstanding and and the story was very well done. This time around, Robocopis trying to stop a drug lord and bring him to justice for the manufacture of a very addictive narcotic, nuke. I thought the new cyborg in this film looked absolutely amazing. The best part of this movie is when Robocop and Caine as the cyborg are battling each other towards the end of the movie. I do not understand why this movie has the rating it has. One of the most underrated sequels of all time, along with Predator 2, which I also enjoyed. Although I did not like this movie as much as the first movie, I like it for what it is. I would recommend this movie to anybody who likes action. Their is enough action to keep you excited from beginning to end. This movie is not to be missed.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Helplessness
This was a big hit of my youth and so I decided to take a trip down memory lane and check if it still works as I have the VHS.

The plot of the film is that conglomerate OCP have decided to take over weeviled futuristic Detroit, and the way they are going to do this is by foreclosing on a loan that they have made to the city, which was secured on city assets (presumably stuff like the train station, prisons, libraries and schools). It's in their interest to let the city go to pot whilst this happens so they can play white knight to the public when they privatise, and so they withdraw their warranty on RoboCop and provoke the police to strike. RoboCop meanwhile is intent on dishing out justice to Cain, the kingpin of an organisation which distributes new designer drug, Nuke, in handy plastic cassettes.

Trauma and helplessness are big themes in this movie and there are two points in the movie where already physically traumatised individuals are systematically butchered/disassembled/tortured in a helpless state. In terms of general suffering whilst helpless I think you could probably raise that to five incidents, if you count three scenes when RoboCop is helpless (aides memoire: magnet, microshocks and "I type it, you think it"), once with a store keeper plagued by kids and also Officer Duffy.

The OCP "shyster" points out to RoboCop that he will never be able to go out dancing and fall in love again, and I think that statement lays bare his traumatic situation, which is a fundamentally hopeless one. The only solution he can find for his pain is to go out and murder criminals. This he manages to accomplish with élan and flourish. To show off at one point he steps into a shot whilst turning his head backwards, kind of like a pool player using their other hand or closing their eyes just before they take a pot. Whereas in the first movie his flourish when holstering is something that keeps alive the memory of his son, here his antics are genuinely psychotic.

The movie is pitch black at times, for example when the Old Man and corporate flunkeys watch film footage of various fatal failures in the RoboCop 2 program, I was reminded of the hideous real life footage the Nazis took of their V2 rocket tests (including one where various scientists and Reich underlings are wiped out by a boomeranging missile). Another particularly pernicious element is the corruption of childhood, one of the main baddies is small boy.

Dr. Juliette Faxx comes in as the main OCP baddie, a power-dressing man-eating sexual sadist. She is an alarming paranoid sexist nightmare that plays on anxieties of the era where men felt threatened by the first generation of "emancipated" and competitive women in the workplace. I think that the sexist nightmare of the 90s, which perhaps is still around, is of the aggressive, and yet impeccable female colleague, which actually is all about helplessness as well! As with the first movie there are newsclips hinting of the helplessness of the time, where environmental catastrophes come one straight after another, holes multiplying in the dam, with not enough fingers and toes to stop up them all.

This movie gets a bad rap maybe because it is not as flawless as the original RoboCop, for example the baddie Cain (Tom Noonan) is pretty listless compared to Clarence Boddiker from the first movie, and it's genuinely a nastier piece of work, however it contains its fair share of iconic moments, and ends up closer to being a horror movie than anything else, just absolutely haunting.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Best splatter sequel ever
peterpants668 December 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Former cop turned can opener Peter Weller returns with more binary code on his mind then a telemarketing firm. In futuristic Detroit which couldn't have been a better fit, or a more realistic one, Weller is having flashback's of his wife and kid, and the police are on strike. A fierce and flashy Tom Noonan leads a semi-skilled, equal opportunity goon squad in selling dope and dealing out life ending beatings. Robocop can't seem to get memories of his wife and child out of his head. He knows he's a robot and the conflict of coming to terms with his body, mind and heart are semi-explored. ICP decides to reprogram the bot with TONS of data that ends up in total overload. Truly one of the last pics to use lots of stop-motion animation. Cain after losing a game of "chicken" with Robocop gets stuck himself inside a case of metal. The showdown at the end is the stuff of legends pitting humanistic robotics against an overhauled terminator! Love the scene where Robo is set up in the factory, "Jesus had days like this". The sets are great, acting top notch, the story is good, direction comes from the man who did "Empire Strikes Back" and those funny Verhoeven commercials that he's known for, are slipped back in for chuckles. If you loved the first one, and are a fan of splatter violence, this is your flick. Ten stars.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
RoboCop Strikes Back
Viva_Chiba4 October 2010
I am surprised to see that this movie is bashed almost by everyone, i am in the minority that enjoyed this movie.

RoboCop 2 is directed by Irvin Kershner, director of 5th episode of the Star Wars saga, "The Empire Strikes Back".

Plot: A new dangerous drug called "Nuke" is circulating in the streets manufactured by the god-delirious "Kane"....now Alex "Robocop" Murphy as a new enemy to fight !

It features one of the best stop-motion animations ever, awesome job, stop motions does what CGI can't.

RoboCop 2 is violent and bloody, not brutal like the first one from Paul Verhoeven, but that's okay it's still enjoyable. Some of the stars complained about the movie being "Too violent" and "negative", probably this is the reason why we don't see Peter Weller RoboCop 3

RoboCop 2 still contains some satire, like in the first one, but if i tell you i will be forced to spoil something.

Too bad that it's followed by the kid friendly "Robocop 3".....
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Robocop 2: Robocop v. Cain
view_and_review21 January 2007
Warning: Spoilers
OCP is at it again.

I thought "Robocop 2" was great, and at the very least it was better than the first. R2 showed more vulnerability in Robocop and seemingly even more sinister bad guys. And how could you not like Cain? The Robocop v. Cain battle ranks high with me amongst silver screen battles, robots or otherwise. On the one hand there is Robocop: a virtually impenetrable human sized robot with a powerful, fully automatic Desert Eagle hand gun, unlimited ammo, and a dead cop's brain at the controls. On the other hand there is Cain: a state of the art, extra large, finely tuned weapon, with every imaginable weapon of destruction short of a nuclear bomb, and a nuke addicted dead drug dealer's brain at the controls.

The entire movie was priming the audience for a magnificent showdown between Robocop and Cain. First they showed Robocop's fallibility by having him chopped up and delivered to the front steps of the police HQ. Second, Robocop fried himself to erase the OCP programming in his brain that was hindering him from pursuing justice. Third, OCP created another robot using Cain's brain, a notorious drug dealer. Finally, "R2" made sure to display Cain's devastating power and ruthlessness when he broke up the meeting between the mayor and the young protégé drug dealer. By the time Cain was done, that crime scene looked like mid 70's Beirut. Cain appeared indestructible and far more menacing than the first Robocop bad 'bot: ED 209.

The final fight between the two was fantastic, especially if you like destructive, high casualty, spill over fights, and an awesome display of raw power. Robocop knew that he was over-matched so he even resolved to destroy himself in trying to destroy Cain when he pried Cain from the top of the high rise building. It was only Robocop's edge in intelligence that allowed him to finally defeat Cain.

"Robocop 2" was a rare improvement on an already good movie. The story was serviceable, the characters were a perfect fit, and the action was spot on. This movie was not for anyone looking for a deep message, or any kind of resolution to a previous bad experience. This was purely a good guy v. bad guys, finish with a bang action flick.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
I don't care what anyone says, I love Robocop 2.
poolandrews3 July 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Robocop 2 is again set in Detroit in the near future a year after the events of the original Robocop, Detroit is almost entirely financed by the company OCP. The city is in a state lawlessness as most of the cops are on strike as OCP cut their pay, OCP President (Dan O'Herlihy) watches on as his plan to foreclose on the current administration is working which will let OCP take complete control of Detroit. Out on the street a new addictive drug called Nuke is flooding the city, crime & violence follows it. Robocop & the few remaining cops have their hands full. Meanwhile evil scientist Dr. Juliette Faxx (Belinda Bauer) has set about creating a successor to Robocop, another cyborg crime prevention unit to protect & serve. However her real motives aren't as noble as they first seem...

Directed by Irvin Kershner this sequel to the popular Robocop (1987) was unfairly trashed on it's initial release & has a pretty bad reputation but it's a film that I love & while not quite as good as the original in my opinion it's still a terrific film that is probably more fun to watch than it's predecessor. The script credited to Frank Miller was apparently heavily rewritten & maybe that's why the story is a little choppy at times, for instance the character's are good but what was the comedy relief Mayor all about? Robocop's partner Lewis is relegated to standing around for the majority of the film & only seems there to provide some continuity to the original. Why was the subplot about Murphy's wife so short & dropped as soon as it was brought up? That would have given Robocop 2 a human edge. However the biggest single problem with Robocop 2 I have is why would anyone put the brain of a sadistic killer & drug baron into a heavily armed cyborg? It just doesn't make any sort of sense, what was Dr. Faxx's reasons behind it? It was supposed to be a police unit, right? Why get it addicted to Nuke as well? If you don't think about it too much it probably won't bother you. Now the good stuff, it moves along at a great pace with lots of action & I just love the huge over-the-top Robocop vs. Robocop 2 fight at the end, any serious sci-fi geek will lap it up. While the pitch black biting satire of the original isn't quite here there are still some nice moments including OCP trying to take control of Detroit & use it to make a profit, some funny commercial breaks (the one with the guy who commits suicide is funny) & the sequence where Robocop is reprogrammed to be good & none violent by upper class twits who have never lived in the real world is hilarious. I just think there is so much here to enjoy, plenty of gory violent action, lots of special effects, cool robots, car chases, explosions & some neat action scenes. What's not to like?

I really like the look of Robocop 2 & I liked the special effects. I think Robocop 2 was one of the last big budget theatrically released films to predominantly use stop-motion animation for the majority of the effects, over the next couple of years with the likes of Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991) & Jurassic Park (1993) in particular stop-motion died out virtually overnight & was replaced by CGI. I personally love stop-motion animation, it gives you the sense that there is actually something three dimensional there & while it can sometimes look a little jerky I seriously doubt if Robocop 2 was CGI it would look significantly any better. The Robocop vs. Robocop 2 fight at the end is just outrageous, from elevator shafts to the top of 100 storey buildings the makers have fun & in turn we, the audience, have fun. Well, I did anyway. Robocop 2 is also a very violent & pretty gory film, from snipers getting shot through their eye to dozens of people getting gorily riddled with bullets, there's a torture scene as someone is sliced open, there's a very gory brain removal sequence as there is a human brain in a tank & the person it used to belong to's hollowed out decapitated head, necks are violently broken, kids are shot & a guy has his eye poked out by a stiletto heel.

Technically the film is good with some great special effects in my opinion although some may find them a bit dated. Filmed in Houston in Texas. The acting is alright, the main villain Cain played by Tom Noonan isn't a patch on Boddicker from the original though.

Robocop 2 is a film that I think is fantastic, it's got some cool robots & lots of fun special effects sequences as well as plenty of blood, gore & violence although the dark satire of the first film is somewhat replaced by goofy silliness it tries to please everyone. Followed by the dire Robocop 3 (1993), the TV series Robocop (1994 - 1995) & the TV mini-series Robocop: Prime Directives (2000).
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Excellent comic-book sequel to the original.
medbh26 February 1999
I actually think Robocop 2 is superior to its predecessor, though many fans of the latter would probably disagree with me. Robocop 2 is very violent, bloody, and often quite funny. The action sequences are exciting and handled with great skill, and the FX are superb. This is one of my favourites.
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Much better than I remembered.
XweAponX25 January 2018
Irvin Kershner, who also directed probably the best Star Wars film "The Empire Strikes Back", does homage to Verhoeven's directorial style in this first sequel. Apparently Frank Miller wrote the original script, but Kershner didn't use much of it, but Miller hung around anyway.

We see many of the original actors return, especially in the OCP offices. The Newsbreak anchors. Also, many new faces. Who cast this? It is a veritable assembly of character actors who had been in "Star Trek: The Next Generation". The Kid from the opening Robo Drug Bust scene, "Hob" (Gabriel Damon) who taunts Robo, played opposite Michael Dorn in "The Bonding". Mark Rolston who was also in 'Aliens", was in "Eye of the Beholder" and also one episode of Star Trek Continues. Stephen Lee "Duffy" was the target of an Alien Assasin in "The Vengeance Factor". Jeff McCarthy was "Roga Danar", a supersoldier who Troi befriends. Maybe there are more TNG Alumni. Most likely, these are the actors Central Casting used back in 1990 when this was made, and we can virtually date when a film of series was made simply by the guest stars and extras.

Tom Noonan, from "Manhunter", is "Cain", a guy who makes Dope that makes Dope look like a weenie roast, and he's nasty. Noonan always plays great crooks, and he eventually becomes something worse for the final act of this film.

But what boggles me is that as sequels go, this isn't that bad, although not quite as good as the original. From the start is has some of the same elements that made RoboCop great. But you never know what's going to be a hit or not. This film has much of the look and feel of RoboCop, but for some reason it didn't go over. Of course there are plenty of problems and weak spots, but it is interesting to watch this in relation to the Original RoboCop and the reboot RoboCop from 2014.

Again, most of this was practical effects, but in 1990 some primitive CGI was used here. If you don't get caught up in the problems with this film, it does become part of the 3-film Robo story, concluded in Robo 3 with a different actor than Weller.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Really?
gressman0725 December 2014
I'm seeing ratings of 1/10 for this and am just baffled. Sure, this sequel is different from the original, which is, IMO, an amazing action/sci-fi/film in general. Sure, there are a lot of subplots and some points which definitely don't sync up (the "nice" Robocop subplot was humorous enough, but ultimately out of place with the rest of it and seemed only there to give the cops a reason to unify/come back). But there is still so much to enjoy. The opening/humor/action/homage to Veerhoven's violence and gore/villain/EPIC finale fight = all these things were great and worked in themselves, but I can see how they don't necessarily fit together due to all the various subplots and misdirections (the wife, the seeing his son in villain Home Alone boy, etc.). So a perfect film? No, but still an enjoyable sequel to a fantastic film, and one which syncs oddly enough with it considering it is a different director (owing largely to purposeful imitation of the commercials, satire, excessive gore, etc.) A 9/10 for me, minus 1 for what I interpreted as a not entirely synced up script and un-pursued subplots which might have been better removed to make for a tighter film or make room for more pertinent substance.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Good, but not as good as the first
jellyneckr30 May 2004
The original ROBOCOP was one of the rare science fiction movies from the 1980s that didn't suck. After the enormous success of the original ROBOCOP in 1987, there was no doubt that eventually a sequel would be made so three years after the release of the original ROBOCOP, there was ROBOCOP 2. The most common rule with movies is that sequels are terrible and while that is normally always true, that isn't the case with ROBOCOP 2. ROBOCOP 2 is almost as good as the original. It is just as violent and just as entertaining. However, director Irvin Kershner, while a great director, is no Paul Verhoeven. That's not to say that the directing in ROBOCOP 2 isn't good, it's just not as stylish and cool as Verhoeven's directing.

One of the best aspects of ROBOCOP 2 is that screenwriters Frank Miller and Walon Green were able to think of an original story instead of just using the same story line as the original film. A lot of the dialogue is kind of stupid, but no one sees action pictures like this for the dialogue.

Though ROBOCOP 2 is not a bad sequel, the same can't be said for the second sequel, ROBOCOP 3.
12 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Good sequel to RoboCop!
Movie Nuttball31 October 2002
The Sequel to RoboCop is a good one with more violence.Perter Weller and Nancy Allen both do as good Dan O'Herlihy,as they did in the original. Thomas Rosales Jr once again gets shot up in this movie which was no suprise to Me because in most of the films he is in he either gets killed or is behind bars.Tom Noonan is the villain this time around and is a good one at that! John Glover is his usual self.Leonard Rosenman`s score for RoboCop 2 is very good!Fans of the first RoboCop film check the sequel out as it is a good sequel with a lot of action!
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Not as 'deep' as Robo-cop, but more fun
profroche8 November 2000
while Film majoring fake hollywood insiders everywhere take particular relish in trashing this movie, it's actually really good. while the characters are a bit more two dimensional than in robocop, no one is quite so bad as to be a generic Hollywood action archetype. As long as you're not searching for a profound message in what is, after all, a Hollywood action movie, the you can really, really enjoy this. Some of the humor bits are hilarious, and the movie has a lot of classic scenes, in fact, the whole first 15 minutes of it could be considered a classic scene. People screaming about 'Nuke', Bad fat cop Duffy getting slammed into an arcade game, 'Bad Dudes', and the new robocop prototypes are all things that stick in people's heads. A lot of things Robocop says alone will have you cracking up, (when they turn him into a community role model for instance) and considering Robocop possibly represents the easiest acting job anyone has ever done, that's saying a lot if a monotone delivery can make you laugh. Basically, look to Robocop for a more meaningful movie, look to Robocop 2 for more fun, and more memorable scenes. look for Robocop 3 is you want to watch a 90 minute ad for robocop products, and make fun of punk rockers.
22 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed