phanthinga I'm totally fine with movie remakes or reboots of a series if they got fresh idea to once famous character and know how to bring the character back to modern public eyes so when finally got the time to watch the 2014 remake of Robocop i want to pat everyone back who work on the movie for a job well done cause this movie is not a slap to the original material when it explore more about things the original only touch on the surface.Stuff like what happens inside Alex head when he turn into Robocop finally get a reasonable answer and the hardship of how he dealing with his family when the original show very few of it.That being said I find the world buildinng in the original still better when it actually show how much of a dark and gritty world we live in when in the 2014 version we only saw it though little computer screen.The action is okay at best and the replacement of Clarence a scary criminal that give Robocop alot of trouble Antoine Vallon is so forgettable and too much of a coward.In the end there things to like and dislike in this movie so don't dismiss it just because it a remake of a movie you like

juneebuggy I went into thins thinking I'm not sure we need this remake to begin with as the original 80's movie stands up fine and is still such a classic...and I was right New Robocop is just another soulless CGI fest with way too many shoot-um-up scenes, giant robots, video game style action and missing all the emotion and campiness of the original. Joel Kinnaman, I like him but he is lost here as Murphy -a cop resurrected as a crime fighting cyborg whose past life makes him question his corrupt corporate overlords, as he also seeks justice against the criminals that attacked him.Even during his horrifying physical transformation, which leaves him mostly cyborg, I didn't get the feels. I also didn't like how they changed the storyline and had him getting injured in an explosion and then his wife signing him over to Omnicorp In the original the scene that has always stayed with me is Peter Weller getting shot multiple times, getting his arm blown off and his heartache after he is "robocoped" that his wife thinks he's dead and he knows he can't go back to her, ever. This also has me bored with too many endless shoot um up scenes that just went on and on.Ultimately I was disappointed but no more than I expected. Even if I try to take this reboot on its own merits and forget about the original its just not a great movie.

Gavin Purtell I went into the 'RoboCop' reboot with fond, but not very vivid, memories of the original, seeing as it came out when I was 2! I do remember having a RoboCop figurine that I used to play with as a kid. And this new film does a good job of making him look both new and futuristic, but also similar enough to the original that old fans won't be disappointed - he's silver for about a third of the film and black for the rest.In terms of story, it's pretty straight forward - Detective Alex Murphy (Kinnaman) is almost killed, is turned into a cyborg and then tracks down the bad guys in Detroit. Sure, there's a little more to it than that - is he more man, or machine? Does he still have a conscience/soul? And does it matter if he's good at his job?There's some decent action, but a lot of shaky/fast camera work that doesn't always help the action scenes. It feels longer than it should and doesn't have the best ending. Oldman and Keaton are good, but it's hard to feel any real connection to Murphy and his wife (Cornish), as you never spend any real time with them.

Filipe Neto "Robocop" was one of the most remarkable trilogies of the eighties, and it marked the collective memory of those who lived that time. Even those who haven't seen the movies have surely heard of them. The story retains the essential structure that had been shown in the previous films, which makes me think about why they made this movie if they didn't show a new story. The answer is natural: profit. Anyway, there are some differences between this film and its predecessors. Most obviously, a major effort was made here to humanize what used to be a kind of unfeeling cyborg, that simply performed tasks for which it had been programmed. Another difference is that we watch the design and construction of the robot, as well as the motives and intentions behind it. It's clear the commercial interest, as well as the way the industry takes advantage of an injured man to conquer a new market. Another striking difference is the end of dystopian satire to urban society presented so far: the older films featured Robocop as a law response to a violent escalation of crime in an increasingly inhumane and savage urban world, while here he's only a mean to reach a new market by a large multinational.Joel Kinnaman played a decent Robocop, with some human traits but no emotion or obvious psychological conflict. Michael Keaton is a good villain, a self-seeking man who doesn't look to the means to achieve his financial goals. Gary Oldman is the most humane side of the industry who creates Robocop, and he manages to get out of the job even though there is no effort in betting on his inner or psychological conflicts. Abbie Cornish is the actress who has shown greater ability to demonstrate her psychology, but her character specifically serves this purpose. Samuel L. Jackson is a good actor, but I honestly didn't understand the purpose of his character. At a technical level, good CGI reigns in this film but that could be expected. Soundtrack, unfortunately, is quite forgettable.This movie, made for quick profit, is an unnecessary remake of a good trilogy of the 80's that isn't yet worn out by time. So its almost impossible not to make comparisons. Without much emotion or tension, the film lacks psychological depth and is utterly devoid of satire, though it weaves several harsh criticisms of how certain industries may be impersonal and inhumane. Curiously, one criticism the film doesn't do is that the robot is made in the new American mega-factory... China. We are well aware that companies (and not just US) like to exploit cheap labor of Eastern countries, but to see this on film is some bad taste.