Wayhomer Review #172: Robocop (2014)

[fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”]
Joel Kinnaman as Robocop

'Well thank Christ for that...at least I have a real hand left so I can still unlock my iPhone 5S.'

It’s Episode #172 for Robocop (2014), in which our protagonist enjoys back story and setup as much as the next bearded lunatic who can drive, but really wants the story to just get underway. Also, he defends remakes (no, really)…and applauds the new black color scheme for Robocop. It’s just a sensible choice.
[/fusion_builder_column][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”]

Direct link for the feedreaders. Downloadable iPod version here.

Want to subscribe to our Wayhomers as a video podcast? Here’s your link.

Want to subscribe to all our video podcasts in one fell swoop? Here’s your link.

Special thanks to PhantomV48 for the closing animation.

Previous episode here.[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

About author View all posts Author website

Widge

5 CommentsLeave a comment

  • One of the worst things a reviewer can do (when it comes to remakes) is compare it to the original. What for? It is not a sequel! There is no point. I often check Rotten Tomatoes and it annoys me that Robocop (2014) gets a really low score because it was “not as clever as the original” or so. That is why probably I do not only agree with your reviews but also I eagerly anticipate them.
    I don´t think the lenght of back story was necessarily a bad thing, it was not boring and built relationships between characters especially with Murphy and the Dr.

  • I think it can go both ways. On one hand, you want the film to stand on its own. I disagree with saying, well, the original was better so this film sucks. I mean, if it sucks on its own, fine, but if your main thing against it is “It wasn’t the first film” then why the hell didn’t you just stay home and watch the first film? There’s a reason why I’ve never seen or reviewed the ARTHUR remake. I would not be able to watch it objectively and judge it on its own…so I simply have never seen it and don’t plan to. (ARTHUR is my favorite movie.) I don’t even necessarily hold it against a remake if they’re trying to just, you know, remake it and not add a new spin or a new angle or a new whatever. You can have a perfectly good staging–on stage–of HAMLET or even SWEENEY TODD without having to change anything except the cast. So if somebody wants to give it a shot and do it themselves, that’s great. I think you can take that too far, like with Gus Van Sant’s PSYCHO remake, which was pointless.

    The bottom line is: make a good movie. Not even a superlative, Oscar-winning, mind-blowing movie. Just make a good movie. I’ll even accept, like here, attempt to expand, go do something different, run with an idea–and not pull it off completely. E for Effort. I’ll take that over PSYCHO REDUX any day of the week.

%d bloggers like this: