High-Def Digest Forums

High-Def Digest Forums (https://forums.highdefdigest.com/)
-   Blu-ray Software General Discussion (https://forums.highdefdigest.com/blu-ray-software-general-discussion-16/)
-   -   'Robocop (2014)' - High-Def Digest Review (https://forums.highdefdigest.com/blu-ray-software-general-discussion/136255-robocop-2014-high-def-digest-review.html)

Attebery 06-04-2014 07:30 PM

'Robocop (2014)' - High-Def Digest Review
 
E has reviewed 'RoboCop (2014).' He says this remake/reboot is sleeker and more stylish, with updated visuals, but there's a spark of humor missing. With excellent video and audio, along with a handful of extras, this Blu-ray is well worth a look.

Full review here:
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/11908/robocop2014.html

boguspomp 06-04-2014 07:44 PM

We watched it a while ago and we liked it. My wife is a fan of the original; I only watched 20 minutes of that version.
Good review that covers all important points. Even if you are a hardcore Robocop 1987 fan don't hesitate and give this a try.
Cheers

timcharger 06-04-2014 09:16 PM

I just knew that these words would be said:

"For the most part, 'RoboCop (2014)' is a completely unnecessary,"

Unnecessary?

What kind of criteria for judging film is that? I understand if this was
Schindler's List or All the President's Men that there are movies that
are needed to be made. They are telling a necessary story for society
to put down in celluloid. Yes, you're right. Robocop 2014 is not
necessary. It's not Schindler's List.

But was Robocop 1987 necessary? Who first watched Robocop 1987
and walked out of the theater thanking the Hollywood Gods that this
"necessary" film was made? If the original can't pass this test, why
does the remake need to fulfill this criteria?

Does the remake explore themes that the original skips or only
glosses over?
Yes.

Are the themes of the original still relevant today, still notable for a
new generation to discover?
Yes.

Is this a reboot within 10 years to keep theatrical rights and is a
money grab to prolong intellectual property ownership?
No.

There are plenty of other questions to ask or criteria to judge why a
film should be made. But if "necessity" is a criteria, then 99% of all
films are unnecessary.

Krawk 06-04-2014 09:51 PM

Unnecessary would be the umpteen remakes of Carrie.
Robocop, although not R-Rated does not mean it is junk. The grading system has changed quite a bit - Many R-Rated titles back then are now considered PG-13. An action film that keeps you interested, and try to ignore the fact it is a "remake" - might be worth more than a look.

I realize the remaster is considered unrated because the MPAA censors decided to give it an X rating back then.

timcharger 06-04-2014 10:17 PM

Robocop 1987 is a cult classic that happens to be very violent.
The violence was a device used by the director Verhoeven in
telling his story.

However, the violence in and of itself is NOT the core story of
Robocop.

As long as the remake didn't change the violence gauge to a
Saturday morning cartoon level (and it didn't), it can
legitimately tell (and it does) the Robocop story with less gore.

Boston007 06-04-2014 10:23 PM

I enjoyed the remake and I can put aside that it doesn't have to be like the original. I can appreciate it if it was a reboot and whatnot.

timcharger 06-04-2014 10:59 PM

I liked Jay Baruchel as Michael Keaton's evil marketing guy.

And Michael Keaton was "deliciously scheming." His "let's go with black" line
gave me a wicked smile. I know that's closer to Christian Bale's Batman line,
but I can't help imagine Keaton's Batman saying that.

In the deleted scenes was another Michael Keaton gem.
(feels weird to use a spoiler tag on a deleted scene, but you should enjoy
the punchline)
Spoiler
It's from My Life.
The my dad and handshakes line, that's pure gold.

timcharger 06-04-2014 11:14 PM

E, late review due to Fox distributing this MGM film?

I like to make sure my Fox F-bombs are justified.

timcharger 06-04-2014 11:21 PM

"The overall package is at the very least worth a look."

Bottomline says Give It A Rent. Did you mean to select Worth A Look?

Or is this similar the confusion of a technical glitch accidentally deleting
the Must Own rating?

Boston007 06-05-2014 08:26 AM

This movie is worth it just to see Sam Jackson LOL - I loved his segments

Gloobey 06-05-2014 01:18 PM

Not sure if the review is a negative or positive one, pretty ambiguous from where I'm sitting. It should be a very positive review, this movie was so much more than your standard reboot, the sociopolitical subplot kept you interested and the action was spot on. The disc looks great, btw, so don't be put off by the review, pick it up...

Attebery 06-05-2014 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timcharger (Post 2484874)
"The overall package is at the very least worth a look."

Bottomline says Give It A Rent. Did you mean to select Worth A Look?

Or is this similar the confusion of a technical glitch accidentally deleting
the Must Own rating?

Just fixed. Not sure how that happened.

rainman208 06-05-2014 03:15 PM

Like many i was very weary of this especially after the Total Recall remake disaster. But I must say I found this one enjoyable. I'm glad I gave it a chance. My Blu-ray copy is on the way.

timcharger 06-05-2014 03:21 PM

"Dead or alive, you're coming with me."

I liked how 2014's Robocop turned the meaning of this phrase around.

Robocop 1987 meant the criminal whether dead or alive, would be
captured/arrested by Murphy.

Robocop 2014 has Murphy disregarding his own life, dead or alive,
Murphy's gonna get the culprit.

taygan315 06-06-2014 01:56 AM

Picked up the metalpak at BB Tuesday. Like the cover. Cant wait to see the flick for the first time.

malakai 06-07-2014 03:55 PM

Just got done watching this. I wouldn't exactly call it as good a the original, although it's not bad. We were considering purchasing this but decided not to after watching it. It's a solid rent.

Tnecniv 06-11-2014 11:01 PM

Blind bought and watched. The story had some nice substance to go with the good looking action, and the cast performed well within their roles. But there was something missing that kept it from being great. For some reason, just didn't care for Murphy and his family, and I thought that the bad guys needed to be a little more... bad, though I did appreciate that they weren't over the top caricatures. Was a good all around movie but I just felt no emotional attachment to any of the characters.

timcharger 06-12-2014 02:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tnecniv (Post 2486726)
Blind bought and watched. The story had some nice substance to go with the good looking action, and the cast performed well within their roles. But there was something missing that kept it from being great. For some reason, just didn't care for Murphy and his family, and I thought that the bad guys needed to be a little more... bad, though I did appreciate that they weren't over the top caricatures. Was a good all around movie but I just felt no emotional attachment to any of the characters.

I'd agree with this:
"Was a good all around movie but I just felt no emotional attachment".

Rewatching the 1987 flick, I say the same lack-of-emotional-attachment
goes for the original. Murphy is introduced by transferring into the Detroit
precinct and all we learn of him is that he practices twirling his gun due to
his son and that he likes to argue with his female partner on who drives
the police car. Before we get emotionally attached to 1987's Murphy, he
has a gruesome near-death by cartoon-like, silly-laughing thugs. Shortly
thereafter, he's Robocop.

I think both 1987 and 2014 films has to juggle the task of giving the
audience some character development to get some emotional attachment
to the Cop, yet also quickly deliver on-screen the Robot.

timcharger 06-12-2014 03:03 AM

Something I thought 2014 could have done that 1987 did was the tough female
partner cop. Nancy Allen in 1987 was a novel change, and her brutality as a
cop willing to punch it out with the bad guys was interesting. Though she
didn't look the part, she looked like she was only 100 lbs soaking wet, her part
stood out.

Usually, Michelle Rodriguez gets the parts of a chick who can knockout a dude
with her right cross. It would have better I think, if Robocop 2014 kept that
character.

ZebraMajor 06-12-2014 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timcharger (Post 2486762)
I'd agree with this:
"Was a good all around movie but I just felt no emotional attachment".

Rewatching the 1987 flick, I say the same lack-of-emotional-attachment
goes for the original. Murphy is introduced by transferring into the Detroit
precinct and all we learn of him is that he practices twirling his gun due to
his son and that he likes to argue with his female partner on who drives
the police car. Before we get emotionally attached to 1987's Murphy, he
has a gruesome near-death by cartoon-like, silly-laughing thugs. Shortly
thereafter, he's Robocop.

I think both 1987 and 2014 films has to juggle the task of giving the
audience some character development to get some emotional attachment
to the Cop, yet also quickly deliver on-screen the Robot.

Murphy's gruesome slaughter in the original movie is the only emotion attachment the audience needs. It triggers an emotional revenge instinct. By design we're not required to care about Murphy's wife and son. Structurally they're only included to serve Murphy's story arc. The story is so lean and mean any beefing up of the family arc would dilute the movie's focus. And his bond to Lewis is established very efficiently. Verhoeven is wise to construct the story in this way.

Who wanted or needed more wife in son in the original?

Haven't seen the new one but by adding more focus to the family story they did something fresh with the material. Kudos for that.

timcharger 06-12-2014 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZebraMajor (Post 2486833)
Murphy's gruesome slaughter in the original movie is the only emotion attachment the audience needs.

Hence my point there isn't much emotional connection to a gung ho, newly
transferred cop who followed a van full of heavily-armed thugs into a huge
industrial warehouse. The thugs don't have a kidnapped victim, their van
is abandoned so they are on foot, they vastly outnumber the 2 cops, and
Murphy and partner don't wait for backup, when they can have the criminals
surrounded?! His gruesome slaughter after his cavalier attitude isn't
emotionally resonant.

Hell, I enjoyed Robocop 1987. I'm just saying that original 1987 offers
little in the emotionally connecting with hero. Which is fine, that wasn't
Verhoeven's goal. Social commentary and outlandish violence was.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZebraMajor (Post 2486833)
Who wanted or needed more wife in son in the original?

Well that would be hard to do in the 1987 plot with Murphy, a father and
husband, rashly rushing into the criminals' den outnumbered and outgunned.
From 1987 Murphy's actions, he's a caricature of a dad. He's more
concerned with impressing his son with gun twirling, than taking sensible
police risks and getting back home alive.

Again not a fault of the 1987 film, since that wasn't its goal.

Further, how much love does the 1987 Murphy really have for his family, if
an address change ends his pursuit of his "loved" ones?

ZebraMajor 06-12-2014 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timcharger (Post 2486844)
Hell, I enjoyed Robocop 1987. I'm just saying that original 1987 offers little in the emotionally connecting with hero. Which is fine, that wasn't
Verhoeven's goal. Social commentary and outlandish violence was.

My point is I think there isn't much emotional connection for you. I don't have that problem. Murphy's murder is enough to get me on board emotionally. My guess is that's true for most people who love the movie.

Boston007 06-12-2014 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZebraMajor (Post 2486864)
My point is I think there isn't much emotional connection for you. I don't have that problem. Murphy's murder is enough to get me on board emotionally. My guess is that's true for most people who love the movie.

I felt way more attached and emotional to the 1987 Murphy than the 2014 one.

Tnecniv 06-13-2014 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timcharger (Post 2486763)
Something I thought 2014 could have done that 1987 did was the tough female
partner cop. Nancy Allen in 1987 was a novel change, and her brutality as a
cop willing to punch it out with the bad guys was interesting. Though she
didn't look the part, she looked like she was only 100 lbs soaking wet, her part
stood out.

Usually, Michelle Rodriguez gets the parts of a chick who can knockout a dude
with her right cross. It would have better I think, if Robocop 2014 kept that
character.

Even though I enjoyed Michael K Williams in the role - subjectively more than anything, am very partial to his character from The Wire (then again, am pretty much partial to all the actors in that show, love the Wire, but that's another conversation for another day), I agree with this. I think Gina Carano would have made a good Lewis.

Favelle 06-13-2014 01:18 AM

Gonna light this up this weekend.... Am i in for some good bass or what?

eNoize 06-13-2014 03:24 AM

The bass is pretty good and RoboCop's footsteps have some weight to the them, but the best moments are when he shoots his gun, which reaches down to 17Hz with a bit of authority. A graph of the overall bass is here.

Boston007 06-13-2014 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Favelle (Post 2486988)
Gonna light this up this weekend.... Am i in for some good bass or what?

I HATE you for your awesome bass!

bruceames 06-13-2014 12:44 PM

I would have bought it if it had a 3D version.

stephan.klose 06-24-2014 02:57 AM

For some reason this movie left me so cold I couldn't even tell if I liked it or not after I finished watching it. That's extremely rare for me. Usually I land on either end of the spectrum. But this movie just left me cold. And the guy who played Robocop already had no emotions before he was Roboop. From a technical standpoint the Blu Ray was amazing though. Still I can't recommend this one. Might have been at least fun if it were rated R with some Langauge and Violence.

Krawk 06-24-2014 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan.klose (Post 2488562)
And the guy who played Robocop already had no emotions before he was Robocop.

Much can be said about Peter Weller's character - you had a real hard time caring about him as there was almost no character development. But, the story moved pretty quickly, so maybe it was a good thing.

Favelle 06-25-2014 02:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eNoize (Post 2487000)
The bass is pretty good and RoboCop's footsteps have some weight to the them, but the best moments are when he shoots his gun, which reaches down to 17Hz with a bit of authority. A graph of the overall bass is here.

Yesssss,,,,,,.....!

Favelle 06-25-2014 02:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boston007 (Post 2487019)
I HATE you for your awesome bass!

Don't hate.........JOIN! ;)

Anjohl 01-07-2015 03:45 AM

I cannot believe I am about to say this, but: I really liked it. I wouldn't go so far as to say I loved it, but I disagree with virtually every criticism I have seen. The movie was tight, well paced, incredibly well acted, and Jackson's framing device was genius, and very topical. Oddly enough, the worst part of the film was the lead protagonist. I found his performance somewhat wooden.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:44 PM.