RoboCop

Na sua primeira metade, RoboCop observa a psicologia de transformar um humano num robô e dá pistas sobre questões de ética sem perder as primeiras pistas de espetáculo visual. Na segunda metade, o filme acelera e o drama cuidadosamente construído decompôs-se (uma reviravolta que até os seus criadores (ou seja, nem mesmo o próprio argumentista) não compreendem, onde RoboCop coloca como prioridade resolver o seu passado e não os crimes em curso, é o início desta decomposição), e a intrigante ficção científica torna-se uma brincadeira de ação. É como se o filme de Padilha tivesse sido editado e abreviado pelos produtores para acomodar um público mais consumista que não precisa mais do que uma «brincadeira» de ação. É uma pena. As opiniões cínicas sobre a política internacional dos EUA e algumas piadas engraçadas («Só sou de marketing!») sugerem que o novo RoboCop poderia ter sido um remake equivalente, um espelho dado à sociedade inteligentemente deslocado para o novo milénio. (15/02/2014)

Values (moral, personal, familial), likable anti-American critique (toothless, inoffensive), action with only one truly distinctive scene (the warehouse), and the strangled potential of wanting to play out at least one of the themes a little stronger. Or, it’s a perfectly Hollywood fluffy nothing that is held afloat only by Kinnaman's undeniable charisma. 3 ½. (09/12/2014)

This film could serve as a demonstration of how contemporary Hollywood sometimes bets on the brain drain of progressive personalities from other cinematographies and then tries to tame them in the machine. Padilha’s "action social drama" manuscript is there at the beginning, and seeing the editing and shooting from "another world" is, of course, a refreshing but sedentary rating, a bit of enigmatic magic with musical dramaturgy as a result, and the surprisingly extinct kinetics of Carvalho's camera just turn the action into padding. The creators also sometimes provocatively associate it with demanding conversations about the essence of the main character. The new RoboCop is actually a bit of a radical and staid conversational drama about a man from whom remains only a piece of his face and several organs. Most of the violence from the original moves from the streets to the body of the protagonist, who spends more than half of the film dealing with his identity, family, and getting used to the suit. Thanks to well-written dialogues and great actors, it works. Ideologically, the film evokes the irony of the original through a right-wing talk show and a parody of the marketing abuse of Murphy / RoboCop as a product for the masses. There is also a noticeable shift in the acceptance of a globalized perspective and the transformation of the corporate sphere from "sharks in suits" to a casual field of philanthropists in cool outfits. While Verhoeven once made a film that can be consumed as a perfect product of American culture and as its harsh parody, "liberal fascist" Padilha and his team are much more literal. Some people still have a problem deciphering it, but the critical storyline pointing to the mechanization of war and justice is quite understandable. Combined with thoughts about transforming man into a machine, it becomes quite a productive thing to think about. The new RoboCop will never offer the total "blood, shit and mud" pleasure of the original, which it tries not to refer to too ostentatiously (and when it does, then it does so ironically - the use of Poledouris’ motif as the signature tune of a right-wing agitation show). It looks for its own way to get to the topic. Therefore, despite the wheels falling off and the somewhat dubious gradation of the second half, it makes sense. Special thx to always fabulous Oldman, easygoing armyJobs Keaton and the very precisely vulnerable Kinnaman. I’ll be keeping my fingers crossed for it, but it will probably just pass us by like (the little more problematic) Elysium. I just hope that we will see the day when the ratio of realized and unrealized ideas in the fights between producer and inventive creator goes the other way. [75%] (06/02/2014)

A lot of movies influenced me throughout my childhood and Robocop was one of those movies. Which is why I thought I won’t be too happy about another 1980s action movie remake. But then I saw some reviews claiming that this remake wasn’t bad at all, which is actually why I decided to watch it. And I must admit that it had its upsides, especially actors like Samuel L. Jackson or Gary Oldman, who did all the hard work on this movie. Joel Kinnaman wasn’t quite as good as them. But why should he since he appears as a human in the beginning only to come back as an emotionless Robocop. I was also a little shocked that this movie didn’t have a proper story. They create a robo-human who is so perfect that he has no competition. Or at least until a dozen lunatics start shooting missiles at him that could tear a giant apart. (13/09/2014)

Somewhere half-way. I don’t glorify Verhoeven’s classic, so I went into Padilha’s remake without prejudice, and yet it was unable to win me over in any significant way. As an action flick, the action scenes in Robocop aren’t exciting, and as a satire, it’s not sharp enough, even though it has some promising hints. Overall it’s unremarkably bland. (04/05/2014)