Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Robocop

Robocop
Thread Tools
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 6, 2013, 02:47 PM
 
RoboCop - Movie Trailers - iTunes

Robocop is one of the best movies ever (that's not hyperbole), so I was doubtful this was going to work, but I'm impressed.

What made me go "okay, you win" was the in-universe explanation for the look of the new suit (which I don't much care for yet) vs. the look of the original, which was more than awesome.

IIRC, the original movie cost $14MM, and the suit cost half of it.

Worth every penny.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 6, 2013, 03:33 PM
 
Looks good. Stellar cast, and Joel Kinnaman is a truly inspired choice.

Not completely feeling the black suit, but the silver suit looks fantastic.

They've clearly reinvented the story significantly, which is a good thing: citizens are wary of drone policing, so the corporation creates a drone cop who only appears to have free will. Brilliant.

The original RoboCop was obvious satire. This film seems to tell it straight. Time will tell if that reformulation works.

I wonder who the "bad guys" are this time? (Since were know OmniCorp are the real bad guys.) I'm kinda tired of terrorists as villains, but the bombing and drone elements of the story seem to make that a lock.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 6, 2013, 03:35 PM
 
Yep, the original is an all-time great. This trailer doesn't quite sell me - my only hope for this remake was when the rumour that Michael Fassbender would play Murphy was circulating. THAT would have made me buy a ticket.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 6, 2013, 03:35 PM
 
No idea who the guy is, not impressed by the suit, not a fanatic about the original (I like it, but its over-the-top, yes I know that's the point), pessimistic of all remakes.

I think that sums it all up.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 6, 2013, 03:43 PM
 
As I said, I don't like the suit either, but I liked them admitting up-front it's marketing.

Also, as much as I love Ronny Cox, I think Michael Keaton is perfect for the villain.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 6, 2013, 03:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
No idea who the guy is...
This should help: The Killing (TV Series 2011– ) - IMDb

Like everything on AMC, The Killing is fantastic television.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 6, 2013, 03:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
As I said, I don't like the suit either, but I liked them admitting up-front it's marketing.
What do you mean?
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 6, 2013, 03:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
This should help: The Killing (TV Series 2011– ) - IMDb

Like everything on AMC, The Killing is fantastic television.
I googled him. Haven't seen the show, so it's kinda irrelevant. And I didn't hear great things about it.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your Anus
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 6, 2013, 06:19 PM
 
Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

My sig is 1 pixel too big.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: type 13 planet
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 6, 2013, 07:31 PM
 
It's probably going to be pg-13
It's probably not going to have anything CLOSE to Boddicker
It's probably going to beat us over the head with some free will bullshit
It's probably also going to SUCK

New, Improved and Legal in 50 States
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 7, 2013, 12:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
What do you mean?
From what I can gather, he starts out the original colors, and then Keaton does some corporate meddling and makes it "tactical" black.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 7, 2013, 05:09 AM
 
It looks better than I thought it would be, the suit looks better when it's silver. It's one of those 'tell the whole story in a very short time' trailers though, explaining a lot of things before you see the film, not a teaser to bring you in and find things out when you watch it (yes I know it's a remake).

It'll be much easier if you just comply.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 7, 2013, 07:58 AM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
I wonder who the "bad guys" are this time? (Since were know OmniCorp are the real bad guys.) I'm kinda tired of terrorists as villains, but the bombing and drone elements of the story seem to make that a lock.
Commies.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 7, 2013, 08:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
From what I can gather, he starts out the original colors, and then Keaton does some corporate meddling and makes it "tactical" black.
Oh. I thought you meant they changed the colour to black for movie marketing purposes, not story-driven reasons.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 7, 2013, 02:05 PM
 
Cool! Side note: The Killing sucks.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 7, 2013, 05:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
Oh. I thought you meant they changed the colour to black for movie marketing purposes, not story-driven reasons.
I think it's both. They (the producers) changed it to "update" the look, and they have the asshole corporate dude "update" the look in the movie.

I'm positive this was meant to be reflexive.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 7, 2013, 05:04 PM
 
Also, Keaton might be the Miguel Ferrer character rather than the Ronny Cox character.

Shit. Those are two great actors. This movie has its work cut out for it.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 7, 2013, 05:05 PM
 
I used to call the old man funny names. "Iron Butt." "Boner." Once I even called him..."asshole."
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 7, 2013, 08:44 PM
 
I've been thinking about the original, and just a little touch I recall is there are no opening credits. This, along with how much of the budget they dedicated to the suit, are both indications about how much the people involved cared about the movie.

That's not to say credit isn't important, only it has it's time and place, and proper placement was more important to them.
     
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 7, 2013, 08:56 PM
 
I get the feeling that Sam Jackson is the Ronny Cox character this time.

I'm on the fence with this. While I liked the original, it was about how the story was told, not the setting, nor Verhoeven's satire. Never have thought much of Verhoeven overall anyway, as he tended to throw all sorts of weirdness into things that should have stood on their own without his take on them. Check out "Starship Troopers" (the movie) for how thoroughly he could trash what was a fairly cerebral story by turning it into a "bug hunt." Anyway, Weller, Cox and the rest of the cast made what should have been a crappy B movie into a real piece of art through acting and playing it all straight. It remains to be seen whether the upcoming film can pull that off.

I hope the new movie doesn't include the stupid "commercials" Verhoeven's movie had. "I'd buy that for a dollar." Talk about cheesy (and irritating) tag lines!

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 7, 2013, 10:27 PM
 
I think Verhoeven can be really good. Like with Robocop and Total Recall. I agree Starship Troopers sucked.

I also liked the commercials and I'd buy that for a dollar. It was supposed to be annoying.

Weller, Cox, Ferrer, and the That 70's Show guy are all really good actors, who I like a lot. It's a little sad Weller stopped, but it's cool he decided to stop to become a history professor.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 7, 2013, 10:38 PM
 
Fantastic Verhoeven touch from Total Recall:

When Arnold runs through the security sensor, before he jumps through the screen, there's a quick cut to the two guards who are manning the station. Verhoeven (I assume) directed them to behave like they had never seen this before and had no idea what to do.

That's a brilliant little piece of storytelling. It's showing you that security sensor is so good it has eliminated people trying to sneak weapons through it, and these guards spend their whole day doing nothing.

All in a two second shot.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 7, 2013, 11:04 PM
 
I liked "Starship Troopers" a lot.

It was *supposed* to be a trashy satire on B-Movie space flicks even more than a satire sci-Fi dystopia.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2013, 12:02 AM
 
I'll fully admit I wasn't on that wavelength when I saw the movie.

They spent an insane amount of money on it, I was kinda expecting more than a B-movie.
     
Forum Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Jose, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2013, 12:16 AM
 
The black suit looks nice, MUCH better than the grey suit.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2013, 12:18 AM
 
Maybe someday they'll do Starship Troopers with suits.

They'll probably be black.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2013, 04:18 AM
 
The production was A-movie. The storytelling and all of the lines most definitely were satire.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: type 13 planet
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2013, 09:22 AM
 
Starship Troopers is a god dang masterpiece. It's a damn shame Verhoeven couldn't benefit from the modern production techniques/quality dung like Elysium or Prometheus so flippantly waste.

New, Improved and Legal in 50 States
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2013, 10:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
I hope the new movie doesn't include the stupid "commercials" Verhoeven's movie had. "I'd buy that for a dollar." Talk about cheesy (and irritating) tag lines!
Wasn't that line from The Running Man? I think Robocop had the animated commercials for steroids and whatever.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2013, 10:20 AM
 
Starship Troopers has two big problems:

1) They used that title for a movie that has absolutely nothing to do with the book, because that book could have made a very interesting movie.
2) Denise Richards. She has exactly two facial expressions.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2013, 12:22 PM
 
One shot in the trailer is reminiscent of Revenge of the Sith. My friends call me Murphy. You call me Darth RoboCop
¡Viva Cristo Rey!
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2013, 01:27 PM
 
I remember Verhoeven talking about the fleet getting attacked.

He said he wanted it to be like a freeway pileup.

You're in space for **** sake. You don't "drive" in space like it's the freeway.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2013, 01:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
Starship Troopers has two big problems:

1) They used that title for a movie that has absolutely nothing to do with the book, because that book could have made a very interesting movie.
Starting with the Mobile Infantry not being, umm... mobile.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2013, 01:41 PM
 
The entire point about the military in Starship Troopers is that it's absolutely tiny but extremely advanced. They drop a platoon to take over a planet, win and go to the next. When dropping, they're spaced with 2km between each soldier. They win because they have highly advanced armor and training, and the result is that they very rarely die. It's the genesis of the entire space marine thing. The movie is the opposite - huge armies that basically get slaughtered because they're incompetent, and the "win" is because Barney Stinson turns out to be a telepath.

Note that the threequel tries to get it back onto the powerful suits track, but I don't think anyone saw that movie.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2013, 02:10 PM
 
I need to bring this back on topic.

"Bitches, leave."
     
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2013, 03:44 PM
 
Before returning to topic: P has essentially capsulized the whole wrongness of Verhoeven's "Starship Troopers." It was his story, but he wanted to get the benefit of Heinlein's track record. Up until a few weeks before its release, the movie was titled "Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers," but his estate killed that as soon as they saw the film. On the other hand, the Heinlein story is almost entirely NOT about combat, but about the reasoning and essentially the philosophy behind why combat is needed, when and where. It's a thought provoking, as well as entertaining read. Oh, and Denise's facial expressions were not why she was cast in that role...

Did they use "I'd buy that for a dollar" in Running Man? Because it's in many of the irritating in-film commercials in Robocop.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2013, 06:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
Starship Troopers has two big problems:

1) They used that title for a movie that has absolutely nothing to do with the book, because that book could have made a very interesting movie.
2) Denise Richards. She has exactly two facial expressions.
1) that may be the case. "Inspired by" would probably have been appropriate, from what you've explained.
2) She was perfect. B-Movie all the way. Matched the stylized dialogue and cliché characters.

I'm sorry. I really like that movie. I'm unaffected by expectations, though.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2013, 07:19 PM
 
Here's another great Robocop quote:

"BLAM! BLAM! BLAM! BLAM! BLAM!"
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 9, 2013, 04:22 AM
 
"Robo, excuse me, Robo, any special message for all the kids watching at home?"

"Stay out of trouble."
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 9, 2013, 04:28 AM
 
"Okay Miller! Don't hurt the mayor! We'll give you what you want!"

"First, don't **** with me. I'm a desperate man! And second, I want some fresh coffee. And third, I want a recount! And no matter how it turns out, I want my old job back!"

"Okay."

"And I want a bigger office! And I want a new car! And I want the city to pay for it all!"

"What kind of car, Miller?"

"Something with reclining leather seats, that goes really fast, and gets really shitty gas mileage! Alright?"
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 9, 2013, 07:22 PM
 
Someone pointed out the extra reflexivity of Keaton being the guy who started "suits" being black in Batman.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2013, 04:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
Wasn't that line from The Running Man?
Nope, that was Robocop.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2013, 07:05 PM
 
I just watched the trailer a few more times. One problem I have is the shape of Murphy's head.

I'd be shocked if one of the key reasons Weller was cast wasn't because he has this ridiculous, thin head, which you can put robocrap on and have it look like a normal head.

This actor has a normal head, which looks bulbous when roboed.


In the observation department I noticed they don't "lose the arm" in this version.

God, that was a ****ing good movie.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2013, 07:11 PM
 
I'm pretty confident that the helmet with the flip back visor is removable and we will see the "robohead" at some point in the film.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2013, 07:44 PM
 
Oh, no doubt. The thing is Weller has a head shaped in a way you can pull it off, and because there was no flip visor*, when the helmet came off, it was a "thing", which again, was helped by Weller's misshapen skull.

With this, we get the flipped up visor in the trailer. It's probably not a "thing".

This isn't a problem in and of itself, the problem is this actor has a normal shaped head. When the visor is flipped up he looks... goofy. Like his face is trying to squeeze out.

Now that I think about it, Weller was wiry, which I think helped as well. This guy seems more built, making the rest of the suit too big for his face.



*I like the visor. I feel it has some of the same lineage as the Egyptian armor from Stargate, which was by far the best part of that movie. More importantly however, nifty Verhoeven grade storytelling when he chokes the doctor and the visor flips down as he's doing it. He's (presumably) just woken up. No one has taught him to use the visor. He's "born" knowing it. He doesn't think "visor down", it's wired into his emotions.

This segues nicely into the "who's in control" theme they're exploring. In one sense his emotions triggered the visor, in another, his ability to translate emotion into action has been 100% manufactured. He didn't make that happen, his creators built him that way.

That's two tons of shit in a two second shot.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2013, 07:57 PM
 
We have CGI now. The robohead will look fine.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2013, 08:22 PM
 
Probably. I can only comment on what they did to the footage in the trailer, which was goofy lookin.

Speaking of CG, ED-209 looked totally fake, but it was still cool to see it 15' tall.

That's like, 5 meters!
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2013, 11:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
I'm pretty confident that the helmet with the flip back visor is removable and we will see the "robohead" at some point in the film.
He looks more man in the version. In the original he was just head and spine.
¡Viva Cristo Rey!
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Sep 18, 2013, 02:26 PM
 
"Lose the arm!"
     
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 19, 2013, 09:58 PM
 
I think ED 209 was stop-motion in the original; it had that feel, and for a robot it sort of worked, much like the Walkers in the Star Wars frachise (which were definitely stop-motion).

On the other hand, the CGI opportunities for a new ED 209 are just plain limitless. Think about the "other power armor" video Tony Stark called up in his Congressional testimony in Iron Man 2; the one where the head and torso rotate in opposite directions at the same time was priceless! "In our defense, the pilot survived!" Gold!

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:58 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2