Monday 10 February 2014

Film: 'ROBOCOP'

I was in one of my occasional sour moods approaching this one, wishing that it had rather been 'Dallas Buyers Club' (with overwhelmingly positive reviews here) which has been showing for several days, my attempts to see it having been thwarted by (a) inconvenient showing times and (b) horrendous weather of the 'moist' variety. Hope it lingers longer or comes back in the light of the upcoming BAFTAs and Oscars as it sounds like a 'must see'.

I found this particular 'Robocop' (a re-make of the 1987 Paul Verhoeven 'classic', with Paul Weller in the title role) a surprisingly satisfying romp, much against my expectations. It has a lot of energy, which doesn't flag, and a clutch of stars in significant screen-time roles, rather than the cameos which I thought - notably Michael Keaton and Gary Oldman. Add to that a pretty substantial part in a feature film at last for Marianne Jean-Baptiste after too long a time - though she's hardly stretched in this. Then there's Jennifer Ehle as well as Samuel L. Jackson. The titular character is played by Swede, Joel Kinnaman, and at the helm is Brazilian director, Jose Padhila, the last two names with which I was unfamiliar.

It's Detroit a decade and a half on, where mobile robots are doing the work of protecting the populace from terrorism. But they lack the human element of making rational decisions underscored by emotion. 'Robocop', in his completed state (disparagingly referred to by one cynical character as 'Tin Man' for obvious reasons), was a policeman with wife and young son (cue a bit of sentiment) who's been successfully targeted by a car bomb which leaves his physical body about 90% destroyed, save for his head and upper torso. Keaton, motivated by profit for his company, persuades scientist Oldman to incorporate these surviving parts into a robot to produce a thinking 'super-robot'. (The motivations throughout this film are muddy, to say the least.)  He's then let loose with physical and mental powers for which the Caped Crusader himself would have died. It's then a battle to keep him under control, especially when he's hell-bent on seeking out those who had targeted him.

It's longer than the original film, though still just under two hours. The content doesn't actually linger in the mind for very long, being essentially a vacuous, leave-the-brain-behind, story. Maybe my expectations, being low, enabled me to enjoy it more than expected. But it's efficient enough, with fairly impressive special effects. Reasonable enough to pass the time, then...........................6.

10 comments:

  1. ohhh maybe if it is still raining this weekend we will go and see this. A 6 is not so bad.

    finding it hard to comment from this kindle. still don't have a fixed laptop, typical as I have to work in London at the mo.

    I have though worked out how to follow people now by clicking on the followers clicky button thingy. Who knew. I didn't know it was a button till I was scrolling around on the Kindle, so there is something of worth that has come out of my laptop dying!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Should keep you fairly entertained for a couple of hours, Sol.

      I was wondering how you were getting on in our 'blogger world' - and good to know that you've found a way in for the time being, if not entirely satisfactory. It's always a fear hanging over each of us of what happens if everything suddenly goes down and being locked out. I've had my turns and definitely not looking forward to the next one. But glad you're still there.

      Delete
  2. I groaned to hear they were making this: I originate from Detroit which has enough problems without being linked to this notion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, we've been hearing about Motown's collapse in news reports, though have to admit I'd forgotten it while the film was showing, where it looks affluent and buzzing with commercial life. More fairy tale than reality, I suppose.

      Delete
  3. hope your inside safe. it is nuts here

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your concern, Sol but all O.K. here, today being either the calm after the storm or, maybe more likely, between storms. But a couple of nights ago it was the wildest (wind and rain) I think I've EVER experienced - truly scary. But enough of me, if you're still in the Bath region you've been having it even worse, and only a hop and a step away from the great watery plains of Somerset! I trust that you and yours are also still safely in one piece.

      Delete
  4. You are like the third person who has given a review indicating that Robocop was entertaining. I too didn't want to see the remake, but perhaps I will now. :) Did you ever see The Lego Movie or Frozen yet? Or are those too silly for you? :) Just curious because I want to see those two.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I haven't seen either of those, Brett, though they've both had excellent reviews. The Lego one only opened here a couple of days ago and what I've heard make it sound so good I actually wouldn't mind seeing it - but it's all those noisy kids that there'll be in the audience that would put me off the most.
      I tend not to see such films not because I think they are 'silly' but because with my limited resources I have to be very discriminating. If I had unlimited funds they would be on the list.
      Thanks for your valued visit - and if you do go to see the new Robocop I do think you might be surprised.

      Delete
  5. I suppose I should start from the beginning and see the original Robocop. Better chance of seeing that here anyway (on DVD). Some day, I'll get back to a real movie theater!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think it's necessary to have seen the original, Mitch. It's so long since I saw it that I can barely recall it, and wouldn't have been sure I had if it hadn't been in my 'register'.

      Delete