Ah, RoboCop (2014). Do you remember it? Probably not like the original. There's a reason for that.
RoboCop 2014: A Reboot That Didn't Quite Compute
When Hollywood revives a classic, it’s a risk. Sometimes it works, sometimes it fails. RoboCop 2014 fell somewhere in between. It was not a massive failure, but it also didn’t shine at the box office or win critics over. So, what went wrong? Let's explore this metallic misfire.
Critical Reception: Lukewarm at Best
Critics did not applaud RoboCop 2014. Many noted it lacked shine compared to Paul Verhoeven's 1987 classic. Rotten Tomatoes gave it a lowly 48% from critics. That’s not good. Some reviews hinted at 'potential' for a reboot but pointed out major 'problems'. It felt like a project with loose screws.
Box Office Performance: Not a Disaster, But Definitely Not a Triumph
RoboCop 2014 was not a total failure financially. It made $242 million worldwide against a $100 million budget. Sounds okay, right? Wrong. Hollywood math shows the budget is just the beginning. Marketing and distribution costs add up fast. Insiders claim it didn’t actually turn a profit, like finishing a marathon but not receiving a medal.
Why the Dislike? The Reboot's Fatal Flaws
Why did audiences not accept this new RoboCop? Let's look at some reasons. Firstly, it lacked originality. The 2014 version seemed to run on autopilot, borrowing from the original while missing its spark. It’s like trying to recreate Banksy – you might get some details right, but the genius is often absent.
Secondly, it missed the dark humor and satire of the original. Verhoeven's film was a sharp commentary on greed. It brought violence and humor together in a unique mix. The remake diluted this edge for broader appeal, resulting in a bland action flick. Imagine comedy without any real jokes – just polite laughs.
The Downfall: Why RoboCop 2014 Didn't Launch a Franchise
Hollywood enjoys franchises. Talk of sequels often follows reboots. There were hints of a RoboCop universe post-2014, but they faded fast. Why? Because of low interest. Sony Pictures canceled plans because no one wanted more. It’s like hosting a party and having only your mom show up.
Tone Deaf: Deviating from Original's Gritty Satire
Many believe the biggest flaw of RoboCop 2014 was its tonal shift. The original was gritty and darkly sarcastic, capturing the essence of the cynical 80s. The remake took a softer approach. It toned down violence and satire, opting for a PG-13 vibe. In doing so, it lost the sharpness that defined the original.
Critics noted the removal of social commentary and visceral horror from Verhoeven's work. He made a statement about society, technology, and humanity's struggles. The remake touched on themes lightly, losing the original’s punch.
Too Shiny, Too Clean: The Aesthetic Fail
The original Detroit was a dystopian mess, mirroring themes of decay and corruption. The 2014 version showed too clean a city, lacking the gritty feel vital to the original's atmosphere. It’s like setting a grim drama in a neat suburb – it just seems wrong.
Villain Problem: Antagonist Anemia
Poor villains can ruin any story. RoboCop 2014 featured Samuel L. Jackson as a media mogul and Michael Keaton as a CEO. But they fell short compared to the originals, Clarence Boddicker and Dick Jones. The remake's villains were well-acted but less engaging, lacking the depth and menace of the originals. It’s like pizza without toppings – still okay, but missing something key.
Source Material Sabotage: Straying Too Far
Purists dislike when reboots stray from core elements. RoboCop 2014 deviated significantly, stripping away what made RoboCop unique. Changes to Alex Murphy’s backstory and suit design created distance from the beloved original. It’s akin to remixing a song and removing vital parts – you may produce something decent, but it won’t resonate with listeners.
Comparing Cybernetic Cops: 1987 vs. 2014
Let's compare the two films more directly. It's like contrasting a vintage muscle car and a modern electric vehicle – both serve the same purpose, but the experience differs greatly.
Critical Verdict: Original Wins by a Landslide
Critics overwhelmingly preferred the 1987 RoboCop. Reviews for the remake were mixed and lackluster compared to the acclaim for Verhoeven's film. It’s not just nostalgia at play; the original had a deeper impact on audiences and critics alike.
Originality and Innovation: 1987 Still Reigns Supreme
The 1987 RoboCop was groundbreaking in its time. It blended action, satire, and social commentary uniquely. It pushed boundaries regarding violence and thematic depth in mainstream action films. The 2014 reboot felt derivative, borrowing heavily without adding anything new to the mix. It played it safe, missing the originality of the first film.
Social Commentary Showdown: Original's Satire Still Bites
The original was excellent at balancing action and social commentary. It tackled corporate greed, media, and technology's dehumanizing effects with wit. In contrast, the remake addressed these themes without genuine depth or satire. It felt like shallow window dressing instead of an in-depth discussion of social issues.
Villainous Face-Off: Original Antagonists Take the Crown
The original villains - Clarence Boddicker and Dick Jones - are icons in cinema history. They were threatening and memorable, perfectly representing the forces RoboCop battled against. Raymond Sellars in the remake did not possess the same impact or charisma.
memorability. He felt generic as a corporate bad guy, lacking the menace of the originals. Think of Darth Vader versus a mid-level bureaucrat. Both are antagonists, but one is clearly more compelling.
Plot Points and the 2014 RoboCop Ending
For those who watched RoboCop 2014, or are curious, let’s recap key plot points and the ending.
Alex Murphy's Reassembly
After Alex Murphy is critically injured, his body is rebuilt in Dr. Dennett Norton's lab, played by Gary Oldman. This is where Alex becomes RoboCop 2.0. Post-surgery, Alex waits for his wife Clara and son David to visit, a moment of emotional resonance.
Overriding the Programming
In a rushed move, Alex overrides his programming. He accesses CCTV footage from his house and reviews the events before his 'accident'. His son David witnessed his mangled body and was understandably traumatized. Cue emotional music.
Moreover, Alex manipulates his dopamine levels back to normal. This supposedly revives lost emotions towards his family. It’s a bit of a plot device, but it injects sentimentality into the story.
OCP's Comeuppance
The aftermath for OmniCorp (OCP in the original) is anticlimactic. OCP's parent company launches a 'review' of the drone program and RoboCop program. Meanwhile, the President, swayed by Norton's guilt, vetoes the repeal of the Dreyfus Act. This act prevents drones in law enforcement.
Norton confesses the wrongdoings of the RoboCop program, leading to little consequences for OCP. It feels more like a corporate slap on the wrist than actual justice. The ending lacks the impactful closure of the original.
Production Notes
Release Date: February 12, 2014
RoboCop 2014 was released in the United States on February 12, 2014. Released by Sony Pictures, it aimed to be a mid-February blockbuster. It hoped to capitalize on the lack of major releases around Valentine’s Day.
Filming Locations
Filming for RoboCop 2014 began in September 2012 in Toronto and Vancouver, Canada. Canada often doubles for U.S. cities thanks to tax breaks and skilled crews. Additional filming happened in Hamilton and Detroit itself. Detroit locations aimed to ground the film in the city’s character.
RoboCop's Enduring Legacy
Peter Weller
Peter Weller, who played original RoboCop, is a fascinating figure. Weller is known for much more than RoboCop. After his days as RoboCop, he explored diverse interests. He is not just an actor; he’s also a scholar, musician, and director. Weller holds a Ph.D. in Italian Renaissance Art History. He leads a busy life teaching, playing music, and making appearances both in front and behind the camera.
Catchphrases and Prime Directives
RoboCop is not just known for cool gadgets; he has iconic catchphrases too. "Serve the public trust, protect the innocent, uphold the law" is his most famous mantra. Another classic line is "Dead or alive, you’re coming with me." These phrases are ingrained in pop culture and often parodied.
Beyond catchphrases, RoboCop operates under "Prime Directives". In the original film, they are: Serve the public trust, protect the innocent, uphold the law. These directives guide his actions and create moral dilemmas in a corrupt world.
The RoboCop Cinematic Universe
Ranking the RoboCop Films
If you're planning a RoboCop movie marathon, here's a ranking of all the films:
- RoboCop 3 (1993)
- RoboCop (2014)
- RoboCop 2 (1990)
- RoboCop (1987)
The original 1987 film tops this list, followed by RoboCop 2. RoboCop 2014 and RoboCop 3 are seen as weaker entries in the franchise.
RoboCop 2: A Sequel That Stumbled
Even RoboCop 2, ranked higher than the remake, is often seen as a step down from the original. It suffered from a less impactful story and an exaggerated tone. The sequel struggled to find a new direction for RoboCop while grappling with Murphy’s memories. The result was a less cohesive narrative that failed to capture the original's magic.
Casting Curiosities
Raymond Sellars
Raymond Sellars is the villain in RoboCop 2014. He is CEO of OmniCorp and mastermind behind the RoboCop program. Sellars represents modern corporate greed and ambition.
Arnold Schwarzenegger
A fun piece of trivia: Arnold Schwarzenegger was considered for the lead role in the 1987 RoboCop, but his physique caused issues. He was simply too muscular to fit comfortably into the suit.
Peter Weller's Exit
Peter Weller did not reprise his role for RoboCop 3 due to scheduling conflicts. Weller chose to film Naked Lunch instead of RoboCop 3, leading to Robert John Burke taking over the role. This explains Weller's absence from the third film.
This is the story of RoboCop 2014, a reboot that aimed for the future but got stuck in the past. While not a disaster, it serves as a cautionary tale about revisiting classics. Maybe Hollywood will learn that some classics are best left classic.
Responses (0 )