‘RoboCop’ Spoilers Discussion

Published 5 months ago by , Updated February 17th, 2014 at 4:43 pm,

RoboCop 2014 Joel Kinnaman Spoilers RoboCop Spoilers Discussion

While our readers are already talking about this movie in the comments section of our RoboCop review, this is the place where you can discuss RoboCop spoilers without concerns about ruining the movie for people who haven’t seen it yet.

If you’re posting comments here, assume that anyone in the conversation has seen the movie – if you haven’t seen the movie, we would recommend you don’t read the comments here until you have.

For an in-depth discussion of the film by the Screen Rant editors check out our RoboCop episode of the SR Underground podcast.

We’ve set up a poll below where you can rate RoboCop for yourself. Other than that, feel free to discuss the film and all its surprises!

[poll id="763"]

___________________________________________________

More: RoboCop 2014: Differences Between the Remake and the Original

___________________________________________________

RoboCop runs 108 minutes and is Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of action including frenetic gun violence throughout, brief strong language, sensuality and some drug material. Now playing in regular and IMAX theaters.

Follow me on Twitter @benkendrick for future reviews, as well as movie, TV, and gaming news.

TAGS: robocop

24 Comments

Post a Comment

  1. I had a few problems with Robocop:

    1. Was the crime levels on the streets of Detroit convincing enough to have robot patrols? Because I saw very little in the way of crime in Robocop’s home town

    2. Keaton went from being a good guy to being a bad guy too quickly

    3. Robocop breaks protocol too many times…. Cant kill him, just killed him…. Cant speak to family, speaks to family

    4. Sam Jackson’s news character was annoying, should have had one segment at the beginning and one at the end

    5. His armour was suspect against 5.0 caliber rounds yet the ED209′s shot the crap out of Robocop which what appeared to be 7.76 rounds, they would have shredded him

    6. Lewis being a man, why?

    7. His wife saying ‘we will get through this’?? That’s a joke right, he is a robot for gos sake!!

    • See, now people have started talking about the movie after seeing it, I can see more problems than the trailers showed and makes me hate this reboot even more.

      The whole point of the Robocop program in the first place was due to the massive amounts of crime on the streets while Detroit’s police force were about to go on strike because they wanted a pay rise for working in such dangerous conditions, as well as cops being killed on a regular basis and nobody wanting to work the Old Detroit precincts.

      Directive 4 in the original was an inability to arrest OCP employees, thus preventing him from arresting Dick Jones and warranting Anne Lewis to help him reboot his program at the old steel mill so he could go after Jones at the end of the movie.

      Those two things alone are major aspects of the main character and if you’re saying they were removed or changed needlessly in the reboot then yeah, that’s a pretty major crime and gets a huge thumbs down from me.

      • Directive 4 was still active, It was Dick Jones getting fired by “The old man” that allowed Robo to go after him.

        One of the first things I noticed about the new one was that Detroit seemed like a nice leafy city, not some depressing ex-motor industry city in meltdown. It looked like a nice place to live….so yeah, it really didn’t look like it needed ED-209s and robot security patrolling everywhere.

        The Bad guys were pretty lame. Not one could hold a candle to Clarence Bodicker or Dick Jones.

        The movie did do some interesting things though, but as a whole it wasn’t totally satisfying. For all the things they gained, they missed out on a hell of a lot.

        • Agree – The original cast/characters were superb – I’ve just seen the new one – I enjoyed most of it – and liked that it wasn’t just trying to be the same as the classic movie.
          Long boring sections in this one – effects were great – Didn’t have the soul of the classic tho.
          RoboCop ’87 – is still the best – and always will be.

    • @ChrisTypeR

      1. Was the crime levels on the streets of Detroit convincing enough to have robot patrols? Because I saw very little in the way of crime in Robocop’s home town
      A: Crime was NOT the reason for putting robots on the street. Corporate greed was the driving motivation for everything Omnicorp did. The Kovak Element (the talk show where the host was potrayed by Samuel Jackson, was used to convey this in the movie. Kovak was the media controlled point man for convincing the public why the ,aw forbidding drones on American sooli needed to be over turn.

      2. Keaton went from being a good guy to being a bad guy too quickly
      A: Keatons character was never a goood guy, the movie did not reveal him directly till the end but you could see subtle hints of this throughout the movie.

      3. Robocop breaks protocol too many times…. Cant kill him, just killed him…. Cant speak to family, speaks to family
      A: I mean no disrespect but did you leave at some point during the film perhaps to go to the bathroom or concessions? Omnicorp kept messing with Robocops brain/emotions and thats why he kept changing from Robotic man to droid with face of man.

      4. Sam Jackson’s news character was annoying, should have had one segment at the beginning and one at the end.
      A: Kovak (potrayed by Samuel Jackson) was the media controlled earm of Omnicorp. It was Kovaks job to bad mouth the Senator and his law forbidding drones on American soil. The whole point of the Kovak Element show was to be an infomercial disguised as news/commentary. I was fully expecting the end of the movie to reveal Kovak as either majority stock holder or an executive of the parent company of Omnicorp.

      5. His armour was suspect against 5.0 caliber rounds yet the ED209′s shot the crap out of Robocop which what appeared to be 7.76 rounds, they would have shredded him.
      A: I’d chalk that up to movies being movies.

      6. Lewis being a man, why?
      A: This was a reboot/remake and not simply a re-shoot of the orginal so there are going to be differences. The orginal featured a femail partner (more then likely) so that the film had at least 1 major female in the cast.

      7. His wife saying ‘We will get through this’?? That’s a joke right, he is a robot for gos sake!!
      A: Seriously? What exactly do you think a happily married woman would say under those same conditions?
      w

  2. I enjoyed parts of this film conceptually, but found the structure and plotting pretty haphazard. I was delighted to see Michael K. Williams get the two best lines in the film, though, and I laughed so hard at the unncessary ‘motherf***er’ from Jackson’s character at the end.

  3. 3. Yes this, especially at the end, warning of system shutdown couldn’t stop robocop from pulling the trigger, movie wants to emphasis the human element overcoming the machine part?

  4. Some things I must know-

    Were there commercials with “I’d buy that for a dollar” as the tag-line?

    Did “Can you fly, Bobby?” make it into the film?

    Does a black criminal distract a female cop with his junk?

    Does the main omnicorp dude get shot through a window which for whatever reason makes his arms 4 feet longer?

    • +1

    • Does the bad guy spit blood onto the Sergeants desk and ask for his phone call?

    • Did a bad guy order prostitutes to exit the building with an iconic line of dialog?

      • Nope. They did not. :(

        • None of the above sadly….. I had to kill the director because he made a mistake, now its time to erase that mistake :)

  5. I was surprisingly entertained by the film. The script/story line was a bit uneven in places, but the the general approach was a great one in making Robocop both contemporary and refreshing.

    I felt the beginning and the ending could have focused better in intertwining Murphy/Robocop with the larger scope of the world and themes. I enjoyed the sociopolitical commentary and the role of media and technology in today’s society.

    I would have wanted more scenes like the dream sequence in which Murphy remembers a dance he shared with his wife. That emotional realization Murphy has when he wakes up and sees what is left of him was great. Omnicorp scene could have been told in more a dynamic way in which by the time we have the final action sequence it is more emotional and cathartic.

    Overall I felt the film works on a lot of levels that I didn’t expect. My reaction to seeing what was left of Murphy after the surgery that made him Robocop- the scene in which Norton (Oldman) separates the pieces of the Robocop suit- was very viscera to me.

    The film is a strong 3 star film. Maybe 3.5. I don’t love it. I don’t hate. Works in a contemporary level and is entertaining. The few action scenes worked, the approach to the material worked, a bit more emotional catharsis was needed, and the film suffers from the usual “origin story” weakness but overall finally Robocop is back in a suitable way.

  6. bring back Michael Keaton for the sequel
    mans like a billionaire genius type surely a reasonable storyline to keep him alive blend it with transcendence or something

    • Keaton will be Robocop 2!!

  7. So ….. no Clarence Boddiker then?………. :(

  8. Did anyone notice at the end that Sam Jackson mentions than OMNICORP is a division of OCP, meaning that Omni Consumer Products is still there and is the bigger fish.

  9. Far from perfect but i still enjoyed this. Side note: Did Jackie Earle Haley’s character remind anyone else of the mean merc from District 9? He just hated Murphy for no reason…in my mind, and based on his exosuit, i think his character was jealous of Murphy because HE actually wanted to be a robot and Murphy got to instead. Makes sense to me. Yep.

  10. Wasn’t Miguel Ferrer going to have a cameo? What happened to that?

  11. This movie was better than I thought going in, still wasn’t as epic as the original. I liked the color code bar, blue or red that told the ed209 and prevented RoboCop from arresting or killing. The original with the directives was brilliant , and unfortuanly not used in this one. I loved the scen with Murphy taken apart, lungs exposed! I liked Gary Oldman Doctor character a lot, and smart ass gun trainer calling RoboCop a ‘Tin Man.’. This movie was a 3.5 at least and yes the lines ‘ Dead or Alive, your coming with me, and I won’t buy that for a dollar we’re used!’

  12. Just curious if anyone else was expcting Kovak (Samuel Jacksons Character) to be revealed at the end as being either owner, majority stock holder or some excutive of the parent company of Omni-Corp?

    When that last sceene started I was certain that when the camera panned to show the people behind the camera I was certain that when the cameras cut and the lights came on that they would start a board meeting and there would be a statement from Koval along the lines of “Well that was one serious F’ing waste of resources. How long before we can put our backup plan into motion?”.

  13. I expected Robocop 2014 to be a total letdown, but was pleasantly surprised. While not near as good as the original, it was very pleasing that they did not just gloss over the creation of Robocop as most movies do theses days. However, two things I was wondering about that I would love to get some comments on…

    1) The explosion and The right hand.
    Putting aside that the murder of Alex Murphy in the original Robocop was such an amazing part of the movie and integral to the whole idea. All we got in the 2014 version was a lousy car bomb that I guess he was close enough to to destroy nearly every part of him!? Really? Contrary to what the Alex’s body looked like after the car explosion (I’m speaking of the video footage we see later in the film), very little of Alex’s body remained. The head I get (yet why no facial scars or anything?) the lungs were a pretty cool idea, but what’s the deal with the right hand. Even if that was perfectly in tact why in the world did they need to keep a right hand. A bit silly, no?

    2) Ending
    Wouldn’t it have been much more satisfying to the viewer and empowering of the Robocop character for later films if when Keaton told Robocop that he couldn’t kill him it all clicked, the balance between man and machine, right and wrong, came together and Robocop said an awesome one liner and shot Keaton in the head. Why the half ass pot shot? Almost felt like Robocop really didn’t mean to. In the original when we killed the bad guy he was able to because the bad guy was fired, in the 2014 the reason seemed less clear, but regardless it was a golden opportunity to embolden the Robocop character.

    Thanks for reading. What are your thoughts?

    • As much as anything I think the flesh hand was for public relations reason. It’s a human hand pulling the trigger regardless of how little human being is left. Remember that other than the medical team nobody knows how much of Alex Murphy was cut away to make Robocop.

      I think the finale wanted to stress the struggle of the man against the machine, rather than it being an easy win it’s an ongoing battle.

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

Be Social, Follow Us!!