A direct sequel to Robocop (1987), helmed by the original screen writer is happening

[[McD] James]

Finally, some good movie news for once. Not only is the original Robocop one of the funniest and most exciting action movies ever made, it's also one of the most surprisingly intelligent as well. A true sequel to Robocop that ignores everything that happened after the first movie is something the world could really use right now.

 

Quote

There’s been a bunch of other RoboCop movies and there was recently a remake and I would say this would be kind of going back to the old RoboCop we all love and starting there and going forward. So it’s a continuation really of the first movie. In my mind. So it’s a little bit more of the old school thing.

 

http://www.slashfilm.com/robocop-sequel/

 

I'd buy that for a dollar!

[fraggle]

So I'm by no means the world's biggest Robocop fan, but I'm afraid that I'm very skeptical that any "modern sequel" is going to live up to what you love about the original. Even if they do have the original screen writer on board - making a movie is so much more than just a script.

 

Any Robocop movie is going to be an action movie, which means that it's going to end up being forced into the Big Dumb Action Movie mould that every other action movie that comes out nowadays has to conform to. They have to do it to remain competitive because every other Big Dumb Action Movie does the same thing. It's why we're stuck on this neverending train of superhero films, each one more boring than the last.

 

Sorry if this reads like a super-cynical negative comment. You obviously love Robocop; I hope they do make a film you like. But it's hard to hear "reboot of a memorable '80s film" and not think it's yet another cash grab; it's only been a couple of years since the last Robocop reboot. The trend for endless unimaginative reboot films has become really tedious; Red Letter Media did a really good summary why things are this way.

[[McD] James]

But it's not a reboot, it's a sequel.

[Chezza]

I'm happy the Robocop franchise hasn't ended on the 2014 remake. I'm hopeful and keen to watch it.

[june gloom]

1 hour ago, Ajora said:

But it's not a reboot, it's a sequel.

31 years after the fact means it's both.

[Bauul]

@fraggle There are exceptions to that though. Mad Max Fury Road was a similar situation: original director creating a "sequel" that came out 30 years after the original, and it was one of the best action films of the decade.

 

Not saying this will necessarily live up to that standard, but it's not unprecedented.

[SOSU]

5 minutes ago, Bauul said:

There are exceptions to that though. Mad Max Fury Road was a similar situation: original director creating a "sequel" that came out 30 years after the original, and it was one of the best action films of the decade.

 

Not saying this will necessarily live up to that standard, but it's not unprecedented.

Looking at the action movies of the decade i must say that being one of the best of them isn't that big of an achievement :P
jk

[Johnatone]

Being as the original RoboCop is hands down my favorite movie of all time, I do share some of fraggle's skepticism. The whole film was lighting in a bottle: Paul Verhoven didn't want to direct it in the first place, a lot of the original sci-fi elements were toned down due to practicality or a-ha moments (like using the Ford Taurus instead of building a RoboCar), all the actors were spot on choices for their respective roles (there was never a more sinister villain than Clarence Boddicker IMO, and Peter Weller is that insane kind of eccentric about his art), the technology of the time created a lot of the atmosphere (everything nowadays is too sleek or clean), et cetera. I did enjoy RoboCop 2 - even as an adult it still holds up for me as a bad-but-not-terrible sequel (whereas everything beyond that was forgettable - I wish I could forget 3, but I do have nostalgic memories of the TV series I won't ruin by going back to watch them.) Having Ed Neumeier write is definitely a big step in the right direction, but there were so many other elements to RoboCop that even if they do get that right, it could fail on other levels. I'll keep my fingers crossed and my expectations reasonable but I'm very much looking forward to hearing about this.

 

Spoiler

As a side note, when I critique a movie and say it lacks subtlety, RoboCop is the movie I use as my standard. I am by no means far-right or far-left in my personal thinking; I'm a centrist that leans heavily right with a leg stretched over the left, so I'm admittedly heavy in my conservative beliefs and RoboCop was very much a satire of the era's conservative politics and corporate structures. On another level it even shows the balance of reality: Detroit much like in real life had become what it is due to the years of Democrat and union politics, and the movie showcased the dangers of going too extreme in privatized control of the same area (in three movies Detroit continued to go down the shitter with full on corporate control that became increasingly more corrupt) - BUT it is done very naturally and doesn't shove it down your throat in the original movie. Two failed this by making the Old Man more of a deliberate antagonist and by 3 the company is run by neurotic, greedy and shortsighted idiots and the whole thing was campy and cartoonish in nature.

These days both sides tend to spray it, not say it, in every possible medium (I'm not even sure at this point what the hell they thought they were doing with The Last Jedi; OTOH Rogue One worked perfectly even if the casting choices were very publicly and stupidly made a big deal of*) and while Hollywood has always been openly liberal the new generation of writers is lacking in the ability to write a narrative that doesn't seem forced. Thirty years of post-Cold War politics has created an era ripe with points to satire naturally, so I hope Neumeier's writing abilities haven't evolved or changed too much in the same period.

On a related note, this excites me: http://www.slashfilm.com/starship-troopers-reboot/ I've always wanted to see an adaptation represent the book properly. Will we this time? I guess we'll find out. I love Verhoven and his vision was fun, but no Starship Troopers it is. I could see the man pulling off a Hard-R Halo movie though. 

*I saw an interview where the actor who played Cassian said Star Wars didn't have strong female characters who were actually involved in the action or any of the important roles. You would have either had to have not seen any of the movies at all or been paid/contracted to make a statement like that to say something that dumb. Of the three main heroine from the first six movies, only Mon Mothma was the least developed, but her character commanded respect and she was the boss. There were considerably less women than men, yes, but we're talking about a series where half the cast is made-up aliens used to sell plastic toys. Just cast the best people for the job and write compelling characters already. Rogue One was a Dirty Dozen in Vietnam retcon one-off so the characters in it being somewhat two dimensional isn't a problem for me; the rushed atmosphere and suicidal nature of the story necessitated it. It was kind of a look at the smaller consequences of the overall big picture, the soldier and civilian casualties and triumphs that made everything possible. It would have fit nicely in the original EU. It's in my Top 3 with ANH and Empire.

 

[fraggle]

14 hours ago, Ajora said:

But it's not a reboot, it's a sequel.

It makes no difference!

 

13 hours ago, Bauul said:

@fraggle There are exceptions to that though. Mad Max Fury Road was a similar situation: original director creating a "sequel" that came out 30 years after the original, and it was one of the best action films of the decade.

Sure. I'm not saying that there aren't exceptions to the rule. Occasionally something good comes out, and as I said in my previous comment - if you're a Robocop fan then I hope this film is everything you hope for. I'm just saying that my observation is that most of these reboots/fake sequels aren't very good.

 

For me there's a kind of inherent staleness to the concept. From the start the ambition isn't to create something new but to ape something great that already exists, to retread old ground. You're starting with a set mould that first needs to be broken out of to make anything new and revolutionary. It's not surprising that most don't, and end up as lesser imitations.

 

I see people in this thread who clearly love the original Robocop movie - phrases like "lightning in a bottle" show the depth of that appreciation and love. If a movie can be that great for you then probably another movie can too, and it doesn't have to be another Robocop. It probably won't be.

[Trycon]

Can't be worse then the 2014 reboot heh.

Spoiler

I thought the reboot was fine, but robocop deserved better. 

 

 

[Mr. Freeze]

Robocop is one of my favorite movies ever. I can't wait!

[Chewyninja69]

On 1/28/2018 at 6:02 PM, Trycon said:

Can't be worse then the 2014 reboot heh.

  Hide contents

I thought the reboot was fine, but robocop deserved better. 

 

 

I only watched the reboot because I had watched Joel Kinnaman in "The Killing" on Netflix (HIGHLY highly recommend it) and he was awesome in it. Gave the reboot a watch and it actually was pretty good, I thought. He played it very, very well. Peter Weller well? I dunno. But it was pretty good in it's own right, I thought.

[Man of Doom]

Regarding the 2014 reboot:

Spoiler

There was actually rumors that the reboot was going to be just as violent and gory as the original. In fact, both the director and the main star (Joel Kinnaman) wanted to take this route. But because MGM wanted a superhero franchise out of RoboCop, it was trimmed down considerably to be PG-13.

But yeah, I'm actually one of the more optimistic ones in regards to a direct sequel to OG RoboCop. If Blade Runner can have a badass sequel over 30 years after the fact, why can't RoboCop?

I mean, the original screen writer did have an idea for RoboCop 2, and it was supposed to be even more batshit insane than the first movie. Apparently, it was supposed to take place about 30 years after the events of the first movie. But yeah, none of said writer's ideas made it into RoboCop 2.

Edited January 30, 2018 by Man of Doom

[[McD] James]

I believe Bixby Snyder was supposed to be the president of the United States. 

[Mr. Freeze]

Robocop 2 should have ended like Jonah Hex- dead and stuffed into a display case in a museum far into the future.  

[Johnatone]

1 hour ago, Ajora said:

I believe Bixby Snyder was supposed to be the president of the United States. 

I'd buy that for a dollar! He's the kind of man we need in these chaotic of times. /offtopic

I haven't finished Frank Miller's RoboCop, the comic adaptation of the script he wrote for 2 that was largely butchered for what became 2 though I have it in a box somewhere. I still enjoy the second movie even if certain elements went a little too over-the-top and some of the subtlety was missing. After that though, ugh. But the reboot is one of the few times I walked out of a theater so angry I couldn't even speak. Everything about it pissed me off. So needless to say I'm keeping my expectations low for a new one. 

[Liberation]

Robocop is probably one of my favorite films, however to stand a chance the sequel requires Paul Verhoven as well as ed and a film company that allows total creative freedom and is prepared to lose money, probably a lot of it as well.

 

And if it doesn't have drug factory doors getting beaten down, followed up by the most unlikely sentence ever to be spoken in a situation like that by law enforcement, only then to be followed by the mass carnage that never fails to put a grin on your face.... Then chances are, its never going to scratch that itch.. 

 

Hopefully it will make up for the abomination that came out a few years ago.

[NinjaLiquidator]

You cannot make Robocop 2 if you arent Paul Verhoeven. It would feel like somebody else than Carmack and Romero made Doom

[Mr. Freeze]

1 hour ago, NinjaLiquidator said:

You cannot make Robocop 2 if you arent Paul Verhoeven. It would feel like somebody else than Carmack and Romero made Doom

 

I mean...

[40oz]

On 1/31/2018 at 6:40 AM, Mr. Freeze said:

 

I mean...

?????

[Mr. Freeze]

Final Doom exists. See also: Doom 64, Doom 3, Doom 2016

[june gloom]

I think he may be referring to the original Doom, but that still doesn't really track as Robocop 2 and this new movie are sequels. If he were talking about the 2014 remake I could see how what he said made sense, but he's not.

[Soundblock]

They should call it "Silvermane" and weave it into the Spiderman universe.

 

 

[Liberation]

55 minutes ago, Soundblock said:

They should call it "Silvermane" and weave it into the Spiderman universe.

 

Blasphemy!! Heresy!! Heretic!!

 

Sad face/cry emoticons  

[Soundblock]

7 minutes ago, Liberation said:

Blasphemy!! Heresy!! Heretic!!

 

Sad face/cry emoticons  

Just kidding! ;) If any hero would be an untouchable, Murphy'd pretty much be it. Unless they could make/code him overly lawful, like Punisher went over the edge for a while, severely punishing minor crimes. But seriously, even that don't really fit the character, he might be immune to much character development, for good or bad. I'm not holding out much hope for this as a traditional "sequel" though, especially after reading the source article linked by OP. Maybe another story set in the same universe (which removes some of the sequal appeal), but I wouldn't expect any role reprises. Reboots rarely end up delivering for me, but I'd love to be pleasantly surprised. Having said all that, I'm a big proponent for greenlighting a Blokamp-helmed Aliens II. Screw Scott's unexciting retrospect movies blocking it.

[Liberation]

I'm not holding out a lot of hope either @Soundblock! 

 

Will have to look into the aliens 2 you mentioned, that sounds interesting. At least it only has to beat a shitty computer game to be accepted :-)

[Johnatone]

On 1/30/2018 at 1:30 PM, Man of Doom said:

I mean, the original screen writer did have an idea for RoboCop 2, and it was supposed to be even more batshit insane than the first movie. Apparently, it was supposed to take place about 30 years after the events of the first movie.

 

6 hours ago, Soundblock said:

...but I wouldn't expect any role reprises. Reboots rarely end up delivering for me, but I'd love to be pleasantly surprised.

RE: Role reprisals, more than half the main and supporting characters were dead by the end of the first movie. While in their late 60's or 70's, most of the main cast save for Robert Duqoi (Sgt. Reed) are still alive. If the film was to be set 30 years in the future, well, we're here. Donald Johnson saw a lot of shit working for OCP; having him move through the ranks to be the new Old Man of OCP wouldn't be far fetched. With celebrities vying for the White House since the 80's and with more politically incorrect elements beginning to creep into politics, Bixby Snyder being president isn't too batshit insane of an idea either. RoboCop's tech and biological parts would be thirty years older by this point, so an aging Peter Weller as a degrading and about to be obsolete version of our hero could work. If Verhoven, Neumeier, and Michael Miner could get together and create a natural feeling future for the dystopian future they created over three decades ago, and they stayed true to some of the 80's sensibilities (ultraviolence that was just slightly over the top in a campy way but done in a somewhat horror style without resorting to goreno, blood squibs, animatronics and puppetry over CGI, the 80's feel of real world locations matched with matte painting, and Basil Poledouris' (RIP) music style), then its just a matter of finding good new main and supporting actors and a sensible plot. It honestly could work.

 

I'm still not getting my hopes up, of course. But as long as there isn't some incredibly screwy shit happen during production I know I'm going to go see it no matter what.

[The Ultimate DooMer]

On 28/01/2018 at 6:23 AM, fraggle said:

Any Robocop movie is going to be an action movie, which means that it's going to end up being forced into the Big Dumb Action Movie mould that every other action movie that comes out nowadays has to conform to. They have to do it to remain competitive because every other Big Dumb Action Movie does the same thing. It's why we're stuck on this neverending train of superhero films, each one more boring than the last.

In other words, it will end up feeling like a sequel to the reboot rather than the original.

 

*presses the nuke button...get them before they get you*

 

 

Quote

I mean, the original screen writer did have an idea for RoboCop 2, and it was supposed to be even more batshit insane than the first movie. Apparently, it was supposed to take place about 30 years after the events of the first movie.

 

30 years would be more than enough time to build Delta City...then it'd have to be all bright and shiny instead of dark and sinister.

[Opulent]

A sequel isn't really possible with a film like this.  The entire movie is various forms of satire and mockery.  People die numerous times, the social commentary, they intentionally show the stuntmen in the shot, the absurdity of the police state, etc...  It isn't a real movie.  It is like trying to make a sequel to Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

You have to admire Verhoeven's touch with the film though... really helped elevate this, Total Recall, and Starship Troopers to be much better than they would have been.

[Koko Ricky]

A lot of how this movie is going to fare is going to depend on A) how sharp the writer still is and B) whether they can find a director comparable to Verhoeven's style.