RoboCop 2 (1990) Poster

(1990)

User Reviews

Review this title
231 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Underrated sci-fi action flick - Defending an Underrated Sequel
ivo-cobra812 April 2017
Why does this film get's so much hate? Why do I keep hearing that Robocop 3 is better than this, that Robocop (2014) remake is better than this. I don't understand that and I never will. I mean is this good as the first film? no of course not, is it worthy sequel? yes it is! This is an entertaining action film yes. It R rated blast it is yes. I do wish that this movie would come out over the summer I do really miss this kind of action films. Robocop 3 and Robocop remake are not and will never be better than this sequel. I grew up watching this movie it defines my childhood. This was really my first film of the trilogy before I even watched the original. I was entertained in here we have RoboCop VS RoboCain monstrous robot who is addicted to drugs, has mass a machine guns annihilation people blowing up cop cars, killing cops, van's, ambulances. Killing news people, this big battle between Robocop and RoboCain fantastic.

RoboCop 2 (1990) is rated R! RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR not PG-13 It Is violent, action gore adrenaline sci-fi flick not for kids. I am defending my favorite sequel that has Peter Weller and Nancy Allen in it! I don't wan't to see Robert John Burke or even Joel Kinnaman who suck dicks in the whole movies! I love this movie to death the end is the best at all. In this movie RoboCop jumps on a back of a monsters addicted robot, rips his brain out, smashes in to the ground to the pulp.

Plot: RoboCop 2 is the 1990 sequel to RoboCop. Peter Weller returns as the cybernetic law enforcement officer, who now battles an even more sadistic gang led by a deranged killer known as Cain (Tom Noonan), while mega-corporation Omni Consumer Products prepares to take private ownership of Detroit and unveil a new, more powerful law enforcement unit.

This is a prototypical "good" action movie -- intense, perfectly executed, original action, shown to the tune of a forgettable and occasionally insulting story.

I am giving an 8/10 -- an outstanding score. And the gunplay is delivered in perfect Miller style (as opposed to the slo-mo John Woo-style) -- you'll see lots of heavy automatic and explosive weapons, and you'll see them used well. The film is bloody you can see how the gang cut's Robocop to pieces and it is bloody. There was a kid Hob in the film and no he wasn't annoying, he did a good job playing the bad guy. Not annoying kid and I think he did a good job. Robocop shot a guy in the eye.

Nancy Allen as Lewis has much to do like she drives an armored SWAT van the one they used in Die Hard and smashes in to RoboCain, she shots three bad guys, she kicks ass. RoboCop saves a baby.

I don't mind the music score everyone complains about Leonard Rosenman and his music score. I know they should use Basil Poledouris music score but they used different music score and I never mind it, I thought it was an okay song.

The film was directed by Irvin Kershner (The Empire Strikes Back and Never Say Never Again) from a story written by noted graphic novelist Frank Miller. Irvin Kershner did an excellent job directing this sequel I know that Paul Verhoeven suppose to direct this movie but he never direct sequels before and he wasn't sure if he should do it, Hollywood needed a sequel so Irvin Kershner went to directing it. This is his last movie and it is really a shame he is no longer with us anymore R.I.P. Irvin Kershner.

They don't make movies like this one today! I wish I would had sci-fi action movies like are this one today!! I really wish! This is a solid damn sequel that has an action scenes while RoboCock (2014) has no action scenes they can't effort it, it is a PG-13 rated family film. I have this movie on Blu-ray screw Robocop 3 and the remake I will watch this movie. I love action movies this is an action movie that's how they do it right! Is Tom Noonan better bad guy than Kurtwood Smith no. But he does an excellent job as the evil bad guy and he is a cult leader.

I know Peter Weller and Nancy Allen were disappointed with how the movie come out and they don't care for this movie. But honestly it was a pretty damn good entertainment, I wasn't bored with it. I would be proud on this movie.

Rambo III (1988), Missing in Action (1984), Cobra (1986), Predator 2 (1990), Blade: Trinity (2004), The Matrix Revolutions (2003) are so fun underrated action films that are getting so much hate and bashed this days for it, that is horrible. I still love them all.

RoboCop 2 is a 1990 American cyberpunk action film directed by Irvin Kershner. Set in the near future in a dystopian metropolitan Detroit, Michigan, it is the sequel to the 1987 film, RoboCop.

It's a good continuation of RoboCop story. There is nothing new here , but it's well executed. In the end it's one of those rare satisfying sequels. They do there own stuff they don't copy the original film just like Predator 2 they do their own stuff and i love that. Sue me I love RoboCop 2! I give it 8/10 it doesn't deserve the hate!
86 out of 88 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
And now...a word on nutrition
Shawn Watson10 February 1999
Warning: Spoilers
RoboCop 2 is probably the most under-rated and most harshly criticized sequel in history (tying with Predator 2, which came out the same year). Because of a few missing elements from the first and a slightly more cartoonish approach to the violence, the critics and public alike were not pleased and opinions and feelings toward the franchise nosedived with the just plain awful RoboCop 3.

Don't con yourself out of a good movie though. RoboCop 2 still has the same savage sense of humor, cynical social commentary and character pathos of the first film. It's a hyper-realistic vision of an America populated by gun-loving psychos, a democracy owned by big business and the poverty-stricken addicted to drugs dealt to them by peddlers believing themselves to be the second coming of Christ.

Far-fetched could be the typical way of describing it. Completely-over-the-top would be more appropriate. Empire Strikes Back director Irvin Kershner chucks in as much sadistic violence, deafening gunfire, endless destruction and loss of human life that the film just begs you not to take it so seriously.

Some of the blame was placed on writer Frank Miller for the film being more cartoonish than the original. I don't think this is very fair. I read Miller's original script when I was in high school and it is rather different and, dare I say, unfilmable. RoboCop 2 himself was not Nuke Lord Caine, the psychotic hippie with delusions of Godhood. He was called Kong, a psychotic cop who pretty much killed everybody he came across. Sgt. Reed and the Old Man died too, and there wasn't much humor. Screenwriter Walon Green was hired to doctor the script and much of what appears on screen is actually his work. Frank Miller's original ideas are pretty much just left as the framework for the whole movie and some of his story was recycled into RoboCop 3 (don't blame him for that one either). Miller was obviously upset with this but was still a good enough sport to appear in the film (keep a lookout for him playing Doctor Frank), though he vowed not to work in Hollywood again for fear of being taken advantage of. Until Robert Rodriguez promised to make good on his Sin City graphic novels.

Verhoven may be gone but Irvin Kershner tries hard to deliver the same mix of mirth and magic and actually does get it right. Basil Poledouris' brooding score is also gone (it returns in RoboCop 3) but new composer Leonard Rosenman creates a wonderfully heroic and upbeat theme that suits the film more than Poledouris' moody, tormented score to the first.

There have also been many complaints that the humanity of RoboCop and his relationship with Lewis was neutered along with too many other ideas fighting for screen time. I get why most would be annoyed by this but you have to remember that films need to be economic when it comes to length. If every single idea was fully explored and fleshed-out RoboCop 2 would have been 4 hours long. In my opinion each thread has just enough for keen viewers and fans to appreciate. Lazy viewers only see what they want to see and I feel that this has led to many of the negative reviews the film has been met with (which usually comment on how "offensive" the character of Hob is-sheesh, gimme a break). And don't give me that the "humanity" of the first film is gone. Murphy has not resigned to being a machine. He lies to pacify OCP. Pay attention to the very last line of dialogue in the film if you want proof.

Filmed once again in Texas, Houston this time, you really have to feel for Peter Weller walking around in that Robosuit. It must have weighed a ton and he'd be sweating bucketloads inside. There is a particular scene in the film where Murphy is tortured into near-death/destruction that is very hard to watch. But it does lead to him getting a brand-new makeover and those crazy new directives put into his head. The bit where he lectures the Little League kids and scolds the youngsters playing by the leaky fire hydrant (after quoting some very suspicious philosophy) is hilarious.

RoboCop 2 is a great movie. Despite harsh critisisms of the script and story and some slightly dated stop-motion effects it's a brilliant sequel that lives up to expectations. Do listen to the nay-sayers. I don't know what kind of film they were expecting.

And thank you for not smoking!
101 out of 139 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Terrible reputation for a great film
LSBeams18 July 1999
I'm amazed at how bad this movie has gotten trashed over the years. The sequel to one of the best sci-fi movies ever, it was killed by critics and fans alike. I just don't understand why though.

In many ways Robocop 2 is better than its predecessor. For instance, the many subplots. We have the subplot involving Robocop getting put back together, the subplot of Robocop 2 itself, the subplot of whether or not Robocop is human or machine, the subplot of nuke/Cain and his thugs, and the subplot of overall power and corruption.

The mix of dark satire and graphic violence are once again showcased in Robocop 2 and in grander fashion. We get lots of jokes and lots of gore, mixed together flawlessly. All the performances are good. Peter Weller once again does a great job as Murphy, and Tom Noonan makes his Cain character a three-dimensional psychopath.

The score is much different from the score of the original. Instead of the dramatic/sad theme from Robocop, we get a much more heroic/dynamic theme from Robocop 2, and it works quite well with the movie.

Another thing I have got to comment on is the usage of stop motion. Once Cain is transformed into the monstrous Robocop 2 ( the title character ), we get an explosion of stop motion special effects that look fantastic! Stop motion doesn't get any better than this.

All in all, this is one of the best sequels of all time, but got a bad reputation because it was 'too violent'. Don't listen to some of the naysayers. Robocop 2 is a masterfully done film from the director of Empire Strikes Back and shouldn't be missed by any sci-fi buff out there. Check it out now on Widescreen for the DVD.

4 stars out of 4 ( reviewed by Scott Beams )
163 out of 231 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Not as terrible as some make out, but still a disappointment.
mentalcritic27 February 2001
If you believe the video game that was made out of RoboCop, it was set in the same year that RoboCop 2 was released. RoboCop is simply one of the best films ever made, and it brought me much relief from a very sorrowful childhood. Which brings me to the point I am trying to make here: anything was going to be something of a letdown. Another rebuke I would like to make of other critics of this film lies with their complaint that the movie was too mean-spirited and had too much violence. Let me quote Paul Verhoeven's commentary about the original: "the whole style of the movie is 'too much'".

The real failing of this sequel lies in the story, which is full of threads that are either resolved badly (the attempt to reprogram RoboCop with new directives) or not resolved at all (RoboCop's memories of his wife). Considering that not a single second in the original was wasted when it came to drawing the viewer into the hero's mind or building some emotional connection, the lack of sympathy one feels with even Lewis or the Sergeant is worrying. Then there's the villian. A film with a superhero, like Robocop or the Bond series, is only as effective as its main villian. Cain is not an effective villian, and gets very little development in the bargain, the exact opposite of the situation with Clarence Boddicker in the original.

The mock commercials are something of a hit and miss affair. The OCP Communications commercial was hilarious, but the Sunblock 5000 commercial was just plain tasteless. The use of children in RoboCop 2 also counts against it. There were no children in the original, reflecting the fact that the film just wasn't made with children in mind. The use of children in RoboCop 2 smacks of a cheap attempt to appeal to the children who are allowed by their parents or whomever to see the film. It doesn't work because the writers are trying to transplant adult dialogue into a child's mouth. Similarly, the attempt to transplant the manner in which the Christian Coalition think children talk into Robocop fails.

All in all, RoboCop 2 is a passable sequel, but it pales in comparison to the harsh perfection that is the original. Give it a chance because it does have some entertainment value.
59 out of 79 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Not worse than "RoboCop", just different
dee.reid5 December 2002
"RoboCop 2" , the sequel to 1987's ultra-violent "RoboCop", is not quite up to par with its predecessor. The film still manages to entertain on a large level. I know that a lot of people do not like this movie, but I personally think it is still pretty good. I'm not writing a review of this movie, I am just expressing my thoughts on it.

First off, this movie is a lot more violent than the first "RoboCop". You get scenes of bloody shootings, grisly scenes of torture, and a surgery which I'd rather let you see for yourself than describe here. Paul Verhoeven does not return to shock his audience with graphic violence and ultra dark humor, which has since become trademark in his films. The director this time is Irvin Kershner, who made "The Empire Strikes Back" nearly ten years before this movie. Kershner seems to focus a lot more on action, rather than story.

Second, the movie's villain, Cain (Tom Noonan), to me is a direct opposite of Clarence Boddicker (the villain from the first film who was played by Kurtwood Smith). Cain enjoys giving people pleasure (through his highly addictive designer drug called Nuke) while Boddicker was a sadist who took pleasure in the death and suffering of others. (Though after Cain's "transformation", none of this really matters).

Lastly, this movie does not exploit children. The kid in this movie, Hob (played by Garbriel Damon) is Cain's twelve year-old side kick. He is a violent, foul-mouthed little child who runs errands for Cain. The writers for this movie did this intentionally, to show that crime holds no age barrier. Regardless of age, crime is crime.

Like I said, "RoboCop 2" is not trying to be better than its predecessor, it's just trying to be something different.

8/10
76 out of 119 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Oh dear
Paul And Kathy Stevenson27 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I was a huge fan of the original Robocop.

But to say I was disappointed by this first sequel would be an understatement.

The problems are many.

Glossy though the film may look there are plenty of bloopers on screen for all to see, wires, cameramen etc, something I find wholly unacceptable from someone of Irvin Kreshner's pedigree.

Robocop has become a robot. There is no spark of humanity to be found in the character here. A true disappointment when one considers that his "soul" had returned by the end of the first movie. Here his attitude shows no human side and makes him hard to sympathise with.

Caine is a poor villain. OK I know Boddiker from the first film was better than the average, mainly thanks to Kurtwood Smith's performance, but the usually solid Tom Noonan creates a character who you couldn't care less about one way or the other.

What's happened to the Old Man????. I appreciate that he didn't get to where he is by being "nice" but the change in his character here is nothing short of dumbfounding. In the first movie it's made clear he despises Dick Jone's tactics and attitude and yet here he's no better than Jones. It makes no sense.

Doctor Faxx is a poor replacement for Bob Morton's charismatic, if unpleasant, OCP resident genius.

The action sequences, save the sequence where Murphy is stuck to the side of Caine's truck, are harsh and nasty and repel rather than entertain.

And finally. What is with the musical score?. Don't tell me Poledouris couldn't have done it simply because he was working on Total Recall at the time. A series (TV or Movie) soundtrack is part of its personality. Part of its character. When you remove that it harms the familiarity of the characters we're watching. So it's bad enough but shame on Leonard Rosenman. His score here is lurid, camp and downright cringe worthy.

The story has its moments to be fair. There's a lot of originality in here. But it tries too many new things to take in with one film. Hob is a well realised villain and the only truly dis likable "villian" in the move, Thumbs up to Gabriel Damon there.

The final showdown between Robocop and Robocop 2 is fun as well.

But for the vast majority of its overlong running time this is a serious disappointment.
24 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Excellent Sequel! Great film!
LebowskiT100015 November 2002
I don't think anyone is going to argue that the first Robocop film in the series is, by far, the best! But, I still think this installment is very good and has a lot of good things to offer. The story is quite interesting and pretty well thought out. The characters are pretty much the same as the first film, nothing terribly new there. The special effects are absolutely superb and the action is done rather well throughout the film.

Like any film, this film has some flaws. One thing that really bothered me is that they made Robocop more of a Blue-ish color instead of a silver or grey color, it would looked better if they had stuck to the original color. Also, there are a few scenes that are meant to be comedic, but just didn't pull through. Other than that, I thought the film was rather good.

The new cyborg in this film, aptly named "Robocop 2" is astonishing in every way. I thought it was a phenomenal design and beautifully done! The weaponry on this cyborg was quite impressive as well.

The actors in this film did a fine job, I can't think of any that I disliked and the direction of Irvin Kershner (The Empire Strikes Back) was quite good as well.

Even though I liked this film a great deal, I still wouldn't recommend it to everyone. If you saw and liked the original RoboCop, then I think you really ought to see this one, I'm not saying you'll like it, I would hope that you do, but you still may not (as many reviewers on this site have made clear). I would say that if you like a good sci-fi film, then you should check this film out, and I hope you like it. Anyhow, thanks for reading,

-Chris
71 out of 114 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
"Oh my, this isn't very nice"
revival051 August 2008
Warning: Spoilers
For most people, RoboCop 3 is the film that really is the big disgrace for the Robo series. It has few fans, and most people hate it for it's shameless commercial PG-13 approach. Now, I'm not going to say that RoboCop 3 is any good. Frankly, it pretty much sucks. But as far as being a properly shot and executed film, it surpasses this piece of circuit chaos. Yes, the truth of the matter is that RoboCop 2 is the worst of two bad and unnecessary sequels to a near-masterpiece. So what if RoboCop 3 turns Robo into a cartoonish super hero in a ultra mainstream production for kids to enjoy - at least it's doing it openly. I don't know where RoboCop 2 begins and ends, I don't know what or whom it's about, I don't understand what's going on in it, I don't understand which jokes are deliberate and which aren't, I will go insane if I try to understand the characters, I see nothing of any value in anything anybody is saying, I can't believe anybody looked at the shooting script and figured it would work and I can't believe that Irvin Kirshner saw the finished result and figured that he liked what he see. He probably didn't by the way, neither Miller, nor Weller nor Allen did. It's not hard to see why.

Now, RoboCop 2 has it's fans, I know this. Mostly they belong to this league of absolute anti-pretensions, dismissing anybody who expected any depth, or subject matter from the first film, as academic Roger Ebert Sith apprentices. It's just a lot of fun, a good piece of action and great entertainment, the argument goes. Yeah well, I guess if you just don't listen to what any of the characters are saying you could fool yourself that we might as well have Arnold in the suit instead of Weller. Don't get me wrong, I like a good action film, with pure entertainment value as it's only - most satisfying - virtue. But RoboCop 2, sir, ain't no such thing.

Look at the first couple of scenes. This horrible actor makes Robo repeat that he's just a machine, and then goes into this operatic speech about how he could never be a man, where-after Murphy's wife (who's suing OCP for robot-stalkings) walks in out of the blue and have this sad little moment with him, and then is never heard of again! I surely would like to go in to this film scene by scene, because every one has these kind of absurdities in them. It's like a twelve year old fan boy has done the screenplay, the characters act totally random and first say this, then say that. OCP wants to stop crime with a new Robo, especially this drug called "nuke" but then it seems they really just want to become this big capitalist empire and control the entire city – politics are abandoned I guess, understandable given the comic relief mayor, The villain (played by Tom Noonan, who did a better version of this in Last Action Hero and that's saying a lot) is an addict, but is still used for this machine. The woman behind it all has an agenda which is impossible to understand.

Speaking of twelve year olds, this film has the infamous role of "Hub", this mad kid who swears and kills people, played by a child actor. I'm not going to be all moral about it, it's a free world and if you want a psycho kid in your action movie, go for it. I don't know how much of Frank Miller's original vision was put into this, but the credits at least acknowledge him as conceiver of the "story". And, if I zoom out, I could see this as being quite a cool character. It's grim for sure, to have a maniac killer kid but then again this is the world of RoboCop and who would be surprised? This whole business with the OCP trying to become this giant monopoly over everything, is properly dystopian and good as well. Also, the idea of RoboCop getting in touch with his wife and kid, having them embedded into the story somehow - would also be great, and as far as I can see a natural and logical step if they now had to make a RoboCop sequel.

But, of course, these are just ideas. As many people have already said, the screenplay is 100% mess. The kid has one scene (the torture scene) where it's hinted that he in fact is just a stereotype messed up kid, and then we have this unimaginable scene where he is dying and gets all soft and friendly towards ol' tin head. Why doesn't he just take up his uzi and try to take him down with his last breath? Isn't that what his character would do? Does he give his life a little second thought there on his death bed? Not necessarily, given that his last words are "it sucks", so why? It really makes no sense, and this can be said about everybody, no everything, in this film. IS there a strike in the police force? IS RoboCop machine or man? What's the deal with turning Robo into this community service machine for 10 minutes? I mean, sure, it's pretty funny I wouldn't deny that. But why build it up, and then discard it? And why the hell is Allen so criminally underused? and what is it Weller has an obvious urge to express with his character and yeah, well, the threads are many and the mess is enormous.

This review is just as messed up as the film. The only reason I give an extra star up there is because of the actors from the first film, I'm sure they had good intentions with it. I mean it's something somewhat stable, some kind of anchor in this sea of bad movie making.
13 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Insulting, hateful, tasteless, gratuitously violent mess!
the_mysteriousx19 August 2004
Warning: Spoilers
The first Robocop had a sense of cynical wit and a sick sense of violence. It was a fine line to walk, but Paul Verhoeven pulled it off and the film did so well, they made a sequel. How awful. (Possible Spoilers ahead - though anything that could spoil this is beyond me).

Irvin Kershner is not the director for this type of film. He clearly did not understand the humor of the original and as a result the massive over-the-top senseless violence looks really bad - and worse is very distasteful. Even worse is the musical score. Leonard Rosenman was an old man from another era and the heroic, light music does not match the images on the screen at all! What was he scoring?! The Great American Hero?! Worst of all, he completely eliminated Robocop's theme from the first film, which was so memorable and perfect. Can you imagine a Superman film without John Williams' fanfare, or Indiana Jones, etc.? How could he do that?!!

The plot is just a collection of ideas that don't gel. In beginning we see Robo "stalking" his old wife. Fine, good idea. But, they completely drop it after that. Then, there is this a stupid idea of the company reprogramming Robo to be nice. That's thrown in for 10 minutes and then is immediately dropped. Or, the silly idea that the repulsive 10 year-old drug lord reminds Robo of his son - Once again, a weak motif that is shown briefly twice and dropped. This may work in a comic book, but not on film and Frank Miller was unfortunately too inexperienced at the time and threw every idea in along with the kitchen sink. It doesn't work as a whole.

Some people here seem to be praising the corporate bashing in this film and the privatization of the police. That is the best part of the film that is consistent with the first. However, in the original, the old man was a tough business man out for a profit, but ultimately fair in the end. In this film, he is just pure evil in his lust for money and power. You can't just change characters like that for no reason. And Nancy Allen's character is useless in this film, whereas in the first she was essential to Robo's search for himself. She is as gratuitous as the violence in this film.

And the violence, yes the violence. I enjoy many violent, bloody films when they serve purposes and are meant to tell a story. Irvin Kershner seems to get off on human beings being blown to bits, shot to pieces, children lusting for death and torture and peoples' desire for drugs. He doesn't know when to stop. Do we really need to see every last innocent bystander (even people trying to help others) get shot up???? It is inferred when we see the bad Robocop shooting repeatedly! Instead Mr. Kershner proves he has very little taste for this type of work and creates an abominable mess that is a terrible piece of pop art and worse, a disgusting message of violence for any young person watching this film.

No, this film isn't meant to be message-y and I certainly don't watch Robocop movies or Alien or Predator movies for that reason. However, when you go too far and cross the line, much of what you do must be put into question. And as for this film, in the words of the evil kid drug dealer's last words as he lay dying, "It still sucks".
34 out of 56 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
In my opinion, RoboCop 2 is grossly underrated. Warning: Spoilers
I love this sequel. RoboCop 3 is literally on my bottom 5 list of all time, but I don't understand what the big fuss is about #2?

RoboCop 2 has a very unique atmosphere and is loaded with top notch action. The climax battle between RoboCop 2 and.. well, with pretty much everybody else, is so awesome. Also, I simply love the design of the monster robot. It really looks extremely menacing. Sure the stop-motion effects are clearly outdated, but so what? You don't go bad-mouthing Alien's guy in a suit either.

As far as the storyline goes, there's nothing unique about it, but I do admire the filmmakers for the character of Hob. Putting a gun in the kid's hand and waisting him later in a hale of gunfire takes some balls in the commercial Hollywood. In my line of work I get to read a lot of reviews and that's the one thing this movie has been criticized. Hello people, that's the way it REALLY goes in the real world!

RoboCop 2 is simply one of the best and uncompromising sequels around.

**** / *****
21 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
One Awesome Action-Packed Sequel.
Master_Wayne24 November 2004
Robocop 2 is a very amusing movie that is often times unfairly criticized. It is obviously not as good as the first film, but its still a darn good sequel. This movie, just like the first, always gets made fun of and I can't see why. I think these movies are just so entertaining. Here's my two cents.

I am a huge fan of these Sci-Fi/Action movies, and Robocop is definitely one of the coolest in the genre. The first film is a classic, but most people don't seem too fond of it's sequel. Robocop 2 is dark, cruel, and gruesome, but it never misses it's chance to fit in a joke. The humor in this movie is just as good as the first's, if not better. The acting is a little poor at times, but you can't expect too much out of a film like this. Robocop 2's story is less diverting, but the special effects are superior to the first. This movie has a much better climax than the original, and the final moments of violence at the ending have some of the best special effects I have ever seen(without the use of cgi)in a movie.

My problem is that people always accuse films like this of not being realistic enough. What should you expect from a title like 'Robocop 2"? People need to just sit back and suspend disbelief for a movie like this. The Robocop movies are pure bloody fun, that's all. I recommend this movie to anyone who likes violent 'machine vs. machine' warfare, and being a fan of the first movie couldn't hurt either.
30 out of 50 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
An OK movie, but Verhoeven's absence is quite apparent, and it is nowhere near as great as its terrific predecessor...
MovieAddict201630 October 2003
Warning: Spoilers
***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS***

"RoboCop" is one of my all-time favorite guilty pleasures, the type of rare action movie that takes no prisoners and never lets up for a single moment until the ride is over, and when the credits start to fill the screen you just let out a big sigh of relief--not because it was a bad film, but because you survived the ride.

"RoboCop 2" is a bit different. Gone is Paul Verhoeven at the helm of the film and filling in for his absence is Irvin Kershner ("The Empire Strikes Back"). The film is violent, perhaps a bit more so than the first in certain areas overall, but it lacks the hard, almost unexplainable solid edge the first film had--the sharpness that pierces you as you watch the film like a knife blade. "RoboCop 2" has a dull blade. The first has a great effect. This does not. There's violence without reason, reason without explanation, and explanation without effect.

Detroit is worse off than it was in the last film--men bash little old ladies with cars and steal their loot; hookers stab men in the eye to steal cash; stores are blown up and rampages by little league players and the captain of the team even occur. Police are on strike because they claim the city is screwing them over--only RoboCop (Peter Weller), Lewis (Nancy Allen), and a few other policemen/women remain.

There's a new drug on the rise called "Nuke," manufactured and sold to the public by Cain (Tom Noonan) and his young apprentice (Gabriel Damon), who looks about 11 or 12 but talks with the language of a Quentin Tarantino character and kills innocent human beings mercilessly. Oh, but when he dies we're supposed to feel sorry for him because then he's a cute little mortally-wounded boy.

RoboCop chases down Cain and, after what seems two hours into the film, finally catches him. But Omni Corp, the corporation we saw in the first film, wants a new RoboCop, so they shut down life support on the dying Cain, take his brain and stuff it into a new RoboCop, referenced to so originally as "RoboCop 2," hence the title of the film. (My suggestion is that in "RoboCop 4," they should create a cyborg called RoboCop XP, and he can have lightning-fast reflexes and a built-in wireless broadband modem so he can check his e-mails and surf the 'Net while he's on the go.)

And putting a homicidal drug dealer's brain inside a giant-sized robot law enforcer with machine gun capabilities and weapons of mass destruction probably isn't a very good idea, but the thought never crosses the minds of Omni Corp. The chairman of Omni Corp (Daniel O'Herlihy) produces RoboCop 2 to the public, but RoboCop already realizes RoboCop 2 is dangerous and so he appears at the unveiling armed with a huge gun.

RoboCop 2 goes haywire and kills everyone. The entire sequence is done in cheesy Godzilla animation but, to be quite honest, it didn't look all that bad. He and RoboCop duke it out on top of buildings and in elevator shafts and on the ground outside Omni Corp, where an uncountable number of police officers (hey, weren't they on strike?) are left firing at this indestructible--and very bulletproof--machine that unfortunately does not have an OFF switch in sight. ("Turn it off!" he says. "I can't!" she says. "You idiots!" I say.)

So many loose threads are left dangling in "RoboCop 2," and so many subject matters that I wanted sorting out after seeing the first film. But there isn't any hope in sight. After a brief moment that hints towards the central idea that RoboCop may still be human after all (wasn't that sorta established in the original?), everything is dropped for the action set pieces to move in, such as a car chase with RoboCop and Cain, or the end finale that goes on too long. But RoboCop is seen spying on his wife in the beginning, and we find out that she has gone through serious trauma over this whole thing. She confronts him at the police station and out of decency he insists her husband is dead. But we see the look of remembrance and remorse in his eyes.

That's the storyline I would like to follow. I'd like to follow RoboCop's journey to find himself again, to recover lost memories floating around in that big brain of his. To confront his wife and tell her that he remembers her, to add a human element to the story that was so clearly demonstrated in the original but completely lost here. Kershner obviously wants to mimic Verhoeven. But Verhoeven knows how to equally balance action and excessive gore with social satire and the ongoing human battles, relevant to the action battles. Remember in the first film when RoboCop went through his house and his eyes started to flood with past images and faded memories? Nothing like that is done here. We simply get some cheesy flashback in the beginning when Alex (pre-RoboCop) is laughing with his wife in a very non-candid and dubious sort of way. As I saw this sequence, I just sat in my seat waiting for the word "Hallmark" to appear in gold font across the screen.

As for all the loose threads left open in this film and supposedly not touched in the third movie...let's all hope that when Paul Verhoeven said he wishes to return to the series he wasn't lying. I'd love to see this franchise closed in a more honorable fashion. "RoboCop 2" is an OK movie for a Friday night crowd, but in comparison with the original, it's about as cold as RoboCop's facial tissue and as cloudy as RoboCop's memory.

2.5/5 stars.

  • John Ulmer
15 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Could have been so much better...
BStalker10 November 1998
There was no way this was ever going to be as good as Robocop but they could have done so much better. What's really missing is Basil Poledouris' wonderful fanfare theme tune. In its place we are giving some appalling brass'n'percussion with a chorus singing a ridiculous 'Robocop' theme on top. It's amazing how much music can change a film, and really, a decent score would have improved the film immensely.

Also, Rob Bottin's ultra-violent effects were sadly missed. The film is full of violence but it's mainly of the long-range bullets-hit-bad-guys type: the only thing close to the original's over-the-top nature was the brain removal and the stomach-slicing.

Phil Tippett is on hand, luckily, to deliver some entertaining stop-motion action scenes which really liven up the final scenes of carnage.

Sadly, the bad guys never come across as meanly as Clarence Boddicker did in the first, OCP seem unnecessarily annoying and the little kid is just annoying. It's not a TERRIBLE film but we really could have expected more from the man who brought us 'The Empire Strikes Back'.
10 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Thank you for not smoking.
Davyd Teather22 June 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Robocop 2 is the action packed, fast paced sequel to 1987 hit movie Robocop. Their is more violence, more blood and more gun fights. Everything a sequel is supposed to have. Peter Weller comes back playing the title character yet again. And their is more body count. The look of it is very outstanding and and the story was very well done. This time around, Robocopis trying to stop a drug lord and bring him to justice for the manufacture of a very addictive narcotic, nuke. I thought the new cyborg in this film looked absolutely amazing. The best part of this movie is when Robocop and Caine as the cyborg are battling each other towards the end of the movie. I do not understand why this movie has the rating it has. One of the most underrated sequels of all time, along with Predator 2, which I also enjoyed. Although I did not like this movie as much as the first movie, I like it for what it is. I would recommend this movie to anybody who likes action. Their is enough action to keep you excited from beginning to end. This movie is not to be missed.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Best splatter sequel ever
peterpants668 December 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Former cop turned can opener Peter Weller returns with more binary code on his mind then a telemarketing firm. In futuristic Detroit which couldn't have been a better fit, or a more realistic one, Weller is having flashback's of his wife and kid, and the police are on strike. A fierce and flashy Tom Noonan leads a semi-skilled, equal opportunity goon squad in selling dope and dealing out life ending beatings. Robocop can't seem to get memories of his wife and child out of his head. He knows he's a robot and the conflict of coming to terms with his body, mind and heart are semi-explored. ICP decides to reprogram the bot with TONS of data that ends up in total overload. Truly one of the last pics to use lots of stop-motion animation. Cain after losing a game of "chicken" with Robocop gets stuck himself inside a case of metal. The showdown at the end is the stuff of legends pitting humanistic robotics against an overhauled terminator! Love the scene where Robo is set up in the factory, "Jesus had days like this". The sets are great, acting top notch, the story is good, direction comes from the man who did "Empire Strikes Back" and those funny Verhoeven commercials that he's known for, are slipped back in for chuckles. If you loved the first one, and are a fan of splatter violence, this is your flick. Ten stars.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
RoboCop Strikes Back
Viva_Chiba4 October 2010
I am surprised to see that this movie is bashed almost by everyone, i am in the minority that enjoyed this movie.

RoboCop 2 is directed by Irvin Kershner, director of 5th episode of the Star Wars saga, "The Empire Strikes Back".

Plot: A new dangerous drug called "Nuke" is circulating in the streets manufactured by the god-delirious "Kane"....now Alex "Robocop" Murphy as a new enemy to fight !

It features one of the best stop-motion animations ever, awesome job, stop motions does what CGI can't.

RoboCop 2 is violent and bloody, not brutal like the first one from Paul Verhoeven, but that's okay it's still enjoyable. Some of the stars complained about the movie being "Too violent" and "negative", probably this is the reason why we don't see Peter Weller RoboCop 3

RoboCop 2 still contains some satire, like in the first one, but if i tell you i will be forced to spoil something.

Too bad that it's followed by the kid friendly "Robocop 3".....
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Uninspired and messy sequel.
APRI6ION10 September 2014
Robocop does battle with a powerful drug lord who is transformed into a giant psychopathic cyborg, while simultaneously resisting OCP's attempts to repress his human memories.

At first glance the woeful reviews for Robocop 2 might seem confusing, because everything seems to be in the right place, initially. The production values are fairly slick, the action scenes are shot with an enjoyable bloodthirstiness and there are some funny scenes early on, including some malfunctioning 'Robocop 2' prototypes and a couple of satirical commercials. I also like the scenes in which Robocop becomes an eccentric pacifist. But as the film clunks into the main story it starts to come apart… and fast.

There is absolutely no heart and no energy and one dull scene bumbles into the next like a drunkard trying to string a sentence together. The violence, which starts out cheerfully enough, eventually becomes quite nasty and sadistic. The graphic violence of the original film was used to great satirical effect and was often sardonically humorous, such as ED-209 blowing a company exec to bits at a board meeting, or it had a real point; Clarence Boddicker's biblical execution of Murphy. Here though the violence is just gratuitous, a bit weird and has absolutely nowhere to go - one particular scene comes to mind in which a child mobster is forced to watch the bodily dissection of a crooked cop. In fact the entire child villain thing was irritating and ludicrous from the jump, concluding in a scene in which Robocop takes pity on the little stinker. Don't make me laugh.

Weller does everything he can to breath some life into his character and bags most of the funniest or most memorable moments, but like many things in this film I have no idea what Nancy Allen was doing the whole time, what a waste. She does nothing but point guns at people and frown; this only touches upon the many profound problems with the script and direction.

In the end Robocop 2 doesn't just suffer from the absence of Verhoeven but also from an uneven script humming with unfinished ideas, narrative dead-ends and a serious lack of humour, doing nothing whatsoever to build upon its predecessor's greatness. I have to disagree with some of the more optimistic reviews here; this film isn't trying to do something different, it doesn't appear to know what it's trying to do at all.

I will say this for it though, the stop motion effects were great and it is, at least, a better film than Robocop 3.

4/10
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Not as 'deep' as Robo-cop, but more fun
profroche8 November 2000
while Film majoring fake hollywood insiders everywhere take particular relish in trashing this movie, it's actually really good. while the characters are a bit more two dimensional than in robocop, no one is quite so bad as to be a generic Hollywood action archetype. As long as you're not searching for a profound message in what is, after all, a Hollywood action movie, the you can really, really enjoy this. Some of the humor bits are hilarious, and the movie has a lot of classic scenes, in fact, the whole first 15 minutes of it could be considered a classic scene. People screaming about 'Nuke', Bad fat cop Duffy getting slammed into an arcade game, 'Bad Dudes', and the new robocop prototypes are all things that stick in people's heads. A lot of things Robocop says alone will have you cracking up, (when they turn him into a community role model for instance) and considering Robocop possibly represents the easiest acting job anyone has ever done, that's saying a lot if a monotone delivery can make you laugh. Basically, look to Robocop for a more meaningful movie, look to Robocop 2 for more fun, and more memorable scenes. look for Robocop 3 is you want to watch a 90 minute ad for robocop products, and make fun of punk rockers.
21 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Doesn't Measure Up.
refinedsugar14 March 2001
Okay now we're just being fed formula and who could blame them after the critical and financial business the original Robocop did. This sequel (beyond letting us know the people behind these movies are obviously trying to make a working franchise) tells us how hard it is to duplicate success on those rare instances where a science fiction movie breaks the mold and follow it up with something just as good or better. It's a weird trait that many sequels to successful movies succumb to, but then again, when the original does so many things right some level of disappointment or failings seem almost guaranteed. Dreary atmosphere, a workable story, sprinkles of dark humor, satisfying action pieces and some real emotion. The original had it all. It'd be a fantasy to think we were going to get this and more in a sequel.

We don't. This outing finds less of the dark humor and less of Murphy's humanity as he's tasked with going up against a new underground drug taking over New Detroit. Of course, things will come to a violent head and once again it will be Robocop's prime directive to make things right. Tom Noonan, who starts as the main villain is perhaps the best and the worse. A good actor can take an underwritten part farther than it was supposed to go, but only so far. Hence a key problem. Like most drug barons, especially in movie land, the one he plays is paranoid and prone to using violence. Which means the pursuit of cliché set pieces and scenarios like an obvious showdown between him and Robocop before the end (in some form). What maybe you don't expect is when half-way through the movie, the main villainy force becomes a 14 year old successor to a drug empire.

The premise is simple enough. Part man, mostly machine. He's not prone to annoyances normal human beings have to deal with like being shot, bleeding, dying... that sort of thing. He can be as detached from the world as he wants to be because let's face it, he is detached. Peter Weller reprises as Robocop. Nancy Allen is again along for the ride as his partner. OCP is still OCP. The headquarters for a faceless mega corporation built on greed. Those things haven't changed, but other more intimate story and atmosphere elements have.

Robocop 2 ends up not being a horrible outing. It is still very much entertaining and in due part to memories established by the original, but give me back more of that dark trashy New Detroit atmosphere as seen in the original. Give me less throwaway action scenes, 14-year old boy villains and mediocre stop motion effects. Most of all give me back the feeling that Robocop was fresh. I know that's hard to fulfill, but at least give me a glimmer of hope.
10 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Good sequel to RoboCop!
Movie Nuttball31 October 2002
The Sequel to RoboCop is a good one with more violence.Perter Weller and Nancy Allen both do as good Dan O'Herlihy,as they did in the original. Thomas Rosales Jr once again gets shot up in this movie which was no suprise to Me because in most of the films he is in he either gets killed or is behind bars.Tom Noonan is the villain this time around and is a good one at that! John Glover is his usual self.Leonard Rosenman`s score for RoboCop 2 is very good!Fans of the first RoboCop film check the sequel out as it is a good sequel with a lot of action!
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Excellent comic-book sequel to the original.
medbh26 February 1999
I actually think Robocop 2 is superior to its predecessor, though many fans of the latter would probably disagree with me. Robocop 2 is very violent, bloody, and often quite funny. The action sequences are exciting and handled with great skill, and the FX are superb. This is one of my favourites.
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Violent Fun
Daniel (TERMINATOR180)27 January 2002
Sure, the film's storyline is like that of a Comic Book, but if you enjoy to watch Peter Weller play as Robocop, the Gun-Totin' Law Enforcer of the future, this movie is as fun as the first, and better than the 3rd (which wasn't very good at all, and lacked Peter Weller)

The movie actually has some suspenseful moments, but it's main purpose is to serve the bloody shoot-out craving in most of us.

If you compare it to Robocop's Comic Book Spin-Offs, Cartoon Spin-Offs, and even TV Series Spin-Offs, Robocop 2 is a classic film.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Helplessness
This was a big hit of my youth and so I decided to take a trip down memory lane and check if it still works as I have the VHS.

The plot of the film is that conglomerate OCP have decided to take over weeviled futuristic Detroit, and the way they are going to do this is by foreclosing on a loan that they have made to the city, which was secured on city assets (presumably stuff like the train station, prisons, libraries and schools). It's in their interest to let the city go to pot whilst this happens so they can play white knight to the public when they privatise, and so they withdraw their warranty on RoboCop and provoke the police to strike. RoboCop meanwhile is intent on dishing out justice to Cain, the kingpin of an organisation which distributes new designer drug, Nuke, in handy plastic cassettes.

Trauma and helplessness are big themes in this movie and there are two points in the movie where already physically traumatised individuals are systematically butchered/disassembled/tortured in a helpless state. In terms of general suffering whilst helpless I think you could probably raise that to five incidents, if you count three scenes when RoboCop is helpless (aides memoire: magnet, microshocks and "I type it, you think it"), once with a store keeper plagued by kids and also Officer Duffy.

The OCP "shyster" points out to RoboCop that he will never be able to go out dancing and fall in love again, and I think that statement lays bare his traumatic situation, which is a fundamentally hopeless one. The only solution he can find for his pain is to go out and murder criminals. This he manages to accomplish with élan and flourish. To show off at one point he steps into a shot whilst turning his head backwards, kind of like a pool player using their other hand or closing their eyes just before they take a pot. Whereas in the first movie his flourish when holstering is something that keeps alive the memory of his son, here his antics are genuinely psychotic.

The movie is pitch black at times, for example when the Old Man and corporate flunkeys watch film footage of various fatal failures in the RoboCop 2 program, I was reminded of the hideous real life footage the Nazis took of their V2 rocket tests (including one where various scientists and Reich underlings are wiped out by a boomeranging missile). Another particularly pernicious element is the corruption of childhood, one of the main baddies is small boy.

Dr. Juliette Faxx comes in as the main OCP baddie, a power-dressing man-eating sexual sadist. She is an alarming paranoid sexist nightmare that plays on anxieties of the era where men felt threatened by the first generation of "emancipated" and competitive women in the workplace. I think that the sexist nightmare of the 90s, which perhaps is still around, is of the aggressive, and yet impeccable female colleague, which actually is all about helplessness as well! As with the first movie there are newsclips hinting of the helplessness of the time, where environmental catastrophes come one straight after another, holes multiplying in the dam, with not enough fingers and toes to stop up them all.

This movie gets a bad rap maybe because it is not as flawless as the original RoboCop, for example the baddie Cain (Tom Noonan) is pretty listless compared to Clarence Boddiker from the first movie, and it's genuinely a nastier piece of work, however it contains its fair share of iconic moments, and ends up closer to being a horror movie than anything else, just absolutely haunting.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Robo-Crap
gothamite2729 November 2004
Warning: Spoilers
My god how this film is so horrible. How the author of 'Batman: Year One' wrote such rubbish, I'm afraid I'll never know.

***SPOILERS (but the film spoils itself anyway, so you might as well read the bloody things)***

Let's start with the basics. Now that the excellent character Clarence Boddicker is dead and buried, we've got a psycho drug addict/dealer on the loose that likes to send home videos of his opinions into news channels that like to show disturbing clips of drug dealers vowing to plague the city. Okay, so maybe Cain was high at the time. Don't get me wrong, it was pretty scary.

Cain: "The people want paradise...and they will have it." (Pretty darn scary)

Even still, Cain is still a stupid psycho and is not even the central villain. Some little ten-year old is. Funny, he's the youngest character in the film and he's one of the only villains that's not addicted to 'nuke'.

Anyway, RoboCop is stalking his wife, who alerts the police. They re-programme him with all sorts of zany new Prime Directives, turning him into a Robo-BoyScout. This idea is quickly scrapped when Lewis notices that the bullet-proof behemoth tries to reason with a harmless, overweight gangster -with little more than a basic shotgun (RoboCop is made out of titanium)- instead of shooting him in the head. Robo-BoyScout quickly turns back to Robo-Cop with the help of a high-powered charge of electricity.

Cain is killed and turned into RoboCop 2. A whole lot of people take nuke, the mayor of Old Detroit negotiates with terrorists, RoboCop defeats RoboCop 2, and then...oh wait the film's over.

***END SPOILERS***

Satirical? Nah.

Tells you not to take drugs? Well, if you're a crime-boss it's advisable (according to this movie)...

Cool action? If you want to count unnecessary violence as action.

Cool dialogue? If you want to count unnecessary obscenities as dialogue.

Good film? I'll leave that one to you.
7 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Great special effects, a worthy sequel to a great movie.
The Bronson Fan14 June 2004
One of the better sequels I have seen to a great movie, Robocop 2 is a great sci fi movie. Robocop 2 takes place not to long after Robocop with most of the police on strike, the city addicted a to new drug called nuke and OCP trying to buy out what's left of the police force and then city for there own corrupt corporate schemes. Robocop's main enemy in this one is a deranged hippie (aren't they all) Cain (Tom Noonan), who is the leader of a gang who uses a drug called nuke to make money and control the underworld of crime. Robocop in typical great violent fashion takes out most of the scum, but ends up being dismembered by the gang. Robocop is repaired, but the female corporate villain, Dr. Faxx (Bauer) of course wants to hinder his ability while she works on her own project: Robocop 2. In a great moment in the movie a bunch of "men" and soccer mom types give there opinions on how Robocop should be reprogramed, to be a typical politically correct wimp, think Al Gore and Tipper programing someone. "Talk things out rather then waving that big gun of his." Hahahahha! This obviously fails, Robocop fry's his circuits and goes back to nail Cain and the gang. Cain's brain is taken by Dr. Faxx for the new Robocop 2. Well eventually Robocop faces Cain now in a new body in a great climatic battle in Detroit that ends with his brain smashed all over the ground.

Overall a great movie. The special effects I cant emphasize enough are incredible. How did we go from this to the CGI crap that is so popular now? The stop motion and models are amazing. Not flat as with most of even the most high tech CGI that's out there. To bad it so much money to do that now. The story is OK, I don't think it was as good as part ones, but the edition of the Robocop 2 is a great machine that is well worth the wait. Cain the villain I was not real impressed with. Clarence Boddicker from part one was much better. Look out for Ed Lauter with his stupid outfit, always the man. The action keeps up and you are never board, along with a fair amount of extreme violence although not as bad as I had thought when I saw it as a kid in the movie theaters. Maybe a bit tame by today. As with the first movie watch for all the great in jokes about corporate greed, the future (skin lotion commercial) are all funny. Like OCP's Flag? Some familiar characters return including The Old Man and Nancy Allen returning as Anne Lewis as the strong female role that works. There not much to say about Peter Weller, he walks around in his costume most of the time, nuff said. One and 2 are great movies however skip the stupid part three that was obviously taken over by a bunch of soccer Mom losers who ruined it. Overall the story is a little weak, but Robocop 2 gets a 10 out of 10 stars great sci fi action movie. See it just for the special effects if nothing else.
7 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed