RoboCop 2 (1990)

Too much of everything

Sorry, this movie sucks

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Irvin Kershner, who also directed probably the best Star Wars film "The Empire Strikes Back", does homage to Verhoeven's directorial style in this first sequel. Apparently Frank Miller wrote the original script, but Kershner didn't use much of it, but Miller hung around anyway.We see many of the original actors return, especially in the OCP offices. The Newsbreak anchors. Also, many new faces. Who cast this? It is a veritable assembly of character actors who had been in "Star Trek: The Next Generation". The Kid from the opening Robo Drug Bust scene, "Hob" (Gabriel Damon) who taunts Robo, played opposite Michael Dorn in "The Bonding". Mark Rolston who was also in 'Aliens", was in "Eye of the Beholder" and also one episode of Star Trek Continues. Stephen Lee "Duffy" was the target of an Alien Assasin in "The Vengeance Factor". Jeff McCarthy was "Roga Danar", a supersoldier who Troi befriends. Maybe there are more TNG Alumni. Most likely, these are the actors Central Casting used back in 1990 when this was made, and we can virtually date when a film of series was made simply by the guest stars and extras.Tom Noonan, from "Manhunter", is "Cain", a guy who makes Dope that makes Dope look like a weenie roast, and he's nasty. Noonan always plays great crooks, and he eventually becomes something worse for the final act of this film. But what boggles me is that as sequels go, this isn't that bad, although not quite as good as the original. From the start is has some of the same elements that made RoboCop great. But you never know what's going to be a hit or not. This film has much of the look and feel of RoboCop, but for some reason it didn't go over. Of course there are plenty of problems and weak spots, but it is interesting to watch this in relation to the Original RoboCop and the reboot RoboCop from 2014.Again, most of this was practical effects, but in 1990 some primitive CGI was used here. If you don't get caught up in the problems with this film, it does become part of the 3-film Robo story, concluded in Robo 3 with a different actor than Weller.

This film essentially picks up where its predecessor left off with the cyborg known as "Robocop" (Peter Weller) going about his business trying to keep crooks off the streets of a dystopian Detroit. Unfortunately, there are two organized forces with vastly different agendas which interfere in his efforts. The first is a murderous drug-dealer named "Cain" (Tom Noonan) who has cornered the market on a new drug known as "Nuke" and he intends on selling it at all costs. The second major obstacle to Robocop's efforts to clean up the streets of Detroit is the corporation known as "OCP" who initially created him but now has plans to remove him in favor of other cyborgs which they intend to mass-market. Meanwhile, crime continues to be rampant and the police department can only do so much with the resources they have available. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this was an okay sequel for the most part but definitely doesn't measure up to its illustrious predecessor. It just didn't seem to have the necessary attention to detail like the previous film. Be that as it may, while this film most certainly could have been better, I didn't think it was a bad movie by any means and I have rated it accordingly. Average.

As a film is very bad, as a sequel is embarrassing. Such are the Many people who did not directly understand the motivations of Paul Verhoeven when he made the mythical movie Robocop (1987). So even more controversy produced the sequel to this movie, produced three years later, and directed by Irvin Kershner (the director of the mythical Empire Strikes Back). It is true that Robocop 2 (1990) does not live up to its predecessor, but what we have to leave today is to underestimate a movie that, had it not been for other circumstances (other than the film) would have considered cult.Yes, it is not Verhoeven. Does this mean that the movie is a mere copy intended solely to make money? The truth is that the sequel directed by Kershner has a soul of its own, which gives it its own singularity. Surely, because we have to keep in mind that the project involved the famous comic writer Frank Miller, who gave a totally personal touch. You just have to see the numerous outputs of tone that the film presents. Those who have seen it will forever remember the contortionist fiddler, no doubt, although they are constant.The first RoboCop showed us a Detroit that could be mired in corruption and delinquency, but maintained a certain dignity. However, the story that Kershner presents us goes much further, both aesthetically and thematically. To begin with we must point out that the Detroit that we have before our eyes is much darker. In fact, one can even intuit the influence of Gotham that only a year ago had presented Tim Burton, with his Batman (1989). Detroit has something of a comic, but not of those 60's comics that did not intend to break any moral barrier, but quite the opposite, of the hooligans comrades by which the adolescents were able to make their parents angry. The crazy and suicidal tone of these comic strips is also reflected in the film itself, from the humorous moments (which are not few and pretend at all times to show that the film is not at any time seriously), through the language used or even with one of the protagonists, who is a child (although arms take, in fact the film breaks with the preconceived idea that there can be a child doing bad). The street gangs, the corruption, the Detroit that presents the sequel is just as well thought out (or maybe in this aspect, even better) than the one of the first delivery. And it is certainly because it is where the hand of Frank Miller is most noticeable. Maybe, where he could also work more freely. Not to ignore that the film charges its inks against corporate corruption (our villain is an entrepreneur who seeks to destroy the public sphere to seize all the power of the city). An exaggerated a priori hyperbole but in reality is totally in tune with the real Detroit (and if not, let's see what it has become at the moment).The problems Robocop 2 has had are several. To start with it is a sequel. And you know that you can forgive the sagas (although as we all know, in some cases are endless) but not the sequels. But unfortunately, we also have many internal problems.The assembly does not work. The story seems to stumble and give the feeling or that they either put scissors, or cut the wings to creativity. The final third of the movie with the fight between Robocop and Cain is too long compared to what is really being told. The action sequences are eternalized and never seem to end. In addition, although the film pretends to disguise what it is through numerous strokes of humor (that eye, some are tremendously effective) in fact the story is not quite conventional (as for plot we mean) and is not able to develop the crowd of issues that could have been exploited. In fact, Robocop 2's packaging far exceeds what it teaches us inside.Also the film has enough problems with the design of special effects. At that time the go motion was being tried, and the film abused this resource in excess, causing that half-third end of the film is actually a tedious spectacle of these FX, which to make the matters worse, seen today are somewhat dantesque .

After my initial disappointment that Anne (Nancy Allen) didn't become Robobabe straight away, since she was so severely shot up at the end of part one, I decided to hope for that to happen later on (no, it didn't) and move on. So, then, 'Robocop 2' seemed to become a lesser version of its predecessor; less impressive villains, less impressive action and a lot of bad one-liners from Robocop himself (not that part one had such great one-liners - not at all, really).But things stayed interesting here and there, and Tom Noonan was a pretty good choice as the new main baddie. And then came more and more terrific ideas: about the cops taking over the city with a cunning financial plan, about a kid who thinks he is the next Scarface, about Robocop (the original) descending into an identity crisis by an overload of rules, about a load of baseball kids (led by their coach!) looting a store, about Dr. Faxx exacting a devious plan to use villains for cops and keeping them in control through drugs, about a fresh young black mayor who decides to get his money from anyone just to stay in power... etc., etc. (it gets a little too obvious in the end with the Nazi flag and the Gestapo outfits, though, ha ha). Yes, 'Robocop 2' has a lot to offer, if you'll keep in mind that it's a sort of exploitation flick with a big budget (looks like it - I haven't checked) - and a very creative one.The creative cherry on top here is the loads of stop-motion scenes with Robocop 1 fighting Robocop 2, which actually don't come in until a lot later. There's some short bits of other Robocop stop-motion bits earlier on, which are good fun as well.It's hard to decide if this one is better or just as good as the first one, but both get a big 7 out of 10 for now.