![robocop-2014-lungs[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/z2gn3Yt.jpg "robocop-2014-lungs[1].jpg")
What went wrong?
It was nothing special
>>68805487
>PG-13
>No Satire
>Murphy's death lacks any impact
>Louis is black male
>Bad acting on just about everyone's part
What didn't go wrong?
>>68805487
Like most sequels, the recreation of what was through a sharper lens or a different inevitably dooms it regardless of whether it was good or not.
>>68805487
How come his skull fractured so bad that it had to be removed but his face is a-okay?
>>68805563
They recreated it with baby forskin.
The first film is all about the commercials and inanity of that society. They should've remade the superior sequel.
>>68805563
Because they were assholes
>>68805487
>keep his lungs
why? Literally a huge weakness. Why not just put air vents in his helmet?
>>68805487
>Ultra violent sci fi Christ parallel that satirises consumer culture
vs
>Hollow quip filled PG-13 remake using Robocop™ for name recognition only in an attempt for more dollars
It's a mystery.
>>68805487
Sony pictures literally turned the director into a yes man
>>68805492
Yeah, this. Wasn't a bad movie, had it's own ideas and take on robocop, but not much about it stood out. "Inoffensive" or "exceedingly mediocre" is what I would describe it as.
>>68805487
Nothing really.
>>68805679
I don't remember it being filled with quips at all. Have you been memeing too hard lately?
>>68805487
Does this mean he lost his penis?
>>68805487
Wasnt michael keaton the villian?
>>68805487
That's not robocop, that's handicapped iron man.
>>68805841
>Does it come in black?
>>68806054
>your mom comes on black
>>68806089
>Black cums on your mom
The first robocop was violent. In this one they took all the violence, the movie felt like a kid movie. And there was not antagonist, not a good one.
