2.5 stars. Rating: PG-13, for constant and intense violence, brief profanity and some drug use
By Derrick Bang
The general rule is fundamental:
A remake should surpass or, at the very least, equal its predecessor in all
essential respects.
Otherwise, what’s the point?
 |
| When Alex (Joel Kinnaman, left) finally regains consciousness after the horrific attack that left very little of his actual body, he's horrified to discover just how little remains. Dr. Dennett (Gary Oldman) chooses his words carefully; the next few minutes will determine how well — or badly — Alex adapts to this transformation. |
Director José Padilha’s update of
Robocop seems motivated more by the
smell of money — Sony Pictures’ desire to revive an iconic character, in the
hopes of creating a fresh franchise — than any artistic imperative. And while
this film’s primary fault lies more with first-time writer Joshua Zetumer’s
sloppy script than Padilha’s direction, the result is inescapable: This new Robocop doesn’t come close to matching
Paul Verhoeven’s 1987 original for verve, suspense or clever political satire.
Indeed, Zetumer’s vicious,
hammer-handed swipes at “heartless American imperialism” are this film’s least
successful element: shrill, über-liberal bleats that keep getting in the way of
what should be, at its core, a thoughtful parable on the nature of humanity.
Granted, this sci-fi drama’s political subtext invites debate, but Zetumer
stacks the deck laughably, most visibly in the form of Samuel L. Jackson’s Pat
Novak, a foaming-at-the-mouth, right-wing TV provocateur in the mold of Rush
Limbaugh and Ann Coulter.
Jackson’s Novak also is the first
defense of a poor screenwriter: a hackneyed device who pops up every so often,
to “instruct” or “remind” us poor viewers precisely how we’re supposed to react
to on-screen events. Which suggests that Zetumer and Padilha don’t have much
faith in their audience.
And I sure can’t figure out why
they choose to conclude their film with yet another rant from Novak: a clumsy
coda that makes little sense and does nothing but dilute the story’s mildly
satisfying outcome.
People don’t like to be yelled
at. Not in person, and certainly not at the movies.
All that aside...
The year is 2028. Uneasy military
stability is maintained in Afghanistan and other terrorist-laden hot spots by
the ground-level U.S. presence of EM-208 robot soldiers and larger, hyper-aggressive
ED-209 sentry units. The primary goal, to avoid the loss of American lives,
appears to have been achieved.
