RoboCop is back after a lengthy hiatus, but most critics are wishing it had stayed in 1987. Powered by director José Padilha and backed by some strong acting talents, the movie has promise. Unfortunately, it fails to deliver, and according to one critic, it may have ruined a classic.
- "There was plenty of room for improvement" over the original flick, writes Ian Buckwalter at NPR, and generally, the remake is "well made, polished, and hits every mark." Except that it's a bit of a bore. "Is it crazy to want a futuristic sci-fi action flick about a motorcycle-riding metal supercop to be just a little more fun?"
- Even with a "big budget, strong cast, and star director," RoboCop probably isn't worth your time—in fact, it's "a travesty of a classic," writes Colin Covert at the Minneapolis Star Tribune, who says he watched the film with "a rising sense of anguish." If you liked the original, "avoid seeing this flimsy facsimile."
- Joe Morgenstern at the Wall Street Journal says star Joel Kinnaman "compels our empathy with a kind of macho melancholia," but the other cast members are more fun to watch. Even so, it ends up as "an action adventure that's graphics-rich, logic-poor, coherence-challenged, and pleasure-impaired." Plus, it has none of the clarity that made the original a classic.
- Cue Stephen Whitty to soothe the pain—somewhat. Writing for the Star-Ledger, he notes, "Like RoboCop himself, [the movie] doesn't seem quite as truly, organically alive as it once did. But it sure looks sleek, and moves pretty fast. And if you don't think too much, it almost feels like the real thing."