Robocop - Paul Verhoeven, 1987
Pffft, surprisingly badly directed trash which is pretty boring. 2/10
[quote=“Stanton, post:12323, topic:1923”]Robocop - Paul Verhoeven, 1987
Pffft, surprisingly badly directed trash which is pretty boring. 2/10[/quote]
A favorite movie of mine 
Really?
I expected a lot, or at least something, but it was as bad as it was in 1987 in the theatre. Verhoeven’s worst film.
It’s a cartoon of flesh & blood. It’s not his best film (and it’s not really a personal favorite), but certainly not his worst either (I guess that’s Flesh + Blood)
Robocop is Verhoeven’s finest hour in my opinion.
No, Flesh and Blood is much, much better for me. But not a great film either. Actually Verhoeven’s films don’t give me much. I like his attitude, but not his style. His directing often sucks.
I like the premise of Robocop, and I wanted to like the film too ,but there wasn’t much to enjoy.
I liked the splatter attitude of the extreme violence, but the directing of the action scenes was mostly forgettable. I also liked the old fashioned looking stop motion things, as long as I ook at them as a Harryhausen homage.
Most characters were super boring and very badly written, and the acting was also below average. The intended humour worked rarely, but there was some unintended humour.
The only good scene was then the miscarried presentation of the robot. Apart from that it was really a total bore.
I prefer stop motion to CGI as well. I hate the artificial look most CGI-ridden blockbusters have
I like Verhoeven’s approach to the material, as said a cartoon but not with cartoonish but instead very graphic violence. It works very well and the character of Robocop (and ED 209) work well too. The problem is that some of the supporting characters and their scenes are weakly written. Robocop is a bit like Starship Troopers: some parts are great, others not so. I don’t know which Verhoeven movie really is my favorite. Total Recall, Basic Instinct, Soldier of Orange, The Fourth Man are among his best work.
I prefer CGI to Stop motion any day. Stop motion is ok for very old films, but in an 80s film it looks already odd.
But then there is bad CGI and good CGI. But mostly even the bad CGI is superior to the special effects of old films.
But there are of course old films which have still great looking special effects, and yes, many films which overuse CGI have a general ugly artificial look.
CGI works in movies like Jurassic Park and in those movies in which it is used (very) sparsely, otherwise I can hardly mention a movie in which the CGI was effective. It usually gives me the idea I’m watching a movie made of plastic.
[quote=“Stanton, post:12330, topic:1923”]I prefer CGI to Stop motion any day. Stop motion is ok for very old films, but in an 80s film it looks already odd.
But then there is bad CGI and good CGI. But mostly even the bad CGI is superior to the special effects of old films.
But there are of course old films which have still great looking special effects, and yes, many films which overuse CGI have a general ugly artificial look.[/quote]
absolutely agree - with good CGI i can finally see real looking monsters in, let’s say, John Carter and not funny looking puppets
i think some of the directors in pre-CGI era were quite aware of deficiency of stop motion animation and rather used man in a costume or for bigger creature a big semi-mechanical puppet like Alien Queen in Aliens or creature in Gilliams’ Jabberwocky (and thanks for that)
I like Flesh and Blood more than Robocop
Robocop the 1987 version is a fun film and so much better than the remake for me. Flesh and Blood is just to long a film for the subject matter.
Peeping Tom [1960]- Great British film that i never had the opportunity to watch until recently. Good cast in a well-written story, good cinematography and directing too.
Chilling and intense that really keeps you engaged til the very ending. 8/10
Jess Franco: Killer Barbys (1996)
-I’ve been watching quite a lot of Franco films recently, I think I’ve seen around 40 now. And this one is probably the worst one I’ve seen so far, not that it’s complete trash but it has nothing new to offer to the genre and it’s missing the surreal atmosphere best Franco films have. It was nice to see Aldo Sambrell in it though. I’m not in hurry to see more Franco’s 90’s films.
[quote=“Stanton, post:12323, topic:1923”]Robocop - Paul Verhoeven, 1987
Pffft, surprisingly badly directed trash which is pretty boring. 2/10[/quote]
sacrilege! One of the best films of the 1980’s and easily Paul Verhoevens best and in my top 10 films of all time.
Jess Franco: 99 Women (1969)
-Franco’s first women in prison film. I’m not a fan of the genre, they’re all too much alike imo but this was ok. Too bad I watched a version with random hardcore inserts here and there which really spoilt the film. Cast is really good in this one: Maria Schell, Herbert Lom, Rosalba Neri, Maria Rohm.
Watched a few Dutch movies:
MICHIEL DE RUYTER (Admiral - 2015, Roel Reiné)
A recent, very successful blockbuster. De Ruyter was a 17th Century admiral, the most successful admiral in Dutch history.
Presented as a cross between a war movie and a history lesson, but not very successful at either of the two things. Actually it’s a very dissapointing movie, occasionally good-looking (if a bit digital), offering a few strong performances, but empty and overlong, told in the haphazard style of postmodern cinema. Others have been more positive about it, so it might be a matter of taste
2+ out of 5
DE INBREKER (The Burglar - 1972, Paul Weisz)
One of the most successful Dutch movies from the 70s, starring Rijk De Gooyer as the burglar from the title. He’s asked, by a rich banker (who doesn’t want the police to be involved) to track down his step-daughter. Our burglar understands very well that the whole things smells fishy, but he nevertheless starts looking for the girl (played by Willeke van Ammelrooy, Holland’s most important sex symbol from the period next to Sylvia Kristel)
Willeke is at her sexy best and the film remains watchable after all those years, but today it’s hard to understand why it was so immensily successful back then, and - even more so - why critics were so enthusiastic about it: all in all it’s only a mildly entertaining comedy-thriller with a script that is all over the place.
3- out of 5
A.W.O.L. - Van Damme (aka Lionheart/Leon)
Im guessing this has been seen a lot by most people so sorry for the inane synopsis!
Van Damme is a member of the foreign legion when his brother in USA is set on fire by a gang of drug dealers so Jean Claude has to go A.W.O.L. from Legion and travel to USA. When he arrives his brother is already dead and his killers have been caught so out goes the usual revenge motive. What we get instead is a bare knuckle or cage fighting movie which becomes rather Rocky-esque toward the end.
I was never into JCVD even in the hey day of 1990 , they always seemed geared to the mainstream and what results here is like a tick box catalogue of movie clichés which are ticked off as the movie progresses. The end fight does not fail to up the ante and arouse the audience in a flurry of violence. Of course JCVD wins and the ending is nice and schmaltzy.
I would give this 3/5 but I suppose a lot of people rate this as a classic but like I said I have never been into JCVD and this movie did not really serve to change my mind although it was mindless enough entertainment.
[quote=“the_ugly, post:12340, topic:1923”]A.W.O.L. - Van Damme (aka Lionheart/Leon)
Im guessing this has been seen a lot by most people so sorry for the inane synopsis!
Van Damme is a member of the foreign legion when his brother in USA is set on fire by a gang of drug dealers so Jean Claude has to go A.W.O.L. from Legion and travel to USA. When he arrives his brother is already dead and his killers have been caught so out goes the usual revenge motive. What we get instead is a bare knuckle or cage fighting movie which becomes rather Rocky-esque toward the end.
I was never into JCVD even in the hey day of 1990 , they always seemed geared to the mainstream and what results here is like a tick box catalogue of movie clichés which are ticked off as the movie progresses. The end fight does not fail to up the ante and arouse the audience in a flurry of violence. Of course JCVD wins and the ending is nice and schmaltzy.
I would give this 3/5 but I suppose a lot of people rate this as a classic but like I said I have never been into JCVD and this movie did not really serve to change my mind although it was mindless enough entertainment.[/quote]
Don’t worry, I’ve never been ‘into JCVD’ either. I like the John Woo movie Hard Target and also like Bloodsport, but that’s about it. Living in Belgium and being half-Belgian I’ve seen quite a lot of his movies and I met him once at a press conference (he’s an okay type), but he’s not really my favorite belgian actor, to put it (very) mildly
JCVD is a fine movie, not an actioner though, otherwise, i can’t say “this is one of my favorites” about any of his flicks