Cine-Men: Double the trouble in ‘RoboCop 2’

Jessep Caravella and Ben Staub, Staff Writers

     As we here at Cine-men have previously mentioned, the movies we talk about are voted on to be watched at the BU Science Fiction club. This is the reason this week’s movie is the second in a trilogy when we already talked about the third one. With that out of the way, “RoboCop 2” may be even more ridiculous than “RoboCop 3.”

     Once again, we join Alex Murphy, in the form of RoboCop, fighting crime in Detroit, rather alone because most of the police force is on strike (their corporate overlords, OCP, have cut their pay). OCP plans to take complete control over the city because of the city’s debt to the company.
Hoping to clear the city’s streets of crime to make way for their new city, OCP continues attempts to make a RoboCop 2. Meanwhile, RoboCop fights against a new drug sweeping the city, “Nuke,” being distributed by the notorious Cain.

     Some sequels are used to tell more story, relating back to the events of the first installment. Some are cash grabs with little to no care for the story. “RoboCop 2” fits the first category more than the second. For instance, RoboCop originally needs reprogramming because he keeps driving past his old wife’s house, which is worrisome to her and OCP. There are several other instances relating back to the first film which make the story feel like it’s part of a more solid world.


     Ben: Wow… Just wow… While “RoboCop 3” was a terrible movie that should only be watched on the verge of a blackout, “RoboCop 2” is slightly better, if for nothing else than when RoboCop’s directives are changed to make him more relatable and less violent. Oh, and also a kid drug lord. For a kid, he had a great performance. He was a ruthless drug dealer in the body of a 12-year-old, exhibiting all the childish tropes in his dialogue.
Honestly, there’s not a whole lot to say about “RoboCop 2.” It feels like a build-up to “RoboCop 3,” but that may just be because I’ve watched these way out of order. Once again, this is a drinking movie, and for that it gets a 7/10. As a serious film, I would have specific words for it but, “bad language makes for bad feelings.” 4/10.

     Jessep: As far as this one goes, I appreciated how they focused a little more on world-building for the inevitable third film. It embraces the absolute absurdity of its concept in its own equally absurd way. The movie starts with an over-the-top advertisement for a car alarm that shocks the burglar to death; a spokesman casually speaks in that infomercial tone, walks into the same car that was being stolen and drives off. It blends the graphic violence with 80’s consumerism in such a humorous way, I just can’t help but laugh.

     There are more intentionally funny scenes that made me actually laugh, as opposed to the not-intentionally funny ones that made me laugh anyway. Quality movie-wise, it’s an average 5/10. As an entertaining movie to watch with friends and roast, it’s an 8 or 9/10.