Mother’s Day is here! It’s the one day a year kids take time to appreciate the woman known as Mom. She’s the cook, baker, laundry queen, toilet scrubber, chauffeur, gives a hug or smack, makes you laugh after a long day, and never stops working.
So, what better way to celebrate than to post my top three movie moms? After some research, I realized two of my picks were very underrate. Can you guess which two?
3. Helen Parr (ElastiGirl), The Incredibles
Every good mom is a superhero. We somehow make everything ok, even when we’re freaking out on the inside. We human moms may not be able to stretch our arms a mile long, but when wrapping our arms around our kid, it can certainly feel like we can.
ElastiGirl shows that even real superheros can make great moms. She transforms into a parachute to save her kids falling from a plane. She helps rescue her husband from the evil Syndrome. ElastiGirl is even kind of hot for an animated character. However, my favorite thing about her is she’s real. For example, after falling into the ocean, she threatens to ground her kids for a month if they don’t calm down. She’s sarcastic, cutthroat, and funny, but can cuddle with her kids. She’s a tough woman.
2. Frigga, Thor
Beautiful, smart, and fierce best describe Thor’s mom. I was very surprised she wasn’t on any big lists I saw. She’s a queen! Fridda’s (The Asgardian Frigga, goddess of marriage) role is small but mighty in these movies. She’s the voice of reason and tries to make men think before acting. In Thor, she never leaves her husband’s side when he’s ill and vows to protect. She trusts her kids to do the right thing and handle everything else, so she can be where she’s needed. In Thor 2, she sacrifices herself to protect Thor’s girlfriend and the rest of her family. She wields her sword as well as, if not better than others, and she pays the ultimate price. But we don’t expect anything else. When they send her body off to sea, I still cry. Her devotion to family and show-no-fear attitude reminds us nothing will stand in our way.
1. Mrs. Molly Weasley, Harry Potter series
Hands down No. 1 in my book and also not on any major lists I read. This woman has seven children. Seven. She cooks, cleans, dresses, advises, lectures, screams, cries, hugs, and laughs. She expresses what every good mother feels. Unconditional love.
Fiercely protective and unbelievably supportive, Mrs. Weasley always comes to the rescue. She welcomes Harry with open arms, becoming his surrogate mother while taking care of her own children. She fights alongside them, provides for them, and never complains. You never hear Mrs. Weasley say, “I’m so tired…I’m so under appreciated.” Instead, she’s most known for this scene:
“You – will – never – touch – our – children – again!’ screamed Mrs. Weasley.
Bellatrix laughed, the same exhilarated laugh her cousin Sirius had given as he toppled backwards through the veil, and suddenly Harry knew what was going to happen before it did.
Molly’s curse soared beneath Bellatrix’s outstretched arm and hit her squarely in the chest, directly over her heart.
Bellatrix’s gloating smile froze, her eyes seemed to bulge: for the tiniest space of time she knew what had happened, and then she toppled, and the watching crowd roared, and Voldemort screamed.”
Mrs. Weasley kills Bellatrix. Applause.
Happy Mother’s Day to all the moms – those who have kids, dogs, cats, mice, plants, etc. – and get some rest. We only get one day a year!
It’s time for a reality check. Over the weekend “the two best fighters of their generation” fought in what was a very disappointing showing. Of course anyone who followed the sport knew it would be (as “superfights” almost always are). Mayweather is too skilled defensively and too protective of his undefeated record to pull a Sugar Ray Leonard circa Montreal in 1980 to make it interesting, and Pacquiao is too small and has slipped a bit into one-dimensionality to force Floyd to do so. But there has been a lot of talk as both of these fighters being “all-time greats” as though there is generational forgetfulness on what a real greatness looks like.
Of course “who is the greatest fighter ever” is entirely based on opinion. There is NO answer and rather than say this is a “definitive list” of the greatest fighters of all time I thought I’d say these are the 3 greatest fighters in MY opinion, meaning the ones I like to watch the most and whose abilities have made us stand in awe. And neither Pacquiao, and I love Manny and think he has accomplished a lot, nor Mayweather, who has made a career avoiding the hardest fights, have come close to these legends.
3.) Marco Antonio Barrera: Probably an strange choice for many, but Barrera was without a doubt a pound-for-pound all-time great who could both box, counter, or brawl. In legendary performances against Erik Morales (who many fans appreciate more for his all-guns blazing style), a beautiful chess match with Prince Naseem Hamed (who he battered essentially into retirement), and an all guts battle with Kennedy McKinney Barrera showed ring intelligence, heart, power, and adaptability that is almost never shown nowadays. He could jab southpaws, blast you with right hands, and crush you with left hooks to the body. An aging Barrera looked helpless against the young hungry Pacquiao in their first fight, but lured him into a slower pace in their second. Barrera has faded from collective memory in modern boxing, but people wanting to learn how to be an effective boxer-puncher-brawler need to sit down and watch Marco’s 75 fights.
2.) Roy Jones Jr: This is going to be unpopular, I know, but I have my reasons. In his prime Roy was supernatural. He was the fastest, wiliest, most elusive fighter to ever live. Robbed at the Seoul Olympics, he turned pro in 1989 and essentially didn’t lose a fight (one controversial DQ) until 2004. He had power in both hands and made other all-time greats look like absolute amateurs. Bernard Hopkins, James Toney, Virgil Hill, all great champions made to look slow, awkward, and helpless again Roy Jones. Light Heavyweights, who in any other era would have battled it out for light heavyweight supremacy, skilled fighters, all called uncompetitive and weak challenges. Montel Griffin, Reggie Johnson, Clinton Woods, and Julio Gonzalez, all shelved with contemptuous ease. Even mandatory and lesser defenses against David Talesco (who followed Roy calling him out for months only to lose 12 out of 12 rounds against a one-handed Jones) and Richard Hall (one of the greatest of Roy’s performances) showed what an artist he was. He started at junior middleweight, became middle weight champion, super middleweight champion, light heavyweight champion, and cherry-picked a heavy weight title, easily beating John Ruiz. As with most fighters who rely on athleticism over well-schooled boxing ability, he faded badly and from 2004 onward has had a career that has been a shame to see (though he can still turn on some preternatural abilities even at the age of 40+) but if you look at his career from his heavy weight performance backward to his pro-debut you will see possibly the greatest-skilled pound-for-pound fighter ever to live.
1.) Roberto Duran: What needs to be said? Duran turned pro in 1968 (a year after Ali was forced into exile). Was lightweight champion, possibly the greatest lightweight of all time, from 1972-1979, handed Ray Leonard his first defeat to become welterweight champion in 1980, defeated young champion Davey Moore to become junior middleweight champ and took the greatest middleweight champion in the modern era, Marvin Hagler, to his only 15 round defense in 1983. He won the middleweight title from tough, younger, stronger champion Iran Barkley (scoring the fight’s only knockdown) in 1989. And even won a minor Super Middleweight title from journeyman Pat Lawlor in 2000 (19 years after Ali retired!).Fighting in FIVE decades, winning titles in FOUR. Duran was a brutal warrior with a fighting IQ above anyone who has ever stepped into the ring. He didn’t always look brilliant and lived an entire life in the ring, showing excitement, depression, indifference, joy, rage, and pride under the hot lights. Known for his aggression, Duran was also one of the greatest defensive fighters to ever fight, very hard to hit with clean shots and able to stand in front of you and still be elusive while crushing you with either his left or right hand. There’s never been a more effectively aggressive and brilliant street fighter to ever step into the ring. One Hundred and Thirteen fights. In the modern era that is epic and they are some of the greatest ring performances in history.
Marvin Hagler: Essentially unbeatable. He was another guy who could fight, box, brawl, or counter punch. His last fight, a shame, where he was out-PR’d by Sugar Ray Leonard in the ring. Even as a Ray Leonard fan I think Hagler won it on aggressive, effective punching, but beat himself by starting too slowly and giving away the first 3 rounds. Marvin was involved in the greatest single fight ever. Out-willing, out-fighting, and out-slugging dangerous puncher and brilliant boxer Tommy Hearns in under three rounds.
Arturo Gatti: Not the most skilled fighter, but good god what a heart and what a warrior. He could lose every second of every round and you’d still cheer for him because he never stopped trying. He could be battered into a swollen pulp and with one left hook change your life. His ring life is linked forever to his wars with Mickey Ward; probably the three greatest fights of all time. You were always on the edge of your seat when Arturo fought.
Vitali Klitschko: Yeah. I said that. Vitali is one tough mo-fo. Though not showing his brother’s pure athletic skill, this is a guy who never was a afraid to fight anyone. Anywhere. Any time. He NEVER lost from being out-fought, losing only twice and only through injury; once from cuts and once from having an injured shoulder. Never knocked down, never knocked out, never visually in trouble in a fight. Vitali was one hell of a smart, strong, SOB who would have been a threat to just about any heavyweight. Ever. Even Mike Tyson says so!
Teen movies are my second favorite movie genre behind horror – especially good ones. They’re fun, funny, and make me feel a little younger. In good teen movies, there’s no crazy puke scene, and it’s not overly dramatic. There’s always a guy, and the rewatch value never diminishes. For this post, I focused on teen movies with strong male/female leads, instead of girl teen movies. All of us teen movie fans know there’s a difference.
She’s All That – Freddy Prince Jr., Rachel Leigh Cook, 1999
Zack (Prince) makes a bet that he can make Laney (Cook) prom queen, and of course it all blows up in his face.
Why it’s special:She’s All That is funny and has a ton of people in it, including Paul Walker and Dule Hill. Its plot feels a little generic (popular guy has to transform social outcast), but Laney plays a strong cynical, mature-for-her age teen who just wants to be a part of something. It has all the traditional things: mean girls, a-hole guys, and Usher as a school DJ (you had Usher as a DJ too, right?). The movie has its gross parts, like a nasty pizza scene in the cafeteria, but it doesn’t go overboard or feel cheesy. Some also scenes pay tribute to the show The Real World, which helped launch the reality TV show genre.
The soundtrack: One of the reasons Kiss Me by Sixpence None The Richer became so popular, and there’s a cool freestyle beat-box scene that I can site verbatim.
Extra: One reason I love Psych so much is many She’s All That cast members did a Psych episode or served as a major character. They must love the movie as much as I do!
Photo from susangordon-rpsusangordon-rp.tumblr.com
Also the same year, 10 Things is a ’90s version of Shakespeare’s The Taming of the Shrew. Patrick (Ledger) gets paid to take Kat (Stiles) out, and it the “sh$% hiteth the fan”.
Why it’s special: This is tough for me because 10 Things is much better written and has some of the wittiest dialogue I’ve ever heard. The acting is better, the story is stronger, and there are a ton of people in it as well. Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays a big part, and Larisa Oleynik, who also did a Psych episode, plays a believable Bianca. What makes this movie is Patrick and Kat’s relationship; they have chemistry you seldom find in teen movies, and you assume they may be good friends in the “real” world.
The soundtrack: Opens with Joan Jett. Enough said.
Extra: If I were fairly reviewing this movie, this would be No. 1, but I had to judge it on how many times I’ve watched the movies as well. I’ve watched She’s All That several more times.
Does it say something that all of these were in the late ’90s? This plot is about Preston (Embry) trying to win Amanda’s (Hewitt) affection one last time before everyone goes to college. There’s no money involved, and most of the movie occurs at a party.
Why it’s special: For a party movie, Can’t Hardly Wait is creative and feels a little more real. Instead of taking place at some ridiculously awesome school with a beachfront view (like the two others), its setting is a smaller town, and you never see the school. The acting isn’t awesome, but it’s good, and you believe Preston is desperate to tell her how he feels. Her girlfriends are typical teen girls (support you to your face, talk about you behind your back), and the movie includes all teen stereotypes, such as the dumb jock, geek squad, an angel stripper.
The soundtrack: The geek of the school performs Guns N’ Roses’ Paradise City. Any soundtrack with GnR automatically rocks.
Extra: Seth Green makes this movie. He’s a major/minor character and young, and if you’re a Green fan, you must see it.
Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments below, and if you haven’t seen these teen gems, you should!
Lisa Battles is a friend and coworker who I had the pleasure of spotlighting this month! I’ve seen her edible candy mice and frog cupcakes for special occasions and received a glass she painted this past Christmas. She’s one of the most talented and creative people I’ve ever met, and I’m excited to introduce her work to our awesome readers.
Materials used: Wine glasses, water-based acrylic enamel, rubbing alcohol to prep the glass, variety of tiny paint brushes, wine (optional).
Yours truly. My awesome Christmas present last year!
1. Where did the idea to paint glasses come from?
About 10 years ago, my sister, Lana, gave me a set of four glasses she bought from a novelty company. Each glass was pre-painted with a woman – a blonde, a brunette, a redhead and a dark brunette. I still have three; I broke the blonde while washing it, unfortunately. I decided to paint a more customized redhead on a glass for one of my favorite redheads, Courtney Hodge Evans, for her birthday one year. She kept it for six or seven years, and then sent me a text around Thanksgiving 2014 that after keeping her glass for so many years, she’d accidentally broken it. I asked her to take a clear photo of it, and I’d paint a replacement for it. I did, and since it was almost Christmas, I thought that would be a fun gift idea for many of my girlfriends for holiday gifts, birthday gifts and hostess gifts. So I ended up painting at least a dozen for friends over the holiday season. People loved them, and I had several friends tell me I should sell them. So I did. I set up an Etsy shop early in 2015. So far, including those holiday gifts and several orders, I have painted about 40 different glasses and have about a dozen in the works right now.
2. What is your favorite glass?
I don’t really have a favorite; I like them all for different reasons. That’s probably because I have mostly painted these for friends, and when I feel like I have captured the personality of someone I love already, that makes me love the little portrait as an extension of that. I have done a few for people I’ve never met, and I feel like I have kind of gotten to know the person (and sometimes their pets!) just from studying their photos so much. Even though they are more time-consuming, I think I like doing sets. Seeing the “interaction” of a mom and siblings, groups of best friends, etc. all lined up is really funny to me, especially after a couple of glasses of wine. I gathered together many of the Christmas gift glasses while I had them all together on my table, and it was almost surreal to see so many people I knew “looking back at me” in one spot. If I HAVE to pick, I think the set of draft glasses depicting my Dad and his former law enforcement partner Bill Rhegness in the early 1980s during a spoof Olan Mills shoot may be my favorite. I did a set for Bill at his request, and then of course, Dad wanted a set, so I replicated them. My Dad has been courageous and determined fighting the effects of treatment for Glioblastoma Multiforme (GBM), an aggressive and usually fatal type of brain cancer, the past two years, and Bill has been up to visit him several times during this time. Giving the two of them a laugh over those glasses was rewarding.
Lisa’s dad and former law enforcement partner Bill Rhegness.
3. Are there any famous people you want to paint glass for?
Dad and Bill were pretty well-known for their detective shenanigans in North Alabama! HA … I guess anyone with a colorful or unusual look would be fun — Johnny Depp would have a lot of accessories. But seriously, I can’t think of anyone in particular. A friend who was a music idol to me when I was a teenager in the 1990s ordered a glass with his band’s album cover on it, which I thought was cool of him to order. We were both pleased with how it turned out. I probably put in more hours on that one than any because it was more of a graphic thing to replicate than a photo interpretation. I have another order in the hopper from a different band, but don’t know how soon I will get around to doing them. They will be on beer glasses and pretty cute when I finish them.
4. You have lots of art projects, what are a couple of your favorites?
I enjoy painting the most, whether it’s on wine glasses, beer glasses, a canvas, a piece of wood or whatever. I also prefer this kind of untrained, caricature-type painting, where you can take liberties with how true-to-life it has to look. I have always enjoyed painting and drawing as much as I have writing, at as early an age as I could do any of them. The difference is that while I am excellent about studying, knowing and following rules in writing, I have the opposite opinion about having rules in art. That is probably why I have always preferred to keep it as a hobby and didn’t pursue it as a career: When you have to do something to pay your bills, sometimes you find yourself having to follow rules set by others instead of going with your heart. Keeping it just as an outlet gives me one of few things in life that’s still 100 percent enjoyable to me, because it’s something with which I can do whatever I want and however I want to do it. That luxury seems to get rarer as you get older.
These pets are the size of a dime or smaller.
5. Do you have any advice for other creative types?
I used to think it was a compliment when people would say, “You are so creative. I am not at all.” I still believe the first part of that is intended as a compliment, but I make sure to ask them to think a minute about that second part. I believe that everyone is “creative” with art if they make any piece of art just for the sake of creating it or expressing themselves. If your artistic expression comes out as four crooked lines in different colors you chose, to me that’s your artistic expression for the moment. In other words, I just don’t think there’s a way to “do it wrong” if you’re creating for the sake of creating and not trying to pass yourself off as some virtuoso. While I definitely see the value in people studying art to understand design principles and the work of great artists throughout history, I don’t think the more formal approach to art should scare people away expressing themselves artistically. Unfortunately, I think it does. Creating art can be fun, whether you are “great” at it or not. It doesn’t have to be a competition. If you have fun creating art, then you are creative.
If you’d like to contact Lisa for a glass, feel free to visit the shop, or leave a comment below!
I grew up reading Dark Horse Predator comics and Wizard Magazine. As I moved into other comics, I founds lots of characters to love, but one I always knew about but never read was Judge Dredd. I recognized the character, but didn’t know much beyond the iconic appearance until the last 5 years or so.
Judge Dredd (1995)
In the 90s the mega action stars of the 80s were looking for vehicles. As Sylvester Stallone’s biggest franchises, Rambo and Rocky shifted from classic to semi-farce (at least for a decade or so) Sly began looking for other franchises to be his next big thing. He tried it first with Demolition Man but went for a recognizable character film with 1995s Judge Dredd.
Since I didn’t know about the character at the time I admit I rather enjoyed the film. It went for a “big” story, introduces the world, the judges’ council, then immediately breaks into a story of a character trying to bring it down. It was still exciting, had great 90s special effects (love that bodyguard-bot), and good characters. Stallone made a great Dredd, he certainly had the look, and Diane Cannon was also effective as Judge Hershey.
It came out in the extended Lethal Weapon fallout when every character had to have a “buddy” comic relief aspect. They chose Rob Schneider to basically play himself and proves to be the weakest part of the film. The other aspect of it is Dredd sacrilege but is a direct result of the Stallone-vehicle reality of the movie. They show Dredd’s face. Constantly. Something the creators of the comic have consciously decided not to do (as he is the faceless embodiment of righteous but fascist judgment in Mega City).
It was a Judge movie but still a Stallone movie and also a 90s action movie. It was bright, colorful, and very much a product of the 90s comic movie industry, basic popcorn entertainment. Fun but tossable.
Dredd (2012)
After what a lot of fans consider to be mor Tinseltown than Mega City outing of 1995’s Judge Dredd 2012 brought a reboot in Dredd. With a faceless Karl Urban as the titular Judge, it made the gritty judge movie for the modern era. Films, even hero films, took a dark turn and Judge Dredd is perfect in a “dark” thematic world.
Karl Urban is excellent as Dredd. I didn’t even know it was him, and therefore accepted him more easily as the character. Olivia Thirlby is also fantastic as psychic Judge Anderson, a dynamic female character in modern action movies. Dredd doesn’t treat her like a woman, he treats her like a rookie. Only bringing up her gender when the possibility of capture by savage gangers is a possibility. Lena headey makes a for a sufficiently creepy villain as Ma-Ma and she’s surrounded by a circus of terrific character actors playing terrific characters.
One of the best aspects of the film is its “day-in-the-life” feel. It is a rousing action film, but in the end Dredd explains his miniature war in Peach Trees Mega block as “Drug bust. Perps were…uncooperative…” it looks great, is well-acted, and gives us a look at a different kind of comic character.
These movies show how these films are products of their time and both work very well. Essentially the 2012 Dredd ignores the previous version, but both were successful movies; the first a fun 90s-style action flick; the second a gritty, modern sci-fi crime movie.
Neither is overtly disrespectful of the origin material and the reboot classy-ly makes its own movie without deriding the original. So a viewer can watch 1995s Judge Dredd, enjoy the fun 90s glory of it; then watch Dredd and appreciate the millennium brutality of Mega City crime fighting.
That’s the current state of reboots and remakes in my opinion. Some are good, some are bad, but admittedly it’d be nice to see a brand new intellectual property out there… Til then… It’s Judgment Time Hollywood. At least make more Apes and Dredds, and less Clash of the Titans and RoboCops…
I remember always being behind the times as a kid. I never saw the Rambo or Indiana Jones movies when they were new. I didn’t get the newest pop music or know anything beyond what showed up in “Weird” Al Yankovic or Kids Incorporated. BUT…I distinctly remember the first time I saw a RoboCop movie.
It was actually RoboCop 2, which is slightly inferior but in the same spirit as the original. I loved the action, the big robots, and the stop motion. You saw little glimpses of Officer Alex Murphy’s previous life as a person, enough to make his current state as a cyborg meaningful, but it was mostly shoot ‘em up robot fun with some funny parts and just a dash of character development.
I didn’t see the first film until the 2000s and despite its decidedly 80s vision of crime and the future it held up very well; and I can say that honestly as I didn’t have any youthful attachments to it. Bad guys were wonderfully bad. Robo had an established personality but was a great cyborg. His partner, Anne Lewis, was one of the best tough female characters this side of Vasquez from Aliens. And the story had an excellent progression and a fantastic “oooh gotcha!” conclusion.
The Real RoboCop
THEN they did a remake.
The original RoboCop series established certain demands on anything trying to call itself “RoboCop.” He-is-go-ing-to-talk-like-the-computer-in-War-games. He’ll spin that gun like a he’s in a 1950s western. He’ll call someone a “creep. “ Tell them to freeze. Then lots of shooting will occur.
That’s what RoboCop means to those of us who care about the series and, to be totally honest, would be the audience for a remake series.
Here’s what I don’t watch RoboCop movies for: To see his family life. To get to know him as a person for hour. To have a strong female character turned into…a dude… To see RoboCop CRY. And have Alex Murphy talk like Marky Mark Circa 1991.
Nearly half the remake is used building Alex Murphy’s character. He’s an honest cop, a devoted family man, a good partner, a decent person, a tough guy, a badass, a rebel against corruption. For an hour we see this in story, exposition, and flashbacks. Even after he becomes RoboCop we see more character exposition, as he copes with his new status, trains to become RoboCop a la Batman Begins, and fights against corporate prejudice (from one of the many rather good performances in the film, this one by Jackie Earl Haley. Other great performances include those of Sam Jackson, Michael Keaton, and Gary Oldman).
This is some strange RoboCop…thing
Less than half an hour into the original film Alex Murphy is RoboCop. Out RoboCopping it up with Old Detroit’s street trash. Before he gets all Robo’d, he’s introduced as a rookie to the precinct, which means other characters have to get to know him naturally and thus the audience gets to know him in an organic process. He’s cocky and arrogant, but in less than five seconds of dialogue we see how he’s developed and achieved a rapport with Lewis. He spins his gun because his kid likes it (and maybe he does too…) establishing he’s got a family he cares about, and we see that family in staccato flashes after he’s attacked (actively I’ll say by the bad guys, not in a BS car bomb). All of his character is built in about 10-15 minutes. His transition into RoboCop is done via first-person montage. As he’s switched on, sees something new, and is switched back off again. Time passes, he’s advanced to a new state of Robo, time passes again. Never wasting time so we get to the main story as soon as possible.
RoboCop does a lot of this blow stuff up stuff…
Where Apes updated the premise while making the story fit to a new audience and changing times, 2014’s RoboCop is a near-Clash of the Titans-level farce. The Corporation plot is senseless and muddled. There was a needless “military drones should be legal in the US” angle. Robocop was Strong Sad in an exoskeleton. His wife and child just WOULDN’T GO AWAY. And none of it had to be done.
An hour into the movie RoboCop 2014 makes his first bust (35 minutes passes in the original for RoboCop 1987 to accomplish this) and the corporate mouthpiece comments that Robo ID’d the bad guy after only 60 seconds on duty, and says how impressive that is. Why then, may I ask, did it take the movie 60 MINUTES to get us here?
And none of this “what have they done to me?!” stuff…
Now many of you may start shouting, “But wait, wait, wait, Apes updated its story, was dramatic, and deep, and you showered it with praise!” True. I did. BUT. The original Planet of the Apes movie was a sci-fi drama. Designed to have social commentary, make observations on human hubris, and still wrap it up into a terse, excellent sci-fi movie. That’s exactly what the two new Apes films did.
What was the original RoboCop series? An outstanding, fun, sci-fi action movie with more Dawn of the Dead style tongue-in-cheek commentary on consumerism, economic Darwinism, and social progress seen in the periphery and through action, rather than exposition. It was not a DRAMA. It was NOT a personal introspective look at the life n’ times of a homie from the block who became a robo cop. And how it made it him feel. And what does it mean for society.
The new movie was a product of a film industry that seems not to know how to have much fun anymore. It either makes dreadful and derivative Scary Movie style “fun” or it makes action movies that have to show consequences and emotions rather than just the cartoon style blasty-blasting we saw in the 80s and 90s movies. Even action movies, have to try to hit you in the feels rather than just show a half-dead robo-man blowing away street scum.
More importantly either filmmakers don’t know what kind of movie they want to make, or want to make a cross-genre thing that, as Jim Sterling would say in a mocking, whiny voice, “appeals to a wider audience.” Before making any film the question needs to be asked, “What is this movie about?” And stick to THAT. A movie like RoboCopcan have social commentary, the original certainly did. But it shouldn’t shoehorn it in at the expense of the real plot. We shouldn’t spend more than half the film establishing character. We shouldn’t spend an equal amount of time on drama. We shouldn’t waste even more screen time getting into the mechanics of how RoboCop robo-works. We shouldn’t go down the plot-rabbit-hole chasing military drone legalization and political debate. A movie that tries to do everything at once accomplishes doing nothing much in the end.
In a scene that packs more emotion in three minutes of activity than the 2014 remake did in an hour of exposition, Alex Murphy lies to his wife in RoboCop 2 saying, “They made this…to honor him.” They certainly didn’t make the new RoboCop to honor you, Alex. So Hollywood, the fans are taking away your remake privileges. Dead or alive they’re coming with me…
Next week will be a bonus wrap up with a pair of movies about the same character, one from the 90s one from the last couple of years, that both succeeded in making fun movies but in totally different ways.
Revenant Publications 