Robocop (1987) Review – Action Over Time

What else is there to say about Robocop that hasn’t already been said? Probably not a lot. So let me just get the shorthand list of things most people seem to agree on out of the way: Surprisingly emotional premise, good satire, addictive hyper-violence, has mostly aged well. But no, we’re not ending the review there, funny as it would be.

I was born in 1999. Action movies in my era have always been defined by superhuman feats, even if the film leads us to believe that the people on screen aren’t literally superhuman. Lord knows the Rock has played more human characters than superhuman ones, and yet he’s probably done equally insane stuff in Jumanji or Fast and Furious as he did in Black Adam.

What strikes me a lot watching action movies before my time like Robocop, The Running Man, Predator etc, is that a lot of the heroes aren’t so much superhuman as they are just the perfect human, and that’s decidedly enough. Even Robocop, who is bullet proof and super durable, with all his gadgets is just designed to be a really, really good cop. Not a superhuman cop. Just one that doesn’t have to sleep and follows the law to the letter. You don’t need an extended ten minute car chase that transitions into a fist fight to show Robocop is badass, you just show him briefly shooting a rapists dick off and the job is done. I’m sold. Robocop is a badass, and I haven’t seen him destroy half of Detroit in the name of saving Detroit yet.

I am not trying to be cynical. I don’t have this warped mindset of new action movies are bad, old ones are good, but I think there’s an interesting divide I notice when watching things before and after the big superhero movie uprising. Take Star Wars: It used to be just choking someone to death was enough to show how badass your are, but now you’re a weak punk unless you can stop a space ship from taking off with your mind.

Rising stakes and bigger-is-better, which I think you can attribute to the rise of franchises and the need for never ending content, defines a lot of modern action. It can work well – Avengers Infinity War, the Mission Impossible movies, and the Daniel Craig 007 films are all franchise movies from around the 2010’s that go over-the-top ridiculous and work. But as that decade began to close, I’ve noticed people showing more appreciation for non-franchise action, like Bob Odenkirk’s Nobody. In these cases, these films are either throwbacks to old-school action, or so good they’re about to become franchised like, kinda John Wick was just about a guy avenging his dog and now have 3 sequels. In that respect, Robocop has something in common with John Wick.

But there is something to be said, I think, about the fact the original Robocop manages to get all that badass action movie stuff done, plus the satire delivered, and an interesting plot about corrupt corporations, while not sacrificing an emotional connection to the hero in 1 hour and 40 minutes. Meanwhile it tends to be the norm now days that most of every movie, especially in the action/adventure genre, needs to hit the 2 hour 20 minute mark to do the same. Nothing feels sacrificed in Robocop. It doesn’t feel like being roughly 30-40 minutes shorter than the average modern action movie means it has lost anything. It’s a tight script that gets the point across: In this hyper-exaggerated version of America, only a cop who literally doesn’t need rest and is willing to indulge in gory bloodshed can save Detroit from drug dealers on the streets, and white collar folks bending the rules… Meanwhile, the film’s intermittent newscaster reads, South African rebels have an atomic bomb and are willing to blow themselves up to get what they want.

The news segments in Robocop are so effective and funny because despite the fact you’re watching a movie about a cyborg murdering drug dealers and murderers, who can and will target your penis if he has to, the events you’re watching are so unbelievably low-stakes and inconsequential compared to what is happening in the larger world it is set in. In one segment, Regan’s Star Wars defence system (realised and built in this fictional America) *misfires* towards Earth and just so happens to kill four former US Presidents. Coincidence, right?

The wit, grit and razor edge of Robocop is why it resonates. It makes the kind of jokes that take exactly 1-2 seconds to process, and plays them all completely straight. Then, in the next scene, someone tries to kick Robocop in the balls and breaks their foot for the effort. Superman might be able to punch Zod through a skyscraper, but what’s the point if Zod is totally uninjured afterwards, and Superman won’t even smile at the camera in the credits acknowledge the time you set aside to watch him do all that? Wouldn’t you much rather watch a guy fall into a vat of acid and pop like a balloon when he’s hit by a car thereafter? And sure, you could watch Arnold return as the Terminator in the 16th franchise instalment years from now, but what’s the point if he’s totally immune to failure in the plot until he meets the baddie Terminator? Wouldn’t you rather watch Robocop accidentally win a fight against a superior robot because it’s corporate masters forgot to consider the fact its feet were too big to navigate a flight of stairs?

The truth about Robocop is that is has aged. ED-209 looks clunky here and there, and it looks more than a little goofy when the bad guy falls from the tower at the end. But people still say it holds up, because those things are superficial in a movie that has a lot more to offer beyond surface level thrills. The reason why it stands the test of time, even in 2024, is because Robocop is a guy who shoots other guys and whose actions, however impressive, play out in a world totally indifferent to most of the events happening in the film. It so well balances it’s edgy humour and satire such that it packs a punch but never comes off as annoying or intrusive.

I really like Robocop for all the reasons hundreds of reviewers have already talked about, and which I hastily listed in my introduction. But I’ve struggled throughout this review, and in the time leading up to me posting it, to find the words to convey why it has stuck with me for so long after my viewing. I think I have finally managed it:

Robocop doesn’t try to impress you, beause– That was my original thought, but it’s a stupid one. Ignore it. Obviously it is trying to impress you.

Let’s try again: Robocop, unlike a lot of specifically contemporary franchise films, doesn’t try to justify itself to you. So much modern action/adventure media of today is so fixated on giving you a reason as to why and how it exists, why it is worth your time and why you should watch it, that it often loses itself. Even nostalgia bait nonsense like the new Jumanji, staring Dwayne Johnson, spends more time justifying that the beloved board game movie is now a video game movie, that it never really fully embraces itself. It lacks confidence, as so many do: Thor Love and Thunder, Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, most the Transformers films Quantum of Solace…

Robocop reapects you took the time out of your day to watch it and has confidence that you’ll enjoy it if you are into the genre. That, I think, is why it endures.