RoboCop 2

A typical "sequel" of the 1990s, in which everything had to be bigger, grander, and more bombastic. But the plot doesn't deal with anything, sending the individual motifs, which had been otherwise very promisingly played out, into a corner after a while, only to move on to a tragic finale with a robot on drugs. The action scenes are fine, but everything else gives the impression of an unfinished work based on a promising outline. I don't know if Kershner fucked with Miller's theme on purpose, or if what he received was already this leaky. Either way, I expected a much better result from a collaboration between the two. (20.09.2008)

Less blood, more bullets, a more tangled plot, more characters, brutally overwrought and at least two or three classes worse than the first one. A film that falls into the sequel syndrome in a classic way: there’s more of everything, but in the end it’s less. Verhoeven knew why to stay away. Kershner just embarrassed himself. Two points for the fast-paced action and some technically skillful sequences. (09.05.2009)

Sehr dumm und schlecht. Ich nehme an, dass auf diesen Film keiner von den Beteiligten stolz sein kann. Das betrifft auch den Trickfilmzeichner Phil Tippett. Dank ihm bewegt sich zwar der Roboter-Hauptschuft ausgezeichnet, das Ergebnis seiner Arbeit wirkt aber trotzdem lächerlich, weil die Regie nicht bescheiden war. Aus RoboCop 2 ist außerdem der satirische Ton verschwunden. Aus dem Film ist ein überladener Actionblödsinn geworden, welcher den Stil vom Originalfilm nur vortäuscht. (18.07.2016)

It is a sequel and it is very noticeable how it mimics some aspects of the first film. However, there are quite interesting elements here that would perhaps work well in a comic book, but not so much on the screen. Frank Miller wrote a screenplay that would function as a comic book story, but for a film, even though it is part of a series, a bit more is needed. However, the visual effects are superb. (10.08.2014)