A Look Back at Stranger Things - Season 4

 

Man, I can't believe the final season will be here soon. Which means my time reviewing this show will also be coming to an end. Oh well, before I ever get the chance to review the fifth and final season, let's look back at the fourth season.

Stranger Things 4 (as it's called onscreen) is the fourth season of Netflix's popular show. Said show was production and distributed by Netflix with this season consisting of nine episodes. The show is created by The Duffer Brothers.

The story is, it's March 1986 and it's been eight months since the events of the third season. At first everyone is doing their own thing. Whether it's playing Dungeons & Dragons, visiting girlfriends, or being part of the basketball team in the hopes of being seen as a cool guy instead of a geek. But then a string of brutal murders begin to spread across Hawkins. At first our heroes know it's part of the Upside Down, but they quickly learn it's not the Mind Flyer or some random Demogorgon. They find out it's not something but someone who lives in the Upside Down, and this evil is someone very powerful.

• Negatives

I've got nothing.

• Mix

The biggest mix bag comes from the pacing. Episodes 1-8 are all an hour with the ninth/final episode being two hours long. The reason being is we got multiple stories going on. We got Joyce and Murray with their Russia story, we got Mike, Will, Jonathan, and Argylle with their California to Nevada road trip storyline, we got Eleven's story arc, and we got our storyline in Hawkins. While it was nice to be travel to different locations as suppose to just being in Hawking, a lot of these stories feel like they didn't need to be as long as they were. Like the Russia story arc. That could've been like what, three...maybe four episodes? And we also had Eleven's storyline where without going into too many details, felt like a lot of stuff was repeated. Eleven gets sad because something bad happened thus she feels terrible, she failed at this task thus she feels terrible, Eleven discovers something shocking about her past and take a wild guess of how that made her feel? So while the overall story of this powerful new threat was interesting, and we get some very strong character depth, it still felt like a lot of fat could've been cut out.

• Positives

One of the many pros is the production. Stranger Things has always had a very strong cinematic feel to this, but that still doesn't mean you can't praise the production. The cinematography is great, the special effects both CGI and practical look great, and I love the villain's design in this. It was both gross and yet really awesome at the same time.

Then there's the tone. While the show has always had a serious tone with a mix of more lighter moments, this time around while we still get a breather of some intense stuff, a lot of it was really dark. With the main theme of fears and losses driving the whole plot. Not to mention that ending that was also pretty dark. I wish I could go into more details, but regardless of old this season is I'm not gonna give anything away. But what I will say is the ending is not a happy one. Hell it's not even bittersweet.

The last thing I'll praise is the performances. Since I've praise them main times before I'll keep everything with the series regulars brief. The usual cast of Millie Bobby Brown, Finn Wolfhard, Noah Schnapp, Caleb McLaughlin, Gaten Matarazzo and so forth, once again are incredible. This cast continues to shine and I can't wait to see what they've got for the fifth and final season. But I also want to give praise to Sadie Sink as Max. She was already great in her own right, but here she's given so much to do primarily cause Max has such a great story. While Sink still has Max play her usual headstrong self, I felt like she did incredible with her characters more vulnerable side especially with the episode of "Dear Billy". She killed it in that one. Now to wrap this part of the review up, I want to give praise to Joseph Quinn (who I imagine is now making a name for himself with Fantastic Four: First Steps) as Eddie Munson. I loved this character. Quinn provided tons of charm but also had a lot of tragedy as well. Which in return offered a whole new dynamic to our group of characters.

Season three wasn't really strong for me, but I think season four was definitely an improvement. Even if some storylines and their lengths really messed with the overall pacing of the show. But regardless of that, I think this was still very good.

My final rating is, Good.

So next month will be the start of the final season. Let's hope this show goes out with a bang. For now come back on Friday, Nov 28th, for my review of Zootopia 2. Why Friday? Well because Thursday will be Thanksgiving and I prefer not to work when I should be spending time with family especially during such a big holiday. Where during that time I'll probably be sleeping afterwards because of all of the food I'll be eating. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day and come Thursday I wish you all a very Happy Thanksgiving. 🦃

A Look Back at Zootopia (2016)

 

Before we know it the sequel will be in theaters everywhere. So it's the same old story as before. Now let's look back at the first film shall we?

Zootopia is animated buddy comedy film that was produced by Walt Disney Animation Studios with distribution being done by Walt Disney Pictures. The story was written by Jared Bush and Phil Johnston and directed by Byron Howard and Rich Moore.

The story is, rookie cop Judy Hopps has been transferred to the wonderful city of Zootopia. At first she's given boring tasks like parking duty, but with the help of con man Nick Wilde they'll both try to figure why the predators of Zootopia have all of a sudden been going savage.

• Negatives

I've got nothing.

• Mix

Now let me get something straight first. I do find the story to be pretty good. I know nowadays we roll our eyes because every. single. piece. of. media wants to be or wants us to think it's some sort of sophisticated thesis or a nuance allegory. But at least Zootopia doesn't feel like it was talking down at it's audience like a lot stories I've watched and/or read about. But even with the story being as good as it is, you can start to quickly piece together where the message and themes are going. Especially when Nick reveals his backstory. So yes, we got an entertaining story but let's not kid ourselves and act like it broke the mold.

• Positives

Let's get the most obvious praise out of the way. The animation is incredible. Especially the city of Zootopia. Zootopia is gorgeous! There's beautiful visuals, the architecture has great bits of imagination, the details whether it's buildings or the fur on characters is spectacular, environments feel lived in, etc. The animation is amazing and it deserves it's spot as one of Disney's many best looking animated films.

Then there's the humor. This is a greatly funny movie. We all know the bit of the sloths being the ones to run the DMV, but there's also other funny bits as well. Like Judy's two screaming next door neighbors, there was also an "elephant in the room" bit that was pretty funny, and my personal favorite, Nick taking any chances he can to be a dick.

My last praise will go to the performances from Ginnifer Goodwin and Jason Bateman as Judy Hopps and Nick Wilde. These two can hold their own when their characters aren't together, but their chemistry is awesome. Their push and pull dynamic is perfect, whenever they tease each other is very charming, and you can tell they had a blast. Goodwin and Bateman's chemistry is the heart of the entire movie and I can't wait to see or since they're voicing acting I should say hear what they'll bring for the sequel.

While I don't think this movie is as one big thoughtful allegory as I heard many people make it out to be whether it was back in 2016 or now, I still do love Zootopia. I found it to be a wonderfully fun movie and you should give it a watch.

My final rating is, Great.

So that's all for now. Come back on Monday, Nov 24th, for another Look Back at review. Only this time I'll be reviewing the fourth season of Stranger Things. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

Keeper Review

 

Alright a new Osgood Perkins horror movie. Let's see if he killed it once again.

Keeper is a folk horror movie that's produced by Wayward Entertainment, Big Rodeo Films, and Oddfellows Pictures with Neon distributing. Osgood Perkins directing and Nick Lepard wrote the story.

The story is, to celebrate their one year anniversary doctor Malcolm takes his painter girlfriend Liz on a weekend trip to a secluded cabin in the countryside. At first it's a peaceful trip, but as time goes by strange things begin to happening around them and they'll soon learn the cabin holds a dark secret.

Why The Delay?

So if any of you read my review for the newest version of The Running Man, then you're fully aware that this was suppose to be uploaded yesterday. So what happened? Well believe it or not my dad called me up to help him rake up leaves. The reason for the help is because the front yard maybe regular size, but the backyard is huge. So that took up some time. Then next thing I knew I'm helping him rake leaves at my grandpa's because well, old man bad back, ya know. Usual old guy stuff. Then that took up some time. Then just my luck, I got a stomach ache. Wasn't even expecting that last to happen but it did.

First I'm tired because of raking leaves and then disposing of the leaves, then I'm feeling sick because of a stomach ache. So I decided to say f*ck it and just move this to Tuesday.

Initial Reaction

Now I was looking forward to this because Osgood Perkins has been on quite the win streak. Earlier this year I saw The Monkey and a fun time with it, then during the summer I got a chance to review his well received movie Longlegs. So with those two winning films in mind I was interested in what else Perkins had made.

Cons

I've got nothing.

Middle Ground

The story is the biggest slight issue. We get a very standard set up. Couple wants to do a romantic getaway to somewhere remote then next thing you know shit hits the fan because something scary appears. Now I did enjoy a lot of the horror elements which I dive into later, but this is one of those horror films where a lot of answers aren't explained. Now that I can work for many horror films, and I do enjoy horror films like that or just movies like that in general. It's a storytelling element that can work. But with Keeper not so much. I wasn't really frustrated with the story by the end of the day, but I wasn't really jumping up and down in excitement. I was just in a sort of "meh" mood by the end.

Pros

There's many praises to give this movie with one of them being the atmosphere. Despite story issues, Oz Perkins still creates stunning dread. There's just these incredible build ups to something or someone creeping up on you. You're also given a claustrophobic feel too, because we're only in this one cabin and having a feeling of being stuck there. Then there's the special effects. There's some great CGI and there's also some great practical effects. These effects shine greatly with the ghouls. Which I also want to praise the design work on them. Because the designs on them are grotesque and disturbing. The last thing I'll praise is Tatiana Maslany's performance. I may to this day still be pissed with that godawful She Hulk: Attorney at Law show, but Maslany was amazing. She really anchored all of the chaos and terror in this movie by giving us a relatable and vulnerable performance. She makes you love Liz when she's a kind woman, makes you feel bad for Liz when she has to act being scared by screaming until her voice cracks, and even does a great job going a little primal too. The story might be a bit of gray area, but Maslany does a fantastic job carrying Keeper.

This wasn't an overall lose for Osgood Perkins, it was more like a flawed yet still good attempt. The movie provides plenty of scares, but when it came to answers to questions you don't get a lot.

My final rating is, Okay.

So that's all for now. Sorry if I was a day late. Hopefully that won't happen again since we're getting closer and closer to closing out 2025. Anyways, come back on Thursday, Nov 20th, for my A Look Back at review of Zootopia. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day. 

The Running Man (2025) Review

 

Alright, I had a fun time with the original 1987 film, now let's see what this new verison brought to the table.

The Running Man is a sci-fi action thriller and is the second adaption of Stephen King's 1982 novel of the same name. This time around production was handled by Kinberg Genre and Complete Fiction, with Paramount Pictures distributing. Edgar Wright not only directed but also wrote the screenplay along with Michael Bacall.

The story is, in the future there's a highly popular game show called The Running Man, in which contestants called runners must survive 30 days from a team of murders hunting them down and if they win they'll be gained $1 billion dollars. The newest contestant is Ben Richards who's desperate to get money to help his sick daughter. The ratings are skyrocketing because audiences are loving Ben's defiance and grit, but this also makes him a threat to the entire system.

Initial Reaction

The main reason as to why I wanted to see this is because of Edgar Wright. I think he's a tremendous director and he's given us a lot of great films. Look no further than stuff like Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz, Baby Driver, and his previous movie before this, Last Night in Soho. So when I found out he was directing this I just had to see it.

Cons

I've got nothing.

Middle Ground

I found I had two mix feelings. Let's start with the story. Now I still enjoyed it. There was great tension with the Hunters hunting down Ben Richards and the other contestants. I also really loved how Ben's determination lead to a slow building rebellion, and I also just enjoyed Ben just wanting to help his wife and daughter. But where the story falls a little short is the satire elements. Now we got something good with The Network using deepfakes to make it seem like Ben said things he didn't actually say. That's very relevant given how we're currently dealing with deepfakes and A.I. But then you get things that are very on the nose. The most obvious of which is an in-universe show that's clearly a parody of The Kardashians. And I hope you enjoy making fun of them as much as this movie does, because they use that gag over and over again. The other mix bag is the villains. Now I do like they're very cold and ruthless, and are still willing to do their job even if they know The Network will probably screw them over. But they didn't have the memorable personalities that the 1987 film had. Yes I know the '87 versions aren't anything like the original  book versions, but again at those guys had something for to remember. With these versions you're more than likely to forget them.

Pros

One praise I'll give is the pacing. While some bits are slow, a majority of the runtime goes by pretty quick. Kind of surprising given this is thirty-two minutes longer than the '87 flick. I also really dug the tone. I'll always enjoy the original movie, but I do like how this one felt more dystopian than the previous one. It felt more gritty and intense. Then there's Glen Powell. His performance here is great. He really makes you feel for Ben Richards. Both in a sense of him being loud and angry rebel, and as a very loving and caring husband and father. And to continue on with performances I also want praise Colman Domingo as Bobby T. aka the host of The Running Man. He was great at having to sell you bullsh*t. And I loved all of his scenes. So much so I wish we got more of his character. The last thing I write about to wrap up this review is the action. We got some fun urban brawls, smashing drones to pieces, bloody knife fights, and a some really fun chase scenes. Definitely more grittier stuff than the previous movie. So yeah, when it came to the action I wasn't disappointed.

While I felt like the satire at times was pretty obvious and the villains were brutal but not as memorable, there was still plenty of stuff from this version of The Running Man that I liked.

My final rating is, Good.

Okay that's all for now. Come back on Monday, Nov 17th, for my review of the newest Osgood Perkins horror movie, Keeper. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

A Look Back at The Running Man (1987)

 

With Edgar Wright's version of The Running Man just around the corner, it's time to do my old tradition of reviewing what came before.

The Running Man is a dystopian action movie that's based on Stephen King's 1982 novel of the same name. Braveworld Productions, Taft Entertainment Pictures, and Keith Barish Productions did production, while Tri-Star Pictures was in charged of distribution. The screenplay was written by Steven E. de Souza and Paul Michael Glaser directed.

The story is, in the year 2019 the government maintains control with propaganda, censoring art, music, and communications and their state controlled game show The Running Man. This show allows criminals aka runners can earn their freedom by escaping death at the hands of professional killers. One of the new contenders is Ben Richards who was framed for violent incident which unfairly dubbed him "The Butcher of Bakersfield". Now, Ben must do everything he can to survive.

• Negatives

I've got nothing.

• Mix

The only mix bag I had came from the story, mainly from the ending. From beginning to the near end, we're given a very action movie. It fills you with plenty of excitement, but when it came to Ben and his little uprising against the villain [Damon Killian] everything ends very quickly and neatly. Now that would've been fine in every other movie, but this made such a big deal about overthrowing Killian and then the corrupt government it leaves you to believe that by the end is gonna be a big deal. But what we got was "Okay, that's all. We can go home now". So because of that ending we're never told or even given a hint of how the actions at the end will effect this world or if there's any other sort of consequences. So while I still had fun with this, I still wish there was more to the ending.

• Positives

Let's get into the good stuff starting with the pacing. Now the movie isn't that long to begun with. It only clocks in at an hour and forty-one minutes. But I was still surprised by how quickly everything went. I watched this last night at 9:30pm and it ended somewhere around 11:28pm of 11:29pm it was one of those times. Either way, this is one of those movies that's easy to get through.

Then there's the villains or as their called in this the "Stalkers". These guys are named Subzero (insert Mortal Kombat joke here), Buzzsaw, Dynamo, and Fireball. And if you think their names are a bit over the top, who should see their personalities. They're over the top and colorful and a real blast to watch. It was so much fun to see this guys just go full ham as they try to kill Ben Richards.

The last thing I'll praise is the performances from Arnold Schwarzenegger and Richard Dawson. Unsurprisingly Arnold shines with his effortless charisma, bring both being a simple man to being the action hero with plenty of bravado. And Richard Dawson does a fantastic job as Damon Killian. At one moment he comes off a calm and smooth guy, next thing ya know Richard's playing Killian as a smarmy psychopath with a game show host flair. Both of this men delivered and made an already entertaining movie even more entertaining.

While I have some slight issues with the story, mainly how the ending was dealt with, I found this version of The Running Man to be a very good popcorn flick. And it actually made more interested in the upcoming Edgar Wright remake.

My final rating is, Good.

It goes without saying but, that's all for now. Come back on Saturday, Nov 15th, for my and you guessed it, my review for Edgar Wright's version of The Running Man. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

Frankenstein (2025) Review

 

Alright, a brand new Guillermo del Toro film! Let's see what he cooked up this time.

Frankenstein is a gothic drama movie based on Mark Shelley's iconic 1818 book Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus. Production was done by Double Dare You, Demilo Films, and Bluegrass 7 w/ distribution done by Netflix. Guillermo del Toro both wrote and directed.

The story is, in 1855 Victor Frankenstein was expelled from the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh for reanimating corpses. But this disturbing talent doesn't go unnoticed when he's approach by Arms merchant Henrich Harlander, who'll provide him unlimited funding to conduct his experiments. Fueled by his ego Victor creatures new life, but this act of playing god will have dangerous consequences.

Initial Reaction

This is gonna be one quick explanation. I wanted to see this because del Toro is a phenomenal filmmaker. I don't think I can think of one bad movie he's every made. Come to think of it, I don't think he has made a bad movie. So I decided to this because I firmly believe del Toro was gonna continue his winning streak.

Cons

I've got nothing.

Middle Ground

Now the story still follows the same beats as every other Frankenstein film. The man plays god, and in typical del Toro fashion, we see a monster who isn't an actually monster, etc. So yes, the story is really good. Especially since we get both sides of the story, that being Victor's side and The Creature's side. But as much as I love del Toro, this movie does have a habit of dragging in some places. Sure when dealing with a story like this ya gotta a lot of ground to cover. However there are moments when you're almost gonna feel that two hour and twenty-nine minute runtime.

Pros

First let's start off with the performances, mainly from Oscar Isaac and Jacob Elordi. Oscar once gain showcases why he's such a great talent. He has the ability from making Victor Frankenstein go from manic and driven to being a deeply tormented with a dark moral compass. But then we got Jacob Elordi who I can see being viewed as show stealer. He did a fantastic job making "The Creature" (that's Frankenstein's name this time around as suppose to Frankenstein or Frankenstein's Monster) and playing three different roles. For one part of the Elordi makes The Creature coming off as innocent and almost child like, to being something that's trying to find meaning in it's life, to then being a rageful monster seeking revenge on the only father figure he had in his life.

Now it's time to praise the thing that Guillermo del Toro is known for. His movies having a beautiful dark cinematography. The overall look to this film perfectly captures the dark, moody, and dirty tone of the story. It's a true feast for the eyes, even if you're gonna see some pretty gross cut opened bodies and wolves being torn apart.

The last thing I'll praise is the production designs, holy crap the production design. It's amazing. Now yes, there's more than likely moments where CGI and green screen, but the fact there were moments where you question it should tell you how great the production design is. In a cinematic world, where it seems like almost every movie, and keep in mind I said almost and not every, it's also refreshing to see that there's still practical effects and built sets being used. CGI and green screen do and always will have it's place in cinema but we can't forget what came first.

While the pacing could've used a little more work, Frankenstein (2025) is a fantastic watch. If you're a fan of Guillermo del Toro, Frankenstein, whatever, I think you should give this a watch.

My final rating is, Good.

Okay, that's gonna do it. Due come back on Thursday, Nov 13th, for my A Look Back at review of The Running Man starring Arnold Schwarzenegger. A celebration review for Edgar Wright's version. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

Oh, and tomorrow, to all of the brave soldiers who severed, Happy Veterans Day.

Predator: Badlands Review

 

Ya know, never in my lifetime did I ever think we'd get two Predator films in the same year. But here we are.

Predator: Badlands is a sci-fi action movie and the seventh film in the installment although if you count the Alien vs. Predator flicks it'd be the ninth. Lawrence Gordon Productions, Davis Entertainment, and Toberoff Entertainment did production while 20th Century Studios did distribution. Dan Trachtenberg once again returns to the franchise to direct, and also wrote the screenplay with Brian Duffield and Patrick Aison.

The story is, young Yautja Dek is considered a weakling to his clan by his father. After he watches a bloody fight between his father and brother, Dek sets out to hunt a supposedly unkillable apex predator on the dangerous planet Genna and prove he's not weak. But as Dek searches for this beast, he also learns there's something else on this planet and it wants both his trophy kill and him.

Initial Reaction

I wanted to see this movie for the most simple of reasons. I'm a fan. I think the Predator films are great. Well the first ones great, the second is good, the others are okay, but the less we talk about Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem the better. The point I'm getting at is, I'm a fan and I wanted to see the newest installment of the franchise.

Cons

The only truly bad thing in this movie were the villains. They only thing you can say about them is bland. They were so generic. There's no way anybody is gonna remember these characters.

Middle Ground

My only mix feelings came from the tone. While the first movie had it's lighter moments it was still a very serious flick. So I didn't mind some comedy, but some of it really needed to be toned down. Especially with the character of Thia. Sometimes her more chipper personality felt kind of annoying.

Pros

One positive I'll give is the action. We start off with a pretty coll sword in a cave, get some good survival scenes, and a pretty entertaining third act. Granted it's not as violent as the previous films, but it was still entertaining. Then there's the world building. We get see more of the Yautja culture both from what we see and what Dek tells us. But more importantly we get to explore another planet other than Earth. Genna on the surface looks beautiful, but as we dive deeper into it it's gonna one fictional planet I wouldn't want to visit. The last thing I'll give touch on is Dek's story. While it is a fairly standard coming-of-age story, I still found myself interested in how he was gonna go from the "weakling" to something stronger.

While I don't find Predator: Badlands to be a very strong film for this franchise, I still did enjoy some aspects. Hopefully the next one will be much better.

My final rating is, Okay.

So it goes without saying but that's all for now. Come back on Monday, Nov 10th, for my review of the newest Frankenstein. Which I am totally dreading to see, because as we all know Guillermo del Toro is just the worst filmmaker ever! He's just terrible. Joking aside, hopefully you'll be there and you enjoy the rest of your day.

RoboCop (1987) vs. RoboCop (2014)

 

So it's been a long couple of months since I did one of these. Thankfully I've finally found a spot in my schedule to do so. Now enough of this intro, let's get into the showdown.

Contender #1 - RoboCop (1987)

Director - Paul Verhoeven

Writer(s) - Edward Neumeier & Michael Miner

Release Date - July 17, 1987

Production - Orion Pictures

Distribution - Orion Pictures

Budget - $13,700,000

Gross - $53,400,000

Contender #2 - RoboCop (2014)

Director - José Padilha

Writer(s) - Joshua Zetumer, Edward Neumeier, and Michal Miner

Release Date - February 12, 2014

Production - Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Columbia Pictures, and Strike Entertainment

Distribution - Sony Pictures Releasing

Budget - $100-130,000,000

Gross - $242,600,000

Story

The stories for both films are, Alex Murphy was not only a good father but a damn good cop as well. Then his life was changed when his body was destroyed seemingly beyond repair and he was on death's door. But fate had other plans when the Omi Consumer Products chose him to be their newest weapon against crime and his given the name RoboCop. Where they differ is in the 1987 story is Alex's memories come back to him and seeks vengeance towards the people who turned him into RoboCop. While the 2014's story is Alex is trying to solve his own murder while still trying to the family he once was.

Round #1 - Visuals

Much like my "vs." for the two True Grit films, this seems unfair because Paul Verhoeven didn't the same new technology that José Padilha had for his remake. But after watching both movies I gotta give it the original 1987 film. The visuals had a harsher lighting and much dystopian look to a crime ridden Detroit. Now unlike many I'm not gonna completely dismiss the 2014 remake. But I do admit the remake's visuals are clean, but in doing so it really doesn't have much going for it. Which doesn't make it bad. I've seen films with far worst cinematography than the 2014 remake. What I'm saying is the remake looks good, but lacks a lot of memorability.

So it goes without saying, but the winner is the original 1987 film.

Round #2 - Characters

Now I'm mainly gonna focus on the villains here because I've got something else planned for the story of Alex Murphy/RoboCop. So let's get to with the bad guys. With the 1987 movie you had villains like Clarence Boddicker and his gang. These guys pretty much got off on all the violence and destruction they were inflicting on to others and the city itself. They were especially despicable when they were killing Alex Murphy. So they were easily villains who you're just rooting for to get killed by RoboCop. But what about the villains in the remake? Well, Raymond Sellars and his henchmen like Rick Mattox are definitely bad people. And while there were times when they clearly loved the fact they had control over Murphy/RoboCop, I found they didn't have the same exact menace as Boddicker and his buddies.

So when it comes to villains, the winner is the 1987 movie.

Round #3 - Action

Once again, I almost found myself struggling here, because much like how the visuals were different because how what the crews had to work with, the action was hard because of the different ratings. RoboCop '87 is rated R while RoboCop '14 is rated PG-13. Now I can already see you rolling eyes saying how this should be an easy win because PG-13 isn't nearly as violent. But sometimes folks, violence doesn't always equal better.

So the undisputed winner is the remake!

I'm kidding. Sorry, I just had to get that joke out of the way. But for real let's dive in. Now as I said before the 1987 movie is rated R. So violence is much more intense and can leave you shocked. With the 2014 remake, well it is fun, the problem is the '14 RoboCop is mainly just fighting other machines. He gets a fight with the classic ED-209, drones, and other robots. Sure he does get into shoot out with other human characters, but those scenes are over in seconds or minutes, so when remake RoboCop fights other humans it doesn't feel as personal.

So while, the remake does have it's moments when it comes to action, I do believe that missing human element drags it down a bit. So once again, the winner is the original movie.

Round #4 - Story

Alright, now we have the big one and this is what I was saving for the character of RoboCop. But first let me get into something. This is gonna be a hot take but, I don't think either RoboCop films have clever satire. The original 1987 film was obviously making fun of Regan era capitalism and with the remake they have a character named Pat Novak, who's a conservative who angrily voices his opinions on his talk show [The Novak Element] regrading America and the politics surrounding the country. Oh wow, I wonder who the remake was poking fun of? *cough Bill O'Reilly cough*. So yeah, both films aren't very subtle with their satire.

So with that out of the way, let's get into the real story. That being the story of Alex Murphy aka RoboCop. Now while both suffered in very different but were still near death experiences and then become well you know who. Both the Murphys have different storylines.

The original 1987 Alex Murphy had him being a good cop and loving father to his son and being a great husband to his wife. But his story is more about him struggling between man and machine. Then once he has his own free will, he goes to seek revenge on those who turned him into what he is now. The story arc for the 2014 Alex Murphy follows some similar beats. Cop, father, husband, the near death experience, and then becoming RoboCop. Where the difference comes is this Alex wants his brain to be put on drugs to not only not feeling anything anymore because he hates what he has become, but also become Omni wants something with less feelings when it comes to missions. But once Alex stops being doped and finds out just how traumatized his family has become, he goes on his own mission to find out who tried to kill him and see if he's still capable of being the father/husband he once was.

And honestly, I like both stories. They both of how title character going through a huge struggle and fighting to come out on top. So while some of you might find this to be quite shocking, I'm calling it a draw.

Winner - RoboCop (1987)

So that's all for now. Come back on Saturday, Nov 8th, for my review of Predator: Badlands. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.