RoboCop was a great movie. After earning critical success amongst both critics and casual moviegoers and earning a profit of around forty million dollars, it only made sense for Orion Pictures to follow up with a sequel. Does RoboCop 2 hold a candle to the original? In a way, yes.RoboCop 2 takes place about one year after the events of the original film. The RoboCop project was a success, and OmniCorp, the creators of the project, begin research and development for a successor. Meanwhile, Alexander J. Murphy, also known as RoboCop, continues his duties as a Detroit police officer. However, a new addictive substance sweeps the city. Nuke. Created by Cain, a fanatical cult leader hopelessly addicted to his own drug.The plot is interesting, but it's not perfect. A lot of plot points introduced near the beginning are all but abandoned. RoboCop's relationship with his wife and and the doubt of his own humanity are threads that would have held weight and kept the plot interesting. However, they are dropped rather quickly, instead focusing on OmniCorp's attempted purchase of Detroit. The movie still contains most of the comedy that made the original funny, but quite a few are rehashed from the original.This film was made on a budget of thirty-five million dollars, a rather large upgrade from the original's, and it shows. Animations that seemed charmingly clunky in the original are smooth and get the job done. The use of CGI is done sparingly and doesn't feel awkward or out-of-place, and the practical effects, such as RoboCop's suit, continue to hold up today. However, that doesn't mean that it's flawless. The CGI used on RoboCop 2's digital "face" consists of low-quality, flatshaded polygons that look downright terrifying at points, and it doesn't even look remotely like the person it is trying to portray. It could have been much more appealing if they simply filmed actor Tom Noonan and superimposed his face onto the cyborg's facial screen. This film is still gory, but not to the extent of the original. They were holding back, with no real reason too. Once again, the acting is great. Peter Weller slides back into his character like a knife into butter. The moments he expressed pain were especially impressive. Nancy Allen also provided a good performance as Officer Anne Lewis. Noonan was decent as Cain, but was a little too "hammy" at times.Overall, RoboCop 2 is a good film, and a worthy, albeit flawed, successor to the original. It may be more difficult for people unfamiliar with the series to enjoy, but fans will have fun. It's above-average and better than a few of it's competitors. If you're a fan of the original, give it a try.

This film essentially picks up where its predecessor left off with the cyborg known as "Robocop" (Peter Weller) going about his business trying to keep crooks off the streets of a dystopian Detroit. Unfortunately, there are two organized forces with vastly different agendas which interfere in his efforts. The first is a murderous drug-dealer named "Cain" (Tom Noonan) who has cornered the market on a new drug known as "Nuke" and he intends on selling it at all costs. The second major obstacle to Robocop's efforts to clean up the streets of Detroit is the corporation known as "OCP" who initially created him but now has plans to remove him in favor of other cyborgs which they intend to mass-market. Meanwhile, crime continues to be rampant and the police department can only do so much with the resources they have available. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this was an okay sequel for the most part but definitely doesn't measure up to its illustrious predecessor. It just didn't seem to have the necessary attention to detail like the previous film. Be that as it may, while this film most certainly could have been better, I didn't think it was a bad movie by any means and I have rated it accordingly. Average.

It's fair to say that I hate "RoboCop 2." It's a nasty, horrible and mean- spirited mess of a film that lacks a clear narrative and an interesting story. The acting is woeful, the musical score is disastrous and the script is nonsensical and witless. Peter Weller is completely lost and confused as the character he played in the first movie is so badly characterized that you'd think that this was a different RoboCop to the one we saw in the first movie. Even the brilliant Lewis character is nothing like she was in the original film. The direction lacks flair, style and identity; sometimes it feels like a TV movie that Channel FIVE show on weekday afternoons. Avoid RoboCop 2 like the plague. I can't believe that they thought this would be an acceptable way to follow up such a great film like RoboCop. 2/10

Despite having a bad reputation, ROBOCOP 2 turns out to be above average. A flawed gem, perhaps, as one rather large problem with this film is the lack of fresh ideas which made the original film so entertaining. Indeed, many of the action sequences are simply repeated from the first film, and changed slightly so we hopefully don't spot the similarity. For instance: Robocop smashes a man's head repeatedly into an arcade machine (in the original, he smashed Kurtwood Smith's head through numerous windows); Robocop cleverly kills a man holding a baby in front of him (in the original, he shot a man holding a woman hostage in the groin).The acting is worse than in the original. To be fair, special effects have always overwhelmed the actors in this particular film series, but it's difficult to take many of the supporting cast seriously as they look as if they're about to burst into laughter at any minute. Peter Weller is as good as ever, although he doesn't undergo as much anguish or torment as he did in the first film. Nancy Allen is used sparingly, indeed she hardly makes an impression and was obviously tiring of the series by now. Tom Noonan makes an effective psychotic, although he's difficult to take seriously too. I could have done without the scene of the dying boy; we're supposed to feel sorry for him after he's mutilated Robo and tried to garrote Allen? I think not.A lot of people dislike this film because of the excessive violence and downbeat nature, but for me, it's the main saving grace. It's true, a lot of people die needlessly, gunned down in cold blood. Robocop is even tortured and has his limbs cut off in a disused warehouse, although this isn't as powerful as his original death in the first film. The gore is plentiful, although not as varied as in the first film: it mostly consists of people being shot, their chests exploding in red bursts. These depressing moments are countered by some interesting ideas; namely, the sub-plot involving Robocop being reprogrammed by his makers which induces some laughter; and the whole idea of the 'nuke' drug. I'm glad that the fake news bulletins stayed in too, as these were highlights of the first film and they're just as funny here.A big plus in the film's favour is the quality of the special effects work involved. In particular, the stop motion animation is wonderful, and used a lot in the film's finale where Robocop battles Robocop 2 in a fight to the death. The standard of the animation is particularly good, even beating ED-209 in the original, in fact. Watch out for a spooky bit where a malfunctioning cyborg rips its helmet off to reveal a screaming skull underneath - disturbing or what? The film is also worth sitting through for the twenty minute finale, a huge battle sequence in which hundreds of people are shot, loads of cars explode and the two cyborgs rip each other apart. It's certainly showstopping, but bittersweet too for fans of the series; this was where the quality ended.