A scientist working on a top secret experiment is killed in an explosion but the corporation that funds his experiments transforms him into a robot.A resurrection science fiction film that despite being a B-low budget affair has a grander 80's film quality feel thanks to some gritty, raw and rough round the edges special effects. Richard Cox and Pam Grier are watchable and some performances are above average. However, they are counter balanced by what should have been better supporting actors. Edith Rey and David Preston's dialogue is sometimes flawed, yet their story fairs better exploring some moral dilemmas.Although it predates Robocop (1987) I remember the main draw to watch it was because of The Terminator (1984). That said, the Vindicator shares more with Frankenstein and the Wraith (1986).Jean-Claude Lord's Vindicator was of its day. It has some nice visual moments. The certain charm it held in my mind since 1986 was mostly warm nostalgia - as on revisiting The Vindicator it's not as fast paced as I remembered it.While fun at the time, in retrospect it's for comparable curiosity only.

Scientist Carl Lehman(David McIlwraith),working on a special type of NASA space suit, demands to know why his funding has been cut off by colleague Alex Whyte(Richard Cox), threatening to expose his secret project. Whyte has a number of scientists devoted to a project which would create cybernetic humans, offering the possibility of eternal life. The catch..Whyte would have a remote which could order them to do what ever he so chooses, quite a wealth of power at his command. So, Whyte has scientist Ian(Stephen Mendel)set poor Carl up to be severely burned by a nuclear reactor, his body used as the first prototype for the super-powerful cybernetic man..a BIG mistake, because Carl is able to break free, his remote control mechanism unattached, leaving the facility, and out to endanger potential innocent lives because the single touch onto his body causes a negative hostile reaction that's fatal to the one responsible. Carl's brain still contains memories and certain feelings for his beloved wife, Lauren(Teri Austin), and anger/hostility for those who ruined his life forever. Whyte is quite worried that he'll spoil his future success and calls in an exterminator, Hunter(Pam Grier)who has "never lost to a man", a cold-blooded assassin that will eliminate anyone that may've witnessed something they shouldn't have. Carl believes his only ally, besides Lauren, is a fellow co-worker, Burt(Maury Chaykin), but even he might not be the friend he always though he was.I'm a big fan of "human cyborg" films, contributed to my formidable teenage years watching popular sci-fi actioners, ROBOCOP & THE TERMINATOR, and I do believe THE VINDICATOR will appeal specifically to this crowd. The film also is a mad scientist movie as well with Cox well cast as the determined ARC industries boss yearning for the kind of universal control his project might eventually produce(..by controlling the cybernetic human, whose strength is a phenomenal asset, Whyte sees the unlimited potential for power). The true casting choice that will provide an allure for THE VINDICATOR is Pam Grier as a vicious killer who will snap the neck(..or put a long, thin needle all the way through young female witness' throat)of a woman who provides a threat to her employer's company without a second thought. McIlwraith is only seen for a minimum of five or so minutes before Whyte has him terminated, his eyes providing us with the only method to judge his feelings when his cyborg body goes into attack alert(..when he's touched by anything, an alert sounds off, beating faster and faster before trouble starts for those that antagonize him)..or when he takes his face guard/helmet off to reveal his scarred visage, reflected to his horror from a pool of water or store shop window. Those familiar with Maury Chaykin know that his characters are often never to be trusted, even when his Burt consoles Lauren(..actually Burt is lustfully obsessed with her, and his attempted rape/strangling of her is really disturbing).No doubt, Whyte's team of scientists(..and his bounty hunter)are an assortment of ruthless, vile dreamers, willing to go to any lengths for their own success. That's what makes Carl's revenge so sweet. The 80's, interesting enough, featured films like these where revenge was so satisfying because the hero's opposition were such foul cretins worthy of the most violent death possible. The death toll here isn't extravagant, and the violence isn't as graphic as in ROBOCOP or TOTAL RECALL, but I think THE VINDICATOR has enough elements to please sci-fi buffs. A good point was made elsewhere regarding this movie coming before ROBOCOP so it shouldn't be labeled as a rip-off. Carl's robotic suit of armor(..after the golden NASA suit is burned away), in a bit of cool trivia, was made by Stan Winston's studio.

When I first got the Portugese version of this film (it's never been released on DVD in my country but saw it on VHS when i was like, 11) only to discover in Spanish/Portugese speaking countries this film is known as "RoboMan", I laughed, thinking what a silly name. "The Vindicator" is far cooler. But after viewing this trash-cheese-fest again at the ripe old age of almost 30, i realised the Portugese were spot on. RoboMan is a much better title, if only the film itself didn't TAKE itself so seriously it might have been great. It has quite a good script, that I'm sure was effective when it was released, but sadly it just seems a bit dated and sad now, despite some really inventive ideas. As it is, it tries a little TOO hard to be a serious sci-fi horror, and falls a bit short.David McIlwraith stars as Carl, a scientist, who is nearly killed in an "accidental" explosion because the bad-guy scientists don't like him. It doesn't matter why. Once he's mutilated they stick his brain (and his eyes and a bit of nose) into an indestructible space-suit and plug him in, oh and he has a nifty little device that means he goes ballistic and kills people if they touch him. Why you'd need that on Mars (apparently its a Mars-explorer prototype or something) I have no idea. It'd be like, "hey, we found some life on mars! Sh*t dude, Roboman just squished it!" Anyway, in true dodgy 80's movie-style, no sooner has he escaped from the labs when he runs into a couple of no-good-street-punks, and dispatches them swiftly, and it's here that the film really settles into the horror movie thing...it has all the pacing, limited characterisation, atrocious acting and simplistic music score of a "bad" horror movie.He seeks to track down and destroy the scientists who imprisoned him the robo suit, and is hunted by...wait for it...Pam Grier, in a woefully cheesy role as the bounty hunter (or something) named...uh...Hunter, seems so oddly out of place in this film, and has the best line in the film (paraphrasing here, it's not THAT memorable): "Your buddy's dead with a manhole cover up his *ss coz YOU weren't straight with me!" Yep folks, THAT really is the best line in the film.Terri Austin - she is not much of an actress, but she is quite nice to look at and has a nice voice. Unfortunately she's assaulted by the character of Maury Chaykin in a disturbing and unnecessary attempted-rape scene.Vindicator suit - this actually isn't a ripoff of terminator (it couldn't be anyway, since both "creatures" were designed by the same guy!), the exo-skeleton thing is on the outside here. It is quite cool, in a horror-movie kind of way, like when he removes the face plate: "You can't love THIS!" And it looks good (it was made by Stan Winston studios) and you can see a lot of thought went into the design.Setting - foggy Canadian mornings are a highlight in this film. Reminds me of cold days spent indoors by the fire. Likewise the houses in the film are cool, I particularly like the bad guy's living room, and RoboMan's house.I'm glad i went out of my way to find this movie again, it's nice to have it on the shelf for a winter day when I feel like watching it again, but as far as recommending it? I don't know. I'd say it's more for people like me who saw it ages ago on VHS and have a soft spot for it, or if you are a fan of cheesy 80's Canadian cinema. Otherwise, stick with Terminator and RoboCop. They are easily available everywhere for good reason - they are fantastic movies. This one is pretty average.

Ok, it's not "craptacular", I just wanted to use the line. I just don't know what the other reviewers are raving about, as this is just not GOOD. The movie does have great special effects and acting, IN COMPARISON to 80's sci-fi Canadian efforts. However, they don't stand up when compared to other films of the same time in the same genre (and Canadian science fiction in the 80's is kind of a narrow field anyway, right?) Even animated films like Akira beat it. Budget-conscious editing and production is apparent but forgivable, as the crew did do a great job with the money given to them (probably the loose change out of George Lucas' wallet). The performances give what is demanded of them, undoubtedly, but the movie has a plot as see-through as the (very bizarre) goop the main character gets trapped in. I'm not saying it's a bad movie, but it's not good either. It's certainly nothing to build Canadian sci-fi around (we still have someone named David Cronenberg), and if Atom Egoyan ever put his massive brain into this genre we'd get something really wonderful. In short, go rent it, give it a shot. It won't live up to the fantastic title, but you might enjoy it for what it is. An 80's Canadian sci-fi movie.