Now playing.

Full disclosure: I love the original RoboCop. Paul Verhoeven’s 1987 ultraviolent action film about a murdered cop brought back through technology doubles as an incredibly smart and funny satire. He took the entire Reagan era to task, ridiculing the corporate greed, privatization, and military overspending that defined America in the 1980s. The character of RoboCop personified the way the callousness of those ultra-right wing policies dehumanized the people they were supposed to protect.

So, when I became aware of the impending RoboCop remake, I was more skeptical than outraged. Why would director José Padilha (Elite Squad) bother updating a story that holds core themes as relevant in 2014 as they were in 1987?

To my surprise, the new RoboCop actually has enough going for it to justify its existence. It understands how corporate culture has changed since 1987. Michael Keaton’s greedy CEO is more Richard Branson than Gordon Gecko. He’s cool and thoughtful. His office isn’t a grey board room, but a sleek penthouse filled with works of art. He emphasizes pleasing consumers rather than cold hard dollars.

Sadly, this RoboCop doesn’t have much else to offer. What’s ostensibly an action satire has little to offer in terms of action or satire. Samuel L. Jackson provides some laughs as a Bill O’Reilly-type windbag, but when he’s gone, the movie has no sense of humour (Officer Murphy’s transformation into RoboCop is treated with deadly seriousness). The action scenes are mostly dull and incomprehensible. Padilha seems to think noise and CGI are substitutes for thrilling action set pieces.

My fear going in to this new RoboCop was that it would be a decent action film that lacked the humour and satire of the original. In the end, I got the opposite: a film with a strong point of view that lacks wit and decent action. I guess that’s better, but it’s still not that satisfying.

Published in Volume 68, Number 21 of The Uniter (February 19, 2014)