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. (09/20/2008)

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. (05/09/2009)

Very stupid and bad. I don't think any of the people involved can be proud of this film. Even animator Phil Tippett, who made the robot villain move perfectly, and yet the result of his work still looks ridiculous, because the direction simply didn't know its bounds. In addition, Robocop has lost its satirical undertone and has become a mere over-the-top action nonsense that just plays on the style of the original film. (07/18/2016)

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. (08/10/2014)