

-----------------------------------

Officer Igor Antunes

Thu Aug 04, 2011 9:26 pm


We Can Fix It - RoboCop3

-----------------------------------

Guys, this is a good reading:

http://cdn.craveonline.com/images/stories/2011/Film/Robocop%203%20Header.jpg

WE CAN FIX IT: 'Robocop 3'

With a new remake on the way we take one last look at the movie that killed the franchise the first time. Don't worry... We can fix it.

Link: http://www.craveonline.com/film/articles/172077-we-can-fix-it-robocop-3


-----------------------------------

vegasrobo

Thu Aug 04, 2011 10:07 pm



-----------------------------------

Can't get that site!..ARGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!.So whats the deal?..They using 3 as basis for the reboot?..That would be fantastic!.


-----------------------------------

Josh

Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:37 pm



-----------------------------------

Nice find there Igor, it made for an interesting read.

I'm not going to lie, but I havn't seen RoboCop 3 in years. When I got the Blu-Ray I put it on, watched Robo drive to the top of a parking lot, smash the wall/rail, and shoot up his own cruiser. I can never watch it after that part.

But reading the article made me realise how much of a back seat Robo took and how it effectively made Nikko the main character. We all know the lack of emotion and goofy set pieces made the film a long toy commercial so this makes no sense. If you're going to try and flog toys, the big shiny robot needs to be up there doing some cool shit.

The one thing I do disagree with the article is the reveal of Robo. I've always liked the intro of the the first film as it strays away from your typical "hook the viewer with an action scene". I liked Robo 2's intro also but that was because it did the thing the first film didn't; it hooked us with that action scene.

Anyway, back to the reveal. I like the way you only see his visor, it adds an element of "cool" about Robo. Sadly, Robo smashing his console was probably the most emotional part of the movie but I think that was handled wrong. I think it would have been more effective to have Robo just turn it off, remaining calm and composed and choosing to make that judgement call and assist his fellow officers.

But hey, smashing stuff is cool and cool stuff makes for good toys...


-----------------------------------

KidGoesWild

Fri Aug 05, 2011 12:14 am



-----------------------------------

This was an absolutely great read. Handshake for the author, I wish he could read my text commentary on the movie. One flaw tho is that the author thinks that Robo overcame his programming at the end of R1 which is clearly not the case

Can't get that site!..ARGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!.So whats the deal?..They using 3 as basis for the reboot?..That would be fantastic!.

No, theyre showing areas where R3 failed and how bad of a movie it was, something I had a pleasure doing myself in the past


-----------------------------------

Sean_001

Fri Aug 05, 2011 8:37 pm



-----------------------------------

I actually read this review last night at the bar from my gf's iphone. 

But, looks like Igor beat me to it.

The author raised alot of good points, and mostly all the stuff we already know.


-----------------------------------

Officer Igor Antunes

Sat Aug 06, 2011 7:33 pm



-----------------------------------

But, looks like Igor beat me to it.

Next time i'll check if you read before posting!  :lol: 

Josh, i got the same thiking about the Robo revealing. I really like how they done in the first movie, showing the shining armor step by step. That's why the revealing in the second movie were so fantastic and glorious, you just already know what to expect, but when it happens, and Robo emerges from the fireball in all of its glory, its like "WOW, NOW HE'LL KICK SOME BUTTS", and he does it. Very satisfying.

When i saw Robo3 for the first time on the "Global Opening", i was 13. Man i loved the first act when he jump off the wall, emerging again and saving Lewis. Another part that i loved was the MacDagget pursuit, when Robo shoots from the windshild. The Auto-9 firing sound, mixed with Basil soundtrack just kicked ass. But...


...Today, 14 years after, i can't just see this movie. Its just not fare with the character, and his universe. A real mess, made by the same kind of captalists portraited in the movie.


-----------------------------------

ElectricSoul

Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:06 am



-----------------------------------

they killed it when they decided to give him a kid sidekick / kid to take care of....that was it. after that,there was no recovery. he was going to stop being the man trapped in the machine,searching for his humanity,and kicking ass in the process....he became a role model and walking toy....


-----------------------------------

Proto

Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:06 am



-----------------------------------

I believe that killing is wrong. When was he?


-----------------------------------

ElectricSoul

Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:07 am



-----------------------------------

I believe that killing is wrong. When was he?

what do you mean?


-----------------------------------

RoboPimp

Sun Aug 21, 2011 2:16 am



-----------------------------------

I believe that killing is wrong. When was he?

what do you mean?

Sometime later Proto.


-----------------------------------

Proto

Sun Aug 21, 2011 2:16 am



-----------------------------------

Please tell me the correct answer. Sometime in the 20th Century.


-----------------------------------

RoboPimp

Sun Aug 21, 2011 2:25 am



-----------------------------------

Please tell me the correct answer. Sometime in the 20th Century.

1993


-----------------------------------

Duke Serkol

Sun Aug 21, 2011 6:37 pm



-----------------------------------

Actually I've been meaning to ask you guys... how does everyone feel about the directives being back in Robocop 3?

Personally I never had a problem with them, but upon seeing the movie being discussed on-line, I noticed that this is often a very delicate issue to lots of people.

Me, I always thought it made perfect sense for OCP to find out Robocop got rid of his directives and put them right back. 
They wouldn't want him to go around with free will, he's their product and they want it to stay that way.
And sure, Robocop could electrocute himself again, but I doubt this would stop OCP from trying again (perhaps giving him a "don't electrocute your damn self" directive) and Robo ought to realize this.

Some people object solely to the fourth directive being present, claiming that because Dick Jones is gone, that directive should be gone as well. But why wouldn't OCP adopt such a convenient (for them) insurance in case Robo ever finds them guilty of some crime (OCP involved in some crime? Shock!)

So that's why I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts on the matter, to clear up whether my reasoning here makes sense or I'm not making sense.


-----------------------------------

ElectricSoul

Sun Aug 21, 2011 7:28 pm



-----------------------------------

makes sense to me! i always figured that at some point after he wiped the directives ( and probaly after the end of Robo 2 so Fax couldn't fuck with him again) ,he probably got an annual checkup or diagnostics test or something,the OCP tech's discovered this ,and just downloaded a new program set of them back into him...

he's OCP property...they can go in there and just sdo stuff to him if they want to,whether anyone agrees with it or not, Murphy included...

i could actually see him resisiting,or not wanting it to be done,but getting damaged enough that the tech's HAVE to work on him,and then they slip it in there...


-----------------------------------

Archive

Sun Aug 21, 2011 9:12 pm



-----------------------------------

Although i think the way Robo3 re-used a lot of stuff from the original was incredibly lame there ARE things that are synonymous with the character and you just can't remove, and the prime directives is one of those things.


-----------------------------------

ElectricSoul

Mon Aug 22, 2011 12:02 am



-----------------------------------

the Prime Directives, the Data Spike,and the Basi lscore all give it a feeling of going "home" again....too bad the rest of it sucks!


-----------------------------------

GoldenPimp

Fri Sep 30, 2011 5:59 pm



-----------------------------------

I got angry watching the first 20 minutes of this movie without Robocop.  Not that the opening has to have the main character, but the whole thing was just BAD.

Really bad acting, people running around, children crying and hacking into corporate robots to make them "puppies".

My #1 worst movie of all time is Street Fighter.  This one is #2.


-----------------------------------

Josh

Fri Sep 30, 2011 6:48 pm



-----------------------------------

My #1 worst movie of all time is Street Fighter.  This one is #2.

Street Fighter is so bad It's good.

RoboCop 3 is so bad it makes me want to punch myself in the nuts every time someone mentions it.

Thanks to you Golden, I'm walking like John Wayne...


-----------------------------------

Zentron

Fri Sep 30, 2011 7:53 pm



-----------------------------------

RoboCop 3 is so bad it makes me want to punch myself in the nuts every time someone mentions it.Hi Josh, I've just been watching RoboCop 3!  Yes RoboCop 3 is very bad, but I thik people should watch RoboCop 3 so that they know what a bad film looks like and RoboCop 3, is a great example.  So we should thank RoboCop 3 for being a shining light of badness, which I think RoboCop 3 deserves a place in the hall of bad movies. So let's hear it, for RoboCop 3 :lol:

I'm going to try again with editing RoboCop 3, but this time, I'm going to be brutal, and hopefully make RoboCop 3 finally watchable... and hopefully upload it to a online file host!


-----------------------------------

KidGoesWild

Fri Sep 30, 2011 10:25 pm



-----------------------------------

Actually I've been meaning to ask you guys... how does everyone feel about the directives being back in Robocop 3?

Personally I never had a problem with them, but upon seeing the movie being discussed on-line, I noticed that this is often a very delicate issue to lots of people.



I hate it. It makes no sense whatsoever, especially directive 4. Not only that, but they also ruined a great potential. In R2 robo got free will for the first time ever, Kersh mentioned that its important because he chose to stay and do the duty while he didnt have to. Miller's script focused on the free will even more. In R3 the directives are back like nothing ever happened. And directive 4 back? I mean what the? I thought it was obvious that it was taken down after the events in RoboCop when it presented its flaws and contradiction to law. A man was taken hostage and the attacker and murder suspect couldn't be handled by Police Officer because of that directive. And it was secret because it was illegal and flat out contradicted the law and gave some people free pass. So naturally in R2 its taken down, its gone. And in R3 its back and official? Not to mention in RoboCop he just couldn't arrest a high rank OCP guy, it never said anything about obeying them.
Jones said: "It's a little insurance policy called Directive 4. My little contribution to your psychological profile. Any attempt to arrest a senior officer of OCP results in shutdown"
In R3 we have "Never oppose an OCP officer". Well, I think writers themselves instantly forgot what directive they gave Robo because he simply breaks that rule with ease - he doesn't listen to McDagget, he doesn't step away from the door. He just cannot shoot him, which would indicate that Directive 4 is the same one as in RoboCop - that he cannot arrest or kill high rank OCP guys. But the inconsistent writing and a bad plothole says that that's not what the directive says, and he breaks it like that yet his program doesn't allow him to do something that's not even listed in his directives. Duh..



______________________________________________

http://robocopmovies.blogspot.com/


-----------------------------------

Duke Serkol

Fri Sep 30, 2011 10:44 pm



-----------------------------------

directive 4 back? I mean what the? I thought it was obvious that it was taken down after the events in RoboCop when it presented its flaws and contradiction to law. A man was taken hostage and the attacker and murder suspect couldn't be handled by Police Officer because of that directive. And it was secret because it was illegal and flat out contradicted the law and gave some people free pass. So naturally in R2 its taken down, its gone. And in R3 its back
OCP worried about staying within the boundaries of what's legal? That'd be a first. And really, I think the moment OCP finds out Robo wiped himself clean of all directives, they'd put them back and add one that sayd "Don't you go electrocute yourself." :lol:


-----------------------------------

KidGoesWild

Sat Oct 01, 2011 3:24 am



-----------------------------------


OCP worried about staying within the boundaries of what's legal?That'd be a first  


No its not. They werent officially killing each other. They werent officially and openly snorting coke or dealing with cop killers and gangs.Everything illegal was behind the close doors. Same with directive 4. Thats why it was classified. Once it got out logically it was removed



And really, I think the moment OCP finds out Robo wiped himself clean of all directives, they'd put them back and add one that sayd "Don't you go electrocute yourself."

How would they know tho? Cops would tell? Besides, in Miller's script Robo actually walks away at the end to unknown. As I said, R2 opened so many possibilities with the whole free will thing. R3 had such a potential


______________________________________________ 

http://robocopmovies.blogspot.com/


-----------------------------------

Duke Serkol

Sat Oct 01, 2011 1:15 pm



-----------------------------------


OCP worried about staying within the boundaries of what's legal?That'd be a first  
No its not. They werent officially killing each other. They werent officially and openly snorting coke or dealing with cop killers and gangs.Everything illegal was behind the close doors. Same with directive 4. Thats why it was classified. Once it got out logically it was removed
But who could say it was put back in? Lazarus? She'd get fired and replaced with someone less talkative. Robo himself? He's not legally human, I doubt he'd get a hearing.


And really, I think the moment OCP finds out Robo wiped himself clean of all directives, they'd put them back and add one that sayd "Don't you go electrocute yourself."
How would they know tho? Cops would tell?
Can't they just browse Robo's memory? Or figure out how he did the trick by studying his systems?
Or do you mean how they'd know that he is without directives? I imagine they have periodic controls done by someone other than Lazarus.


-----------------------------------

KidGoesWild

Sat Oct 01, 2011 3:36 pm



-----------------------------------


OCP worried about staying within the boundaries of what's legal?That'd be a first  
No its not. They werent officially killing each other. They werent officially and openly snorting coke or dealing with cop killers and gangs.Everything illegal was behind the close doors. Same with directive 4. Thats why it was classified. Once it got out logically it was removed
But who could say it was put back in? Lazarus? She'd get fired and replaced with someone less talkative. Robo himself? He's not legally human, I doubt he'd get a hearing.

It was gone in R2. And his tech was very righteous, she would ratt OCP out the first chance shed get if she would find out the directive IV is in Robo. Lazarus had to know about it as well. It wasnt even hidden in R3, and she erased it later herself. And robo wasnt a lifeless robot in the first 2 movies like he was in R3, he actually had a personality and would instantly tell that he has that stuff back in.


Can't they just browse Robo's memory? Or figure out how he did the trick by studying his systems?
Or do you mean how they'd know that he is without directives? I imagine they have periodic controls done by someone other than Lazarus.

OCP had bigger problerms than checking Robo after the events of R2, and again Lazarus was the one taking care of him in R3. The directive was gone in R2 as it logically should, its return in R3 makes no sense and not only that, it isnt even hidden, its right there displayed freely with the rest of them. But then again nothing makes sense in this movie


______________________________________________ 

http://robocopmovies.blogspot.com/


-----------------------------------

cobrahunter187

Sat Oct 01, 2011 8:10 pm



-----------------------------------

Lol @Zentron with the multiple times you said robocop 3 josh's ball is gonna be like hammered....

nicely done


-----------------------------------

Duke Serkol

Sat Oct 01, 2011 9:09 pm



-----------------------------------

his tech was very righteous, she would ratt OCP out the first chance shed get if she would find out the directive IV is in Robo. Lazarus had to know about it as well. It wasnt even hidden in R3, and she erased it later herself. And robo wasnt a lifeless robot in the first 2 movies like he was in R3, he actually had a personality and would instantly tell that he has that stuff back in.
And what happens then? Even if OCP was to face legal trouble, this would just lead them to pulling the plug on Robocop. No more lab, no more maintenance. I doubt all the equipment in that room is superflous, so this would decrease his life expectancy considerably. Assuming, that is, they wouldn't try to scrap him themselves, which would either end in him letting them do so or to a Prime Directives scenario with Robo being declared a public danger and OCP hunting him down.
Their only option would be to go rogue like they do... in Robocop3. Relying on materials stolen to keep him going.

Now in R3 Robo joins the squatters because he believes their cause is just. But until then, would you see him embracing a life of crime to keep himself going? This is Murphy we're talking about, the guy that keeps going after his life turned into a living cyber hell out of sense of duty alone. Therefore I don't think so. Which is also why I'm very glad he doesn't stop being a cop at the end of any of the movies, that would completely break character.

So yeah, he'd have to take whatever fourth directive they give him and keep quiet about it.


-----------------------------------

Josh

Sat Oct 01, 2011 9:19 pm



-----------------------------------

Lol @Zentron with the multiple times you said robocop 3 josh's ball is gonna be like hammered...

Please.....stop.....


-----------------------------------

KidGoesWild

Sun Oct 02, 2011 1:21 am



-----------------------------------

his tech was very righteous, she would ratt OCP out the first chance shed get if she would find out the directive IV is in Robo. Lazarus had to know about it as well. It wasnt even hidden in R3, and she erased it later herself. And robo wasnt a lifeless robot in the first 2 movies like he was in R3, he actually had a personality and would instantly tell that he has that stuff back in.
And what happens then? Even if OCP was to face legal trouble, this would just lead them to pulling the plug on Robocop. No more lab, no more maintenance. I doubt all the equipment in that room is superflous, so this would decrease his life expectancy considerably. Assuming, that is, they wouldn't try to scrap him themselves, which would either end in him letting them do so or to a Prime Directives scenario with Robo being declared a public danger and OCP hunting him down.

Doesnt matter tho, its still flat out defying US law and there would be a lot of people outraged about company people being outlawed cause they manipulate their product. Its like saying OCP should openly kill people and deal with drug lords cause they could stop funding police. Yet again, everything they do is covered up, even the whole rehab thing is presented differently in the media. Marie wanted to get the word out to people, it was important cause if people knew, it wouldnt happen. If not the detroit cops, if not the citizens, the FBI and government would step in  in such situation. Under no circumstances would they openly say they are above the law and can do whatever without getting arrested or objected.


Their only option would be to go rogue like they do... in Robocop3. Relying on materials stolen to keep him going.

Not really. As I already mentioned, it was important for OCP to have good public relations. Johnson mentioned it in R2 and that they were getting heat from Robo being offline. Same would happen if it would be open that Robo cant do anything to OCP guys no matter what they do

Now in R3 Robo joins the squatters because he believes their cause is just. But until then, would you see him embracing a life of crime to keep himself going? 

Theyre not criminals. Theyre innocent people ridden out of their homes, not criminals. His program recognized them as innocent (which is another logical flaw). They do go against the law which  creates even more illogical plotholes in that movie. One of Robo's directives is Uphold the law, a rule which he has throughout the movie, yet he breaks it time after time, whether its burning the rehab headquarters or joining people outside the law who by the law should surrender and give up their homes. If they break the law, theyre not innocent in the eye of law. They are "innocent" in our point of view, not according to law. And again, Robo joins them by default, not choice. He did nothing when he saw rehabs separating a kid from his father. Only when he was hurt lying in front of their feet and had no other choice he joined them. I dont even know if it can be called joining. He told them to cover him and then went with them to their hideout where they repaired him. Once repaired he went on selfishly to get his revenge, he never said hell fight with them for their cause. He went after rehabs and mMdagget cause of Lewis and his personal vendetta

This is Murphy we're talking about, the guy that keeps going after his life turned into a living cyber hell out of sense of duty alone. Therefore I don't think so. Which is also why I'm very glad he doesn't stop being a cop at the end of any of the movies, that would completely break character.

As Kershner said, the point of him loosing directives is to show that even tho he doesnt have to do it anymore (which is the case when he has directives), he still stays and chooses to do his duty

So yeah, he'd have to take whatever fourth directive they give him and keep quiet about it.

Why keep quiet? He told what the directive is in R1 once he found out what it is. In the first 2 movies he was actually a guy with human personality, not a robot only. He would object and disown such directive. It was illegal therefore secret in R1, thats why when it was uncovered it was taken down. It was missing in R2. Then when he got hundreds of new directives and found out he can erase them, he chose to risk his own life to take them down. He  rathered die than live with those directives he disliked. Now THATS Murphy. In R3 its all just checklist. Robo? Check. 4 directives? checked. Contradicting its own directives? Check


______________________________________________ 

http://robocopmovies.blogspot.com/


-----------------------------------

cobrahunter187

Sun Oct 02, 2011 9:27 pm



-----------------------------------

Lol @Zentron with the multiple times you said robocop 3 josh's ball is gonna be like hammered...

Please.....stop.....

Was pretty funny tho


-----------------------------------

Duke Serkol

Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:35 am



-----------------------------------

Johnson mentioned it in R2 and that they were getting heat from Robo being offline. Same would happen if it would be open that Robo cant do anything to OCP guys no matter what they do
Nonetheless, the fact remains that Robo and OCP are mutually dependant. If Robocop or Lazarus was to expose OCP and cause them to want to get rid of them, they would be left without funds to keep him going.
Furthermore... are we really sure directive 4 is illegal? I mean, Robocop has essentially the same civil status as a police car, and even if he was legally considered a police officer, I don't think there's any laws about what you can program one to do or not do (due to the fact that before him there were no programmable policemen). The lawiers would have a field day.

One of Robo's directives is Uphold the law, a rule which he has throughout the movie, yet he breaks it time after time, whether its burning the rehab headquarters or joining people outside the law who by the law should surrender and give up their homes. If they break the law, theyre not innocent in the eye of law.
Now THAT is a good point. Robocop 3 shows the fourth directive being deleted but not the other three, yet Robo manages to go rogue and join the squatters in their unlawful activities. There's a definite plot hole.

As Kershner said, the point of him loosing directives is to show that even tho he doesnt have to do it anymore (which is the case when he has directives), he still stays and chooses to do his duty
To that I can agree.

Why keep quiet? He told what the directive is in R1 once he found out what it is.
I meant to the press/authorities etc.

It was illegal therefore secret in R1, thats why when it was uncovered it was taken down.
Personally, I always assumed Jones had kept it secret because Morton wouldn't allow his project to be easily disposable by him.

It was missing in R2. Then when he got hundreds of new directives and found out he can erase them, he chose to risk his own life to take them down. He  rathered die than live with those directives he disliked. Now THATS Murphy.
Those directives were driving him nuts. That's a bit more severe than a mere dislike.
And again, I don't think it would be very practical for him to keep electrocuting himself every time the fourth directive is put back in. Especially because, as I said, OCP would probably end up adding a don't electrocute yourself fifth directive.


-----------------------------------

KidGoesWild

Mon Oct 03, 2011 1:35 am



-----------------------------------


Nonetheless, the fact remains that Robo and OCP are mutually dependant. 

So are Detroit cops

If Robocop or Lazarus was to expose OCP and cause them to want to get rid of them, they would be left without funds to keep him going.


yet the cops striking didnt cause cutting all the funds and closing in the police department. It would be an outrage, just like taking down robocop because he wouldnt hold an illegal directive. Government and FBI would step in. And again, public relations where extremely important for OCP

And dont forget robocop off the streets was crucial for OCP plan and absolute control. He was great in what he was doing and they needed chaos and new robocop. Yet even then they couldnt leave him offline cause they knew the public would eat them up. They sure wouldnt keep him offline if it got out what directive 4 is. They would probably apologize, blame someone for putting it in without their knowledge and erase it

Furthermore... are we really sure directive 4 is illegal? I mean, Robocop has essentially the same civil status as a police car, and even if he was legally considered a police officer, I don't think there's any laws about what you can program one to do or not do (due to the fact that before him there were no programmable policemen). The lawiers would have a field day.

It doesnt matter who he is. The fact remains his directives says that people from one certain corporation can steal, murder and rape but no one else can. OCP doesnt rule the world, thats why they keep their dirt in secret and behind the close doors. Thats why all the lies for the media, thats why the directive was classified


It was illegal therefore secret in R1, thats why when it was uncovered it was taken down.
Personally, I always assumed Jones had kept it secret because Morton wouldn't allow his project to be easily disposable by him.

Morton knew about it. He double checked if its there whispering and upclose and made sure its clssified


Those directives were driving him nuts. That's a bit more severe than a mere dislike.

The point was that they were restricting him from being him, restricting him from actions. Thats what D4 did

And again, I don't think it would be very practical for him to keep electrocuting himself every time the fourth directive is put back in. 

Im not talking about electrocution. Im talking about telling everyone he has an illegal program in, tell lazarus to get rid of it, go to the media, do something to take it out. And knowing what it is and what an outrage it would ("should" in R3) cause it shouldnt be a problem taking it out



______________________________________________

http://robocopmovies.blogspot.com/


-----------------------------------

Duke Serkol

Wed Oct 05, 2011 12:37 am



-----------------------------------

We're repeating ourselves now, so I guess we'll just ahve to agree to disagree.
Simply put, you seem to have more trust concerning Robocop's version of America than I do (the way I see it, in Robo's world it's not just OCP that is corrupt but pretty much everything all the way up to the government).

However...
Morton knew about it. He double checked if its there whispering and upclose and made sure its clssified
What?? I don't remember that! What whispering and upclose do you speak of?


-----------------------------------

KidGoesWild

Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:40 pm



-----------------------------------

When it came to directives, Morton quieted down and leaned very close to Robo. Asked him quietly what are his directives and waited very serious. For me it always meant he knows theres directive IV but wanted to make sure he doesnt say it out loud


______________________________________________

http://robocopmovies.blogspot.com/


-----------------------------------

Duke Serkol

Thu Oct 06, 2011 12:36 am



-----------------------------------

That's just an assumption, though.

Morton hops away to celebrate before Robocop has even time to contemplate the "Directive 4: Classified" line.


-----------------------------------

KidGoesWild

Thu Oct 06, 2011 2:36 am



-----------------------------------

Well he waited till hes done and said its good but yes, thats just an impression Ive got, nothing confirmed


______________________________________________

http://robocopmovies.blogspot.com/


-----------------------------------

boredom29

Tue Jul 17, 2012 8:27 pm



-----------------------------------

I always took it that morton would agree to directive 4, only for the sake of his own vices, morton loved cocaine, hookers, etc.


-----------------------------------

omnicorp

Thu Jul 19, 2012 10:00 am



-----------------------------------

I just watched Robocop 3 ............
I cried ...........
The music is its only saving grace ! 
X:-(

