RoboCop 1987 question. Murphy's death -- Disturbing, graphic, and way unnece!
Question: RoboCop 1987 question!. Murphy's death -- Disturbing, graphic, and way unnecessary!.!?
Robocop truly traumatized me!.!.!. it still does in many ways!. The scene where Murphy is mutilated is just way too over the top, graphic, and unecessary!. I realize that Veroheven wanted to make the audience care for the character of Murphy, but when he is literally shot apart!.!.!. it's disgusting!. Yes, the villains were vile!.!.!. Veroheven did a good job, as well as the actors, in conveying their cruelty!. However, it essentially becomes sensationalistic and implausible!. They're blowing this guy apart with shotguns for crying out loud and he's standing taking it all!?! One blast would have been enough to send him flying back and dead!. But no, he's taking round after round to his entire body, screaming through it all!. Then he collapses to the floor and is still alive!?! I'm sorry, but no way!. They could have simply shot Murphy in the head!. Dead!. That's it!. Every time I think about this movie, I think of this scene and it distubs the heck out of me!. I realize not all things are pretty, but was this, in the sensationalistic manner, really necessary!?
At the time, I think Veroheven wanted to see how much he could get away with and simply wanted to indulge in some sick fantasies!.!.!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
At the time, I think Veroheven wanted to see how much he could get away with and simply wanted to indulge in some sick fantasies!.!.!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
Answers:
films of today are much more indulgent to dark fantasies, if anything makes more sense to show that kind of horror compared to the "Saw" series!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
I watched this movie for the first time in a while about two weeks ago!. It is probably the most gruesome and over violent movie I have ever seen!. Why did they have to blow off his hand first!?
I disagree that it is tame by today's standards!. The 80's had a ton of uber-violent movies in the mainstream!. The only reason they may not be so shocking now are the primitive effects!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
I disagree that it is tame by today's standards!. The 80's had a ton of uber-violent movies in the mainstream!. The only reason they may not be so shocking now are the primitive effects!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
Now technicly they didn't 'blow him apart', his hand was blown off, but thats all!. I feel that his death was so violent and extreme so that the viewers had the ieda that there was no hope for him-only to become RoboCopWww@Enter-QA@Com
Don't worry they are remaking it!.!.so you will get traumitized again!. It was not as bad as Hostel and the films that are out today!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
It is tame by today's standards!! If you were to young to watch it back then you probably shouldn't have!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
Good grief!. Just man up!. i saw this as a kid too and yes, it jolted me a little!. However, I have scene much worse in movies that win Oscars no one says a damn thing!. First, it is a movie! It was not real!. I guess you could see the symbolic stripping away of his physical humanity and a indication of how bad and violent crime had gotten in Old Detroit!. It was a scene done for effect!. Get over it!.
DRAGON 2008
"I BELIEVE IN U!.S!."Www@Enter-QA@Com
DRAGON 2008
"I BELIEVE IN U!.S!."Www@Enter-QA@Com