Follow TV Tropes

Following

Headscratchers / RoboCop 2

Go To

  • Hob's death is presented as a tragedy, but every other hardened homicidal criminal gunned down is presented as scum getting what they deserve. Am I the only one bugged by this?
    • Hob gets sympathy points purely because he's still a kid. Plus, he's never been shown to be explicitly violent. He's more of an unscrupulous businessman than a bloodthirsty thug.
      • He is violent - he's shot guns repeatedly, and tried to garrot Lewis. On the other hand, we get a brief moment of Freudian Excuse, as he tries to look away during the torture scene but Cain forces him to look.
    • You're not the only one bothered by it, no. I personally thought it was a little heavy-handed. Then again, the second film isn't exactly known for its subtlety.
      • Again, it's because he's still a child. Yes, he's a child that's fallen in with a bad crowd and done bad things. The point is supposed to be that as a child, he still has a life ahead of him where he could make choices and move away from that life. The OP should remember a key word they used... "hardened". Every other criminal that gets gunned down is a full adult who's shown to largely revel in violence, while Hob is still mildly horrified by it... yeah, he tries to garrot Lewis, but that's hardly stabbing her or shooting her in the head. There's also the fact that the film specifically shows Robocop as mourning him because the kid reminds him of his son.
    • Advertisement:
    • I agree. I don't care how old that little brat was, he deserved a death ten times as violent as everyone else's! (Which for this franchise is really saying something, amirite?)
    • I didn't take it so much as it being tragic for his own character's sake, but because Murphy, who's there to hold his hand as he dies, was reminded earlier of his own son when he looked at Hob. He probably doesn't see too many kids in the line of duty (the occasional evil little league aside), so the association was probably still there when he found Hob bleeding to death. It's not that we're supposed to see Hob as "just a kid," it's that Murphy clearly does.
      • I agree that Hob brought his death on himself. Hob was the one who made the decision to leave Cain for dead, which likely factored into Robo-Cain killing Hob, the brief scene showing him shooting two police officers (heavily implying he killed one) and there was the glee he took in damaging Robocop and trying to garrote Officer Lewis (even taunting her about it: "You're looking a little out of breath bitch). Child or not, he deserved what he got.
      • Don't think of it as Robocop mourning that Hob-the-psycho-kid-drug-dealer is dead. Think of it as Robocop mourning that Hob-the-kid ever became Hob-the-psycho-drug-dealer in the first place.
    • Advertisement:
    • Hob had a bunch of drug dealers teaching him to not value the lives of others, dunno what your excuses are.
    • We're meant to see Hob as a victim as well as a criminal, the scene where Cain forced him to watch them torture the dirty cop was meant to show Hob was heavily influenced/coerced by his companions and still had some humanity left. He hated Cain and left him for dead, but even without Cain around Hob is still evil at this point. I dont think we're supposed to feel bad about him dying so much as sorry for the corruption of his innocence. This is also a scene where he's forced to acknowledge RoboCop's humanity, while previously he was shown to be reveling in dismembering him and even sadistically tried to feed him his own lubricant, so it may be slight moment of redemption for the character. That being said, I think the scene is more about Murphy than it is the kid.
  • Hob may be just a kid, but why did Robocop's programming deny a target lock when he saw him with a gun during the drug bust. He may be a kid, but he was an armed kid in commission of a crime. This wasn't Murphy choosing not to fire; this was the programming not allowing a kid to be targeted. If anything, allowing the armed kid to get away from the crime could be considered a violation of all three Prime Directives since it allowed a criminal to get away and put the public at risk. One could argue that OCP didn't want their priced creation in the news for killing a kid, but in the crapsack, dystopian world Robocop 2 exists where the Rainforest is radioactive and carjackers get electrocuted as a theft deterrent, Robo offing a kid wouldn't be noticed at all.
      Advertisement:
    • Whatever the ethics of killing an armed criminal kid, the optics of Robocop doing so are what OCP would be concerned with. They don't want their political or corporate enemies somehow getting footage of him doing that and raising a huge stink.
  • Beyond sequel escalation, why create a brand new Robocop model rather than reusing the successful prototype design? Unit 001 (Alex Murphy) was a brilliant success.
    • They TRIED, the whole problem with the original Robocop model is that almost no one else can deal with the transformation. Murphy is an exception because his devotion to the law and his faith (this movie reveals that Murphy was a devout Catholic, and suicide is a mortal sin in Catholicism) makes the horror of his new existence bearable. Everyone else just commits suicide in despair. A prototype you cant recreate is next to useless
    • The original project leader was also dead, with it possible Dick Jones messed with the research so they had to make a new Robocop from scratch. Also OCP wanted a new and better model, Robocop 2.0.
    • The failed prototypes also mostly seem to be lighter and more mobile... the original's fairly slow and pretty heavy, they probably wanted something that would have similar speed and mobility to a normal human but still be as tireless and hard to kill. Robo Cain went the other way, larger and more massive, specifically because Foxx went after a subject who would revel in power.
    • Where did the Elvis guy disappear after the first act? His fate was never explained after the warehouse scene
Top

Example of:

/
/

Feedback