Movies Robocop 3 vs Terminator 3

just downloaded robo 2 and 3.

5 minutes into 2, not 3...and it's so awful lol. how much worse is 3 again?
Honestly I'v never really understood the hate for Robo 2, I think its lacking a bit in depth of drama compared to the original but it nails the black comedy action/satire style of the original which Robo 3 totally fails to do trying to turn it into a bland family action film.

I think Robo 3 feels worse as well because T2 didnt need a sequel, the first two films are a complete story and you don't need to watch any of the rest. Robo 2 on the other hand I think was intended tio be more of a middle chapter, setting up drama like Murphys wife to be paid off in a 3rd film which ended up being ignored by the crap we got.

The only positive of Robo 3 is Rip Torn is somewhat fun although not very threatening compared to his OCP predicessors.
 
While it didn't and couldn't really live up to it's predecessor, I thought T3 had some merrits and I think it became one of those movies your supposed to hate becaue the internet told you to hate it.

IMO Peter Travers got the criticims just about right "Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines may lack the mythic pow of the 1984 original and the visionary thrill of T2, but it's a potent popcorn movie"

There were some good ideas there:
Skynet was a defense AI software that escaped on to the internet to deal with a trivial issue.
John Connor never accepting that Skynet was gone and living off grid
The plot twist that the bunker where they were sent to stop it was just for their protection because it was already too late.
The idea the Judgement Day was inevitable and nothing they could do would ever stop it.
I thought going through with judgement day and showing it was ballsy

Some of it was a warmed over rehash of T2, it was tonally messy, and Arnold was old and rusty, but they actually tried to make a good movie. They started the action pretty much instantly and kept on the throttle as I recall. It was a fun if not masterful film.

Robocop 3 is a sad and ignominious end to a franchise that started with a great movie.

Agree great plot points, but on the flip side the movie almost seemed to be making fun of itself.

Too much forced cliches, it was almost like Last Action Hero in its delivery
 
Like many others in here it took some digging in my memory bank to remember Robocop 3, Terminator 3 while not a good movie has its moments. Arnold rising up with the casket in a gunfight was memorable, Loken also did a decent job as the female villain.

Robocop 3 felt like they were picking the corpse to try and make a final profit off of the name which probably ran its course and didn't need anymore.
 
Like many others in here it took some digging in my memory bank to remember Robocop 3, Terminator 3 while not a good movie has its moments. Arnold rising up with the casket in a gunfight was memorable, Loken also did a decent job as the female villain.

Robocop 3 felt like they were picking the corpse to try and make a final profit off of the name which probably ran its course and didn't need anymore.
I think a big issue with Robo 3 was really that Orion the studio were in serious financial trouble when it was being made, they rushed it into production to the degree Peter Weller couldnt return as he was making Cronenberg's Naked Lunch and seemed to have this idea it was well suited to being a family film.

I spose you could argue Hollywood blockbusters were going more in a family direction but Robocop specifically seems like a terrible fit for that, granted mid aged kids often liked Robo btu exactly because it was pretty dark and graphic. You could argue I spose Terminator 3 might have actually been worse had it been made say 5 years earlier than it was, at least by 2003 post Matrix studios would put money into R-rated films again and it does manage to stay somewhat dark.
 
Honestly I'v never really understood the hate for Robo 2, I think its lacking a bit in depth of drama compared to the original but it nails the black comedy action/satire style of the original which Robo 3 totally fails to do trying to turn it into a bland family action film.
Not sure if it was a consensus, but I know Ebert really took issue with casting a 12 year old as a drug lord.
 
Not sure if it was a consensus, but I know Ebert really took issue with casting a 12 year old as a drug lord.
I don't think that was just being edgy for its own sake though but making comment on children being drawn into crime and generally being asked to grow up too fast, plus of course plays into Murphys story with his son.

I'd guess Frank Millers dislike of Robocop 2 plays into it being looked down on as well but his own version of the script didnt seem to go down well when realised as a comic. Id say its actually other people involved had a better idea of the tone of the original, co writter Walon Green especially had worked on quality films like The Wild Bunch and Scorerer. Its not some cheap sellout at all IMHO, thats Robocop 3 which Miller also did and those people did not.
 
Last edited:
Forgot them both so couldnt rate which was better,but its probably Terminator 3
 
Never seen either and never will. I've made my stand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HHJ
Here's the thing though, they don't behave like ninjas and wield Katanas, so they're basically labelled Ninja robots because they're asian.

 
Agree great plot points, but on the flip side the movie almost seemed to be making fun of itself.

Too much forced cliches, it was almost like Last Action Hero in its delivery

Yeah the pivots from moments of humor or lighter beats in T2 felt subtle and blended tonally with the darker material. The fan service was also doled out with a fire hose whether it was needed or not.

In T3 they were pretty ham fisted. Dr. Silberman from the first 2 movies showing up at the graveyard was really forced fan service and suddenly this character we know from the first two movies as the voice of incredulous rationality is the comic relief. If you compare his reaction to seeing Arnold in T3 to Sarah Conor's reaction to seeing Arnold in T2 it about sums up the difference between the 2 movies.

There are a few pretty bad moments. The whole bathroom fight had a very uncanny valley meets bugs bunny feel to it. Although a lot of movies around that time did.

Still, I think it holds up as a popcorn flick. Just not as one of the all time greats.
 
Terminator 3 pales in comparison to the previous movies but it's still a fun action flick. Robocop 3 is just atrocious in every way.
 
Robocop 3 had some cool ideas and Fred Dekker made both Monster Squad and Night of the Creeps so he had the chops to direct a good film, Basil Poledouris was back, and Gary B. Kibbe was a good cinematographer (worked with John Carpenter for a long time), but it no longer had Peter Weller (a shame as he didn't do it due to scheduling conflicts but the movie came out a couple years after it was filmed anyway) or Dan O'Herlihey, they killed off Nancy Allen's Lewis early and unceremoniously (several deaths felt shortened due to violence, C.C.H. Pounder's character as well), it was stuck with a PG-13 rating to get kids to watch it due to the action figures, videogames, and cartoon (Ghostbusters 2 suffered similarly but the original Ghostbusters was a PG-13 film at best anyway, probably should have been PG), but the plot itself was weak (again some good ideas there), and the whole thing kind of felt rushed, gimped, and cheap. They also no longer were filming in Dallas or Houston like the first two films (respectively) so it just felt different.
The main villain was pretty weak too, not really the actor's fault as he came across as a douchebag you want killed, but he had nothing on Dick Jones, Clarence Boddicker, or Cain. Just lacking both background and personality.
The Rehab villains were never really explored or explained properly to build them up and in general they paled compared to Boddicker's or Cain's gangs who both had way more personality and background. The Splatterpunks could have been cooler had they not been PG-13'd and been more like the Death Wish 3 gang. The robo-ninja (well, ninjas) was cool and all but again under-utilized and with these three distinct villains/villain groups, plus OCP it felt like throwing a bunch of things at the wall to see what sticks. You'd bneed a longer rated R film that was re-written to really get the most out of the concepts within.

Terminator 3 just flat out suffered due to being entirely unnecessary after T2 ended the series perfectly. It had some stupidity like the "talk to the hand" with girly glasses trying to be the new "hasta la vista baby", but it was competently made, just not needed at all. Having an entirely new John Connor, and undoing the end of T2 were also huge demerits (much more so the latter; I know Edward Furlong had drug troubles so I can't blame them in doing a re-casting), but Terminator 3 is still significantly better than Genesys or Dark Fate.
 
T3 can't compare to 1 and 2. But it is a fine action film. Robo3 is straight garbage. Low budget garbage.
 
Terminator 3 was the beginning of the end for the series. Shame cos Arnold was still in shape they could have made a really good follow up to 2.

The female terminator was shit, they could have come up with something much more intimidating. Too much humour as well.

I wish James Cameron had directed and done another epic story like 2 which was so clever and well made. Brilliant storyline. Anyway none of the Terminators exist after 2. Also there is only one Robocop movie, one Jaws, one BHC, 4 Rambos (Last blood omg) 5 Rockys (Rocky Balboa exists Rocky 5 doesn't) Oh and only 3 Star Wars movie ofc. (And one Highlander)

3 seems to be one too many in most cases. A bit like bands calling the 3rd album the difficult one as most bands only have enough material for first couple of albums.

I digress. Final answer T3 easily but it should never be spoken of in the same sentence as the original 2.
 
Back
Top