@Renovatio said:

This movie should have been more violent and R-rated. The director had all of these great themes in the film (free will, privatised state control, etc...) but without the violence there is no real consequence and nothing really at stake.

Sad to see it so sanitised, especially when the Paul Verhoeven version was so much more intense and visceral. Neutering it didn't turn it into a multi-film franchise as I'm sure the studio were hoping for. Ironically, it seems that those type of comic book movies are heading to be more bloody with Logan receiving an R-rating, although that film doesn't have any of the adult and important themes that Robocop has.

I totaly agree with you!

This movie should not have be made at all. It feels totally flat. While the original isn’t a cinematic masterpiece, it still has some original ideas and message. And yes, it is Verhoven-like violence ;)

More violence does not necessarily equal a better film. It has a different goal than the original, which I still prefer, but this was definitely better than RoboCop 2, in my opinion. The original and remake have strength in different departments that each could've benefitted the other. I liked how it was by an explosion it happened in the remake because the way he was obliterated and shot through the head in the original didn't really make sense in case of him making it in any way. However, in the briefing, in the remake, they mention he'd go blind in one eye but when we see him later his eyes look great - and identical. Even though they did a better job at exploring the relationship between Murphy and his wife in the remake as it was quite central, I don't think Joel Kinnaman pulled off the role, and didn't establish a lot of sympathy, pre-explosion, for me. His wife, played by Abbie Cornish, carried him in that respect. The partner aspect in the remake kinda just felt tacked on just to tick a box in resemblance to the original, which did a great job with it.

Touching on the violence as mentioned by OP. The combat that we see throughout is nothing special to write home about. Frankly, it was dull for the most part. The original also made a better use of their villains as the guy responsible for Murphy's death is merely a footnote. There's not really any proper closure on the corrupt police chief either. Even though I enjoyed that they explored the family relationship more this time around, it took too much of the film, which they could've spread out on other subjects. I'm a bit split on the news segments Samuel L. Jackson, I think they took too much time as well, but I see what they were trying to do. Gary Oldman and Michael Keaton both did a fantastic job in their roles. I think they nailed the patient-robot-relationship better, too, in the remake.

In spite of many good aspects, the original for sure comes out on top. The remake had some good stuff going for it, but they didn't all add up to something great. Just a missed opportunity.