[Movies] Talk about the last movie you saw 2: Electric Threadaloo

[GasBandit]

Satire in not required to be comedy. It can simply be an exaggerated viewpoint. Which Robocop is, whether straightforward or not.

Satire requires the use of humor, irony or extreme exaggeration. Robocop's depiction of corporatization was neither humorous nor ironic, and was more extrapolated than exaggerated. The movie has satirical elements, but mostly as comic relief (especially the commercials). Just because Arachnophobia had some funny lines in it didn't make it a comedy (despite what the trailers had us believe). The corporatization of the police force was meant as commentary, but it was portrayed in a believable manner - it could be seen as a logical construct of the world portrayed. The ALIEN franchise has corporations running everything, too, but it isn't satire either.

 

[Ravenpoe]

Satire requires the use of humor, irony or extreme exaggeration. Robocop's depiction of corporatization was neither humorous nor ironic, and was more extrapolated than exaggerated. The movie has satirical elements, but mostly as comic relief (especially the commercials). Just because Arachnophobia had some funny lines in it didn't make it a comedy (despite what the trailers had us believe). The corporatization of the police force was meant as commentary, but it was portrayed in a believable manner - it could be seen as a logical construct of the world portrayed. The ALIEN franchise has corporations running everything, too, but it isn't satire either.

When's the last time you watched RoboCop? It opens with a very darkly funny scene of the malfunctioning ED-209. Even the late Roger Ebert agrees:

"This is a very funny scene. (Whether it was even funnier before the MPAA Code and Ratings Administration requested trims in it is, I suppose, a moot point.) It is funny in the same way that the assembly line in Chaplin's "Modern Times" is funny - because there is something hilarious about logic applied to a situation where it is not relevant."

 

[fade]

Yeah, I'm going to have to disagree with you about the lack of humor. Many of the scenes in that movie are intended to be funny. But the rest is splitting hairs. I say exaggerated, you say extrapolated. We're in pure opinion territory at this point.

 

[Yoshimickster]

Plus there were like, silly commercials all through-out the movie satirizing how fucked such a future would be. "Yamaha, you pick the heart!"

 

[PatrThom]

So yeah, I prefer Asimov. If only Verhoeven had done I, Robot.

I want a good Foundation movie. Mainly because I want a good Second Foundation movie.
Starship Troopers was unequivocally an ironic criticism of war movies, specifically the ones that romanticize war.

--Patrick

 

[GasBandit]

When's the last time you watched RoboCop? It opens with a very darkly funny scene of the malfunctioning ED-209.

Yeah, I'm going to have to disagree with you about the lack of humor.

Plus there were like, silly commercials all through-out the movie satirizing how fucked such a future would be. "Yamaha, you pick the heart!"

Robocop has satirical elements, but it is not a satire. ... Robocop is an action sci-fi cop movie played straight, beyond things like "I'D BUY THAT FOR A DOLLAR"

The movie has satirical elements, but mostly as comic relief (particularly the commercials)

I said it! Twice! It's not rocket surgery guys. There are satirical elements to it, yes, but the corporate police commentary is played straight.

 

[Frank]

Yeah, I'm going to have to disagree with you about the lack of humor. Many of the scenes in that movie are intended to be funny. But the rest is splitting hairs. I say exaggerated, you say extrapolated. We're in pure opinion territory at this point.

They can fix you. They can fix anything.[DOUBLEPOST=1490640248,1490639988][/DOUBLEPOST]

I haven't said anything about satire. That was other posters. Frankly I think the term is being thrown around too lightly. I wouldn't consider the book OR the movie satire. At least not compared to, say, Bill the Galactic Hero. Robocop has satirical elements, but it is not a satire. Life of Brian is satire. Airplane! is satire. Office Space is satire. Robocop is an action sci-fi cop movie played straight, beyond things like "I'D BUY THAT FOR A DOLLAR"

You confuse parody and satire I think.[DOUBLEPOST=1490640306][/DOUBLEPOST]

Airplane! is the purest form of satire: a Parody.

Heh, woops to my last post. Didn't read every post before posting.

Satire does not require humour, that's just one of the methods it can employ.

 

[Dave]

Conversely, I wouldn't call Airplane! a satire. The satirical parts it has are coincidental as it plays on those aspects purely for the humor. Life of Brian, yes.

Airplane! is most certainly a satire. The 1960's & 1970's had a plethora of "disaster" movies. This parodies these. Also, look up the movie "Zero Hour". Airplane! is almost a 1:1 reshoot of it.

 

[Frank]

Satire requires the use of humor, irony or extreme exaggeration. Robocop's depiction of corporatization was neither humorous nor ironic, and was more extrapolated than exaggerated. The movie has satirical elements, but mostly as comic relief (especially the commercials). Just because Arachnophobia had some funny lines in it didn't make it a comedy (despite what the trailers had us believe). The corporatization of the police force was meant as commentary, but it was portrayed in a believable manner - it could be seen as a logical construct of the world portrayed. The ALIEN franchise has corporations running everything, too, but it isn't satire either.

There I go not reading all the posts again.

I believe Robocop's depiction of corporatization was very exaggerated at the time. How were we to know it wouldn't be by today?

 

[Ravenpoe]

I said it! Twice! It's not rocket surgery guys. There are satirical elements to it, yes, but the corporate police commentary is played straight.

You expect me to read things before replying? Pfft.


Ok, you did say that, and I think I see where the disagreement is coming from. You're saying Robocop isn't purely a satire, because it isn't, it's a blend of many different genres and themes, as most good movies are. But I feel it is perfectly fine to call it a social satire, because that doesn't mean it isn't also a thriller, a cyberpunk action movie, etc.

 

[fade]

I said it! Twice! It's not rocket surgery guys. There are satirical elements to it, yes, but the corporate police commentary is played straight.

I read it both times. I still don't think that excludes it as a satire. I also don't agree it's played straight. I think nearly every scene is an exaggeration, not a straight play. But that's the opinion part.[DOUBLEPOST=1490641828,1490641623][/DOUBLEPOST]

Airplane! is most certainly a satire. The 1960's & 1970's had a plethora of "disaster" movies. This parodies these. Also, look up the movie "Zero Hour". Airplane! is almost a 1:1 reshoot of it.

I'm well aware of that (and Airport 75, as I pointed out above) I still have difficulty calling a parody a satire. A satire has the connotation of some social institution, and some kind of social aim. Parodying a movie doesn't really have that social aspect to it. I guess you could argue that it was an attempt to call attention to the over-the-top nature of disaster films. Maybe.

Lest ye think it's just me:

E.g. https://www.cliffsnotes.com/cliffsn...hats-the-difference-between-parody-and-satire

 

[GasBandit]

I read it both times.

Yeah, that part was more for the other knuckleheads.

I guess you could argue that it was an attempt to call attention to the over-the-top nature of disaster films. Maybe.

That is exactly what it was. It was the movie equivalent of "DISASTER AM SRS BZNS"

Lest ye think it's just me:

E.g. https://www.cliffsnotes.com/cliffsn...hats-the-difference-between-parody-and-satire

Parody is a subset of satire. Satire uses creative work to make humorous commentary about a real life concept, though the work itself and the real life example being satirized may be entirely unrelated. Parody goes further, and makes the real life thing being satirized part of the explicit work. That cliff note definition has got it the wrong-way-around, it mistakes broader scope for distinct difference.

 

[fade]

But I don't agree with your categorization that parody must be satirical. It doesn't have to comment on anything. It can be purely humorous.

 

[GasBandit]

But I don't agree with your categorization that parody must be satirical. It doesn't have to comment on anything. It can be purely humorous.

It innately mocks its own subject material. That it is a form of commentary is the basis of its legal protection.

 

[fade]

No disagreement there, but mocking and satire aren't the same thing.

 

[Null]

Airplane! isn't a satire, it's a parody of disaster movies, and a specific few of those in particular.

Life of Brian and Office Space are both satires.

Robocop is also a satire - not only of commercialization and oligarchy, but also of the whole "rogue (ex-)cop on a roaring rampage of avenge" genre that Chuck Norris (among others) did so much work in.

 

[Gruebeard]

I want a good Foundation movie. Mainly because I want a good Second Foundation movie.
Starship Troopers was unequivocally an ironic criticism of war movies, specifically the ones that romanticize war.

--Patrick

I originally gave you a brofist on the Foundationl bit, but had to retract it for the Second Foundation. Not that I didn't like it. I did. But the telepathy part that grew out from the Mule ruined the later Foundation books (that Asimov's publisher had to nearly force him to write) and I blame Second Foundation for that.

But yeah, a Foundation movie.[DOUBLEPOST=1490644799,1490644506][/DOUBLEPOST]

I said it! Twice! It's not rocket surgery guys. There are satirical elements to it, yes, but the corporate police commentary is played straight.

As I understand it (I never actually read it) the cannibalism stuff is played straight in A Modest Proposal.

I also don't think delivering a joke deadpan makes it not a joke.

 

[fade]

You know, this is a really pedantic argument. Call it what you want, I didn't care for Starship Troopers. But Robocop, Airplane!, and Life of Brian were awesome.

 

[Gruebeard]

I still think you ought to give it a second viewing, especially since you liked Robocop.

If you've got it hanging around in a couple months with nothing else to do.

 

[GasBandit]

Airplane! isn't a satire, it's a parody of disaster movies, and a specific few of those in particular.

Parody is a subset of satire, and though it leaned heavily on to specific movies, it was a satire of the genre as a whole.

Robocop is also a satire - not only of commercialization and oligarchy, but also of the whole "rogue (ex-)cop on a roaring rampage of avenge" genre that Chuck Norris (among others) did so much work in.

It didn't satirize that so much as it just participated in it.

As I understand it (I never actually read it) the cannibalism stuff is played straight in A Modest Proposal.

I also don't think delivering a joke deadpan makes it not a joke.

there's a difference between deadpan delivery and something being played straight. The former is meant to elevate the absurdity, while the latter is simply unironic use of a trope.

Really, by you guys' definition, every single movie that didn't Pioneer a genre is a de facto satire of that genre.

 

[fade]

It almost seems like you don't remember Robocop. It's clearly a wild send-up of all these things.

 

[PatrThom]

I originally gave you a brofist on the Foundationl bit, but had to retract it for the Second Foundation. Not that I didn't like it. I did. But the telepathy part that grew out from the Mule ruined the later Foundation books (that Asimov's publisher had to nearly force him to write) and I blame Second Foundation for that.

I've mainly read the first three (plus Prelude). I think they would make great movies IF they could be distilled into 90-120min worth of script, each. I agree that the Mule was a little too deus ex machina-y, except that in this case the d-e-m is what creates the main plots of the story, and is not the means to its resolution like they usually are. Don't forget that there are also those half a dozen or so people who all were so sure they knew where F2 was.
Hmm...maybe not a movie. Independent miniseries? They're all the rage these days.

there's a difference between deadpan delivery and something being played straight.

...and Leslie Nielsen was good at both.

--Patrick

 

[GasBandit]

It almost seems like you don't remember Robocop. It's clearly a wild send-up of all these things.

That's what people tell themselves when they aren't comfortable with the fact that they like a by-the-numbers rogue cop action movie with a sci-fi twist. It was no more satire than Demolition Man, though both had satirical elements.

And neither the book nor the movie versions of Starship Troopers were satire either. Anyone who thinks Heinlein was being subtle and clever about satire obviously hasn't read enough Heinlein, and the movie was just straightforward bang-bang-bang invading aliens schlock.

 

[fade]

Really? I have no fear of admitting I like silly things, but come on. The movie specifically calls all that stuff out. There are scenes that serve no other purpose but to make the point. I mean, when it comes down to it, on plot points Airplane! is a by the numbers movie, too. But it's also a parody precisely because it's by the numbers.

 

[PatrThom]

I think when some people in the last couple of pages used the word "satire," they actually meant to use "subversion."

--Patrick

 

[GasBandit]

Really? I have no fear of admitting I like silly things, but come on. The movie specifically calls all that stuff out. There are scenes that serve no other purpose but to make the point. I mean, when it comes down to it, on plot points Airplane! is a by the numbers movie, too. But it's also a parody precisely because it's by the numbers.

It does more than hit the numbers, it draws great big clownshoes on the numbers and smushes every number with a pie in the face.[DOUBLEPOST=1490648998,1490648859][/DOUBLEPOST]

I think when some people in the last couple of pages used the word "satire," they actually meant to use "subversion."

--Patrick

Except I don't think Robocop's treatment of corporatism or cop revenge were intended to be subversive, I assert that they were both simply elements of the movie meant to be taken at face value, same as they were in ALIEN or Dirty Harry.

 

[fade]

I don't know what to say. I guess I saw clown shoes in Robocop and you didn't.

 

[PatrThom]

I don't think Robocop's treatment of corporatism or cop revenge were intended to be subversive, I assert that they were both simply elements of the movie meant to be taken at face value, same as they were in ALIEN or Dirty Harry.

I agree. Robocop's treatment of corporatism was supposed to be irony, not subversion.
Airplane!, on the other hand...

--Patrick

 

[GasBandit]

I agree. Robocop's treatment of corporatism was supposed to be irony, not subversion.

Then you don't actually agree with me. Because my assertion is it was not ironic either, it was straightforward. It was simply set dressing/worldbuilding to enable the plot the writer desired, with a dash of culture commentary thrown in. OCP, Weyland-Yutani, Potayto, Potahto.

 

[fade]

The ridiculous death rate of the cops, the silly OCP no-kill directive, entering old detroit is a death sentence, the antagonists deaths, ED209's over-the-top malfunction, the commercials, Miguel Ferrer's coke and hooker party ending with a hand grenade... I took all of this as intentionally goofy, and purposefully over-the-top.

 

[GasBandit]

The ridiculous death rate of the cops, the silly OCP no-kill directive, entering old detroit is a death sentence, the antagonists deaths, ED209's over-the-top malfunction, the commercials, Miguel Ferrer's coke and hooker party ending with a hand grenade... I took all of this as intentionally goofy, and purposefully over-the-top.

And I took it as the setting/plot for an action movie set in a dystopian alternate near-future. Consider the opening scene of Demolition Man, where Simon Phoenix has carved out his own section of LA and made it a "no go" zone. Consider how over-the-top it all was as well. But it wasn't satire, it was just storycraft.

Though Bob Morton's coke and hooker party looked about right for the 80s, hand grenade notwithstanding

 

[PatrThom]

Then you don't actually agree with me. Because my assertion is it was not ironic either, it was straightforward.

Ah, so you did not see it as the director saying, "Corporations are assholes," instead you saw it as, "These (specific) corporations are assholes."

--Patrick

 

[Ravenpoe]

They say that at its highest level, satire is identical to reality. Sounds like Robocop just worked too well on Gas.

If it helps any, Paul Verhoeven himself calls it a satire.

In an interview discussing the remakes of Robocop and Total Recall:

“I think that is a mistake,” [Verhoeven] continues in an interview with Collider. “Both those movies needed the distance of satire or comedy to situate it for audiences. Playing it straight without any humour is a problem and not an improvement.” Verhoeven’s films have long been noted for their stylized depictions of extreme violence, though his tongue-in-cheek sense of humor has sometimes been misinterpreted or unnoticed.


Source: http://www.indiewire.com/2016/09/paul-verhoeven-robocop-total-recall-remakes-failed-1201727904/

 

[Frank]

The ridiculous death rate of the cops, the silly OCP no-kill directive, entering old detroit is a death sentence, the antagonists deaths, ED209's over-the-top malfunction, the commercials, Miguel Ferrer's coke and hooker party ending with a hand grenade... I took all of this as intentionally goofy, and purposefully over-the-top.

Exactly, the ED-209 malfunction where an executive is gunned down in front of the whole board in an insanely unsafe demonstration and the only response out of the CEO is to turn to the guy responsible and says he's very disappointed is about as big a mockery of corporate culture as it gets.

 

[GasBandit]

They say that at its highest level, satire is identical to reality. Sounds like Robocop just worked too well on Gas.

If it helps any, Paul Verhoeven himself calls it a satire.

He's saying you need satire and humor to keep it light (IE, the comedy relief), not that the whole concept of the movie is satire. Devoid of the humorous elements, the movie's remake became ponderous.

The whole quote is:

At this point aside from Showgirls all of your Hollywood movies have sequels or remakes or both. I always wondered if you watch them and what you think about them?

VERHOEVEN: Oh sure, I watch them. Somehow they seem to think that the lightness of say Total Recall and Robocop is a hindrance. So they take these somewhat absurd stories and make them much too serious. I think that is a mistake. Especially in Robocop when he awakens they gave him the same brain. He’s a horribly injured and amputated victim, which is horrifying and tragic from the very beginning. So we didn’t do that in Robocop. His brain is gone and he has only flashes of memory and needs to go to a computer to find out who he even is. I think by not having a robot brain, you make the movie much heavier and I don’t think that helps the movie in anyway. It becomes more silly or absurd, but in the wrong way. Both those movies needed the distance of satire or comedy to situate it for audiences. Playing it straight without any humour is a problem and not an improvement.

Also note that he thinks Robocop doesn't have a human brain, when it's explicitly said in universe they use (what's left of) Murphy's brain.

And, in all things, remember, George Lucas apparently didn't want Han to shoot first, and the creator of the Graphics Interchange Format thinks it sounds like peanut butter.