@@hakasims To be fair, TERFs are delicate snowflakes who can't handle even the mildest form of criticism. They report-bombed a meme I made on Reddit depicting the science on transgender medicine as an RPG in any argument against TERFs and they succeeded in getting my account suspended. The worst part about that was knowing dozens of TERFs got notifications that they got a Trans meme removed, TERF joy is poison to my soul.
@Filthy acts at a reasonable price Hahahaha you wouldnt believe... I've been rooting for the Empire myself as a teen back in '77 before I began to open my eyes to the world I live in!
It is really interesting, though I think it was at least partially a happy accident. Apparently in early pre-production, Orion were considering Schwarzenegger for the role of Murphy/Robocop, but the effects team pointed out that they needed an actor with a slim physique to play Murphy because (as the video points out) the costume had to look plausible; on an actor with a bodybuilder's physique, the extra breadth and width the suit would need to move and function would look completely ridiculous.
@@turricanedtc3764 this is true, but the shared locker rooms and similar outfits (not more feminine ones for women) were decisions and those do remark the egalitarian nature of the police.
@JohnnyTheWolf They probably thought that would be too different. It always seems to me that they want to try and "recapture the magic". See: Men in Black immediately bringing K back.
@@harvest5218 Annoyingly, a lot of sequels are: 'reset character growth to start; and tell same story again.' I want _more_ character progression! (Then again, I'd but Robocop 2 for a dollar...)
if you havent ever seen the deleted scene where she is in the hospital at the end it explains she recovered, of course it was deleted therefore not canon i guess but meh robocop 2 wasnt the greatest anyway dont get me started on 3
About the similarity between Murphy and Lewis. The cherry on top is this: Nancy Allen and Peter Weller share the same birthday - and by strangest of strange coincidences, today, June 24, is their birthday.
I'm a transwoman. Robocop was one of the three movies I had on VHS as a young trying-to-be-a-boy. I watched it so many times I can practically quote it from memory. I considered it a struggle about finding an identity apart from the ones that were forced upon you by family, society, and (literal) programming. I didn't catch the mirroring with Lewis or his wife. I saw it mostly in ED-209 which was incapable of questioning its role or making independent decisions. It was Murphy's humanity that made him able to change, to discover his true self and embrace it. And he was nearly destroyed for it. I never saw it as a "trans narrative", but definitely one about transformation, acceptance, and growth. I may need to go back and watch it again now that I've transitioned. Maybe I'll see something I never let myself see before.
Huh, see about a year ago and I said that I didn't buy the Trans-reading. That makes a ton of sense; he's not equipped to articulate the gap between his identity as Murphy and his body as Robocop but it still causes him misery. Thank you for the comment; only a dialogue creates the fertile intellectual ground to understand something in a deeper way and not just as an iteration on pre-existing mental habits.
I always thought that Murphy lost his family due to him “dying”. If he lost his family before dying then it changes everything. Thank you for such an insightful reading.
That shot will annoy me until the day I die. Why couldn't they just green screen the actor falling? They would have had to superimpose the puppet on the same background. It's makes no sense!
There was a time portal, he was tried in the future for time crimes, and then the effect of putting him back made it look as though he was Stretch Armstronging it. Simple.
As a kid, Lewis was my favorite female character in anything. I thought she looked cool, was cool, and I honestly modeled a bunch of OCs after her when I was little lol.
One comment about James Cameron's female heroes Ripley and Sarah - that clip of Sarah in T2 was intended to show her losing her humanity, trying to become a killing machine to protect her future, not being a hero. That said, I agree that Cameron does impose traditional male heroic qualities on female characters to make them heroes, but in both those movies, they were motivated by wanting to protect a child. So I think his version of a female hero is jamming together extreme versions of both traditional male (strong fighters) and traditional female (protective mothers) qualities.
That's what bothers me most about Aliens. In the 1st movie she was simply a smart competent member of the crew. She assumed leadership bc she had to. There are no backstory. Everyone's motive (except Ash) was simply to survive. The idea that a woman is only a hero bc of motherhood is in itself a patriarchal idea, largely coming out of Christianity and the Mary myth. The most flawed scene in alien, is where she attempts to save the cat when her human crew members were in danger.
Not trying to be a dick here, but it's wild to me that you can watch Aliens and come away with the idea that Cameron thinks that female strength comes from abandoning womanhood to act like a man. He's specifically saying the opposite - that's the whole purpose of the Vazquez character. They even have Hudson ask her if she's ever been mistaken for a man to really drive the point home. She's the most aggressive and violent member of the space marines. Meanwhile, Ripley's strength comes not from the masculine instinct to destroy, but in her embracing of her mothering instincts (you could certainly question the progressiveness of this message today in 2019, but for 1986, it's pretty good). She becomes strong to protect Newt. The film's iconic image is of Ripley holding Newt on her hip with one arm, and brandishing a flame thrower with the other. The climactic fight is between the two mothers (Ripley and the Alien Queen)! I thought the Robocop stuff was great, but I had to comment on this, as it's an issue I've considered extensively.
Murphy/RoboCop, by film's end, favored the human side, the Murphy side, more, hence the final line being "Murphy," one of the more uplifting concluding lines I have ever heard. He was essentially reclaiming himself with just a one-word sentence.
IMO, once you get to the middle of the '80s, and all of the residual weirdness of the '70s is dead, you mostly have to look to indie and underground cinema to find the good stuff. RoboCop was the little movie that could, and I think that Verhoeven and co. got away with slipping a lot of things under the radar.
See also: Heathers, Sex Lies and Videotape, Blue Velvet, The Fly, Drugstore Cowboy, Do the Right Thing, Married to the Mob, Cinema Paradiso, and Tampopo.
You have given me an entirely new appreciation for the "They'll fix you, they fix everything" line and I can't thank you enough! Also, IT'S SO OBVIOUS they're doubles... So OBVIOUS I never saw it before! I am LOVING your videos; please keep it up!
10:50 so we transitively have Martine Verhoeven to thank as well for this gem of cinema for seeing what her hubby didn't right away. THANKS, MRS. VERHOEVEN!
I'd argue that the house tour scene is far more about his former home (and, by extension, his identity and humanity) becoming sterilized and commodified, and I'd read his punching of the TV screen as a futile--and very traditionally masculine--act of lashing out against the artificial face of corporate America, but I otherwise found the mirroring/doubling arguments quite compelling. I would also take a different read on his relationship with his family. While he is undoubtedly focusing on idealized memories, the memories may indicate his own insecurities about his masculinity more than they do any real disapproval from his wife and son. Murphy becomes obsessed over learning a gun trick that his son asked about in passing--and in a tone that suggests that he already idolized his father. So too, his mind latches onto a confrontational image of his wife, seemingly emasculating him with her disdain. In truth, though, he may have mis-remembered his wife's tone and body language precisely because he feels inadequate in his gender performance.
"seemingly emasculating him with her disdain. In truth, though, he may have mis-remembered his wife's tone and body language precisely because he feels inadequate in his gender performance" BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....No.
I think he'd be more annoyed at being shot to death and not being able to see his family ever again. Gender roles and masculinity would be the last thing on his mind.
Aron Marczylo I think it’s more complex than that. Ever try getting a group of people to write a single piece of dialogue for a character at once? The sheer number of people mutes any individuals creative inputs, until only a common group identity survives.
This is an interesting view on the film. I've always loved RoboCop, even as a wee baby who shouldn't have been watching it. I've personally never seen it that way so it's nice to hear someone speak on it like this. It really does have so many layers and that's why I've enjoyed it even more as I've grown older and my world views have broadened.
You seem to of missed a part of the wife saying she needs to talk. It is shown later that she was just playing with him and that what she “needs to talk” about is that she “loves him”. Murphy seemed to have a very idealic family life, which makes his trip down memory lane all the more heart breaking.
that's the beauty of this movie. the message isn't shoved down your throat like, "oh look, CEO business men bad" since RoboCop saved the Old Man, and never really killed him in part 2.
Yeah. It's a real stretch. Reading way too much into it. Deliberately choosing absurd interpretations of certain flashbacks. It's trying way too hard to apply a different meaning. Same thing as confirmation bias.
@@jevansturner She acknowledges that it's a stretch in the review itself, as much a thought experiment as a reading of the movie. Whether or not you think it's a valid reading, it is an interesting one.
Gibb Charron that's the thing. It was so forced and cringe-worthy that I really felt I was wasting my time hoping for some actual insight or profound thoughts. Finishing the video, I really wished I had spent the time watching something else.
feel bad about my comment now. I don't think theres anything wrong with applying a theory, and the movie has enough body disassociation that I think it was a valid target but its just that reading it through the lens of toxic masculinity or the language of fascism has more explanatory power. Trans theory didn't work for me on this movie buy applying it generated some useful ideas such as Lewis being a metaphorical mirror to Murphy.
Also, I don't think there's enough contextual material in the film to support the trans identity theory. It's fairly clear that their marriage failed as a result of him being pronounced dead and re-shaped to fit into the RoboCop mold, and there's very little to indicate that they had marital problems beforehand. The only expression of traditional masculinity that we see Murphy try to conform to in the opening of the movie is with the gun, and I think that this is more an expression of heroism and being a hero than it is something strictly masculine; to support this, Lewis also has a gun and also finds the story Murphy tells her amusing, indicating that she can empathise with this. While I agree that Lewis is Murphy's mirror in the scene where she talks to him for the first time after his death, I don't think this is carried over at all into his conversations with his wife because she doesn't look like him and doesn't behave like him. Even in the difference between the moments where she says, "I really need to tell you something!", I don't see enough context to support the conclusions you're drawing. Ultimately the film does lampoon gender roles, but this is done to critique masculinism and patriarchal constructs, rather than a message about Murphy's gender identity. He no more conforms to masculinity than Lewis does, nor does he even try to in the early part of the movie. His involuntary transformation into the company's ideal of masculinity says a lot about how they perceive strength, but it doesn't tell me anything about how Murphy viewed gender beforehand. There's really nothing to indicate in his memories or in his behaviour that he's trying super hard to conform to traditional masculinity. By that standard, Lewis is also trying to conform to traditional masculinity, but we also know that isn't true. I think it's fun to entertain these possibilities, but in this particular case I don't see the structural support for the theory. The entire home sequence is a testament to how his humanity was stripped away and how he lost his family as a result of it.
The trans theme seems like a stretch to me, but if one of my favourite movies of all time is even deeper than I thought, and more people can enjoy it on another level, that is awesome. I mean, I don't think I ever noticed that boardroom scene is one continuous take.
Verhoeven has done wonderful continuous takes in most of his films. But Verhoeven's continuous takes are different from Welles, De Palma's or Scorsese's continuous takes, because he doesn't want you to notice them. They are only there to drive the story forward.
I was about to post about the same thing. I'm not completely convinced that the trans angle was intentional but it does add an interesting layer to the movie which is ostensibly about transhumanism and finding your own identity... And Verhoeven is genius enough that it could be exactly how he intended it to be interpreted so... What do I know?
This is a fantastic analysis! I just wrapped up my masters this past year and I was studying masculinity in history. Videos like this are always so great to me as they both remind me why masculinity and hypermasculinity are important to study but also just remind me of how much fun I had studying them
it's all bullshit...Verhoeven had the actress slash off her hair to make her more tough and less aesthetically pleasing in order to fit into his ugliest depiction of a brutal society..one in which gender isn't an issue hence why the cops shower and dress together...just like they do in starship troopers... there is no way on this earth that the film Robocop is addressing ANY trans issues what so ever... of course in 2021 it's easy for people to attempt to read that there are trans issues in there...but there seriously ARE NOT
In my personal experience of trying to achieve the hyper masculine traits expected of me by my (grand)uncles between the ages of 11 and 20 (father out of picture completely, was/is incarcerated, parents were addicts, brothers and sister raised by grandmother since I was 6 and Im oldest for backstory) then finally snapped cause I couldnt meet the expectations they/I had set. Ended up diving deep into my own Jungian anima, after a few years contemplating who I really was, I became more secure in myself than ever before. Its easier to know yourself when youre not trying to fit somebody elses mold, a mold they dont even understand was also forced upon themselves originally and how much it stunted them.
A counterpoint to the James Cameron point. That shot of Sarah Connor IS her attempting a masculine "let's shoot the problem away with our guns" solution. But the narrative immediately shows how this is a wrong headed move, and how it takes a toll on her emotionally. She suffers by becoming a terminator macho lady lone gun doing it alone. She wins through collaboration with others and learning to trust. Also, as far as the writing of badass female characters in action movies who aren't trying to be ultra masc/macho to be badass... Rose from Titanic?
@@kryptonicification I wouldn't say Fish is wrong or overlooking stuff exactly. Like, I think I'd agree that Cameron's understanding of badass women is rooted in motherhood (especially since his actual mother was a WWII fighter pilot badass lady). It's just, in my reading of his films (as opposed to Fish's), I don't think the portrayal is of macho=good uncritically and consistently. Both readings are valid.
Interesting take. People forget that a movie can have multiple meanings, and that half the story of a movie is written by the watcher. I think that a LOT of these things are a stretch and could easily have much different meanings, but that's because I'm watching it. A lot of this may not even be necessarily about being trans per se, but reclaiming those aspects of your personality that are coded by society as feminine and thus supposed to be rejected.
lol'd at the James Cameron reference. Verhoeven studied Cameron's films prior to making Robocop, but that aside, Cameron's films frequently featuring very strong/masculine female characters reflects his personal life, where he was married to a string of powerful women who occupied traditionally male roles (and in the case of ex wife Kathryn Bigelow) focused their art on machismo.
I honestly think he's just fascinated by a specific kind of gender nonconformity and role switching. Like, with the exception of Arnold, his male leads are often weak, submissive, or feminized in some way. Jack Dawson is probably the best example; he's an androgynous manic pixie dream boy who gets stuffed in the fridge to further Rose's character development. Just a complete inversion of a typical male lead in an action film.
16:14 - That's a really interesting (and valid) interpretation, and to be honest I hadn't noticed the difference in the takes used until this was pointed out. I can't help but think, though, that on one hand it might be as simple as the editor or director preferring the framing or delivery of the actor's second line ("I love you") in the second take. On another hand, I recently watched videos of some panels and interviews with the case and crew of the movie, and one thing that Peter Weller mentioned was that in the original script, Lewis's "Murphy, it's *you*" and confronting Emil at the gas station happened before Robocop's dream/memory of Murphy's murder (and he pointed out that the "standard" Hollywood storytelling method has physical stimuli trigger the metaphysical realisation). According to Weller, Verhoeven emphatically insisted that the "dream" had to happen first - that Murphy's "soul" had to begin to reassert itself on its own, and then have his soul drive his subsequent perceptions and actions. So how about this for an idea? The first time we see flashbacks is when Murphy is being worked on in the ER. Murphy is consciously aware that his body has been irretrievably maimed and that he has almost certainly been mortally wounded - he is obviously and understandably afraid of dying, and so the flashbacks represent moments in his life where he felt fear and concern. Being a good role model to his son in a crapsack world ("Can you do that, Dad?"), his family waving goodbye (as he knows he's been transferred to a much more dangerous precinct), and his wife confronting him ("I really need to tell you something") without the resolution we see later. Could it be possible that this version of the flashback is a representation coloured by the fear that Murphy's soul felt on hearing those words - another example of the "dream"? For what it's worth, my interpretation of the flashbacks we see later when Murphy (as RoboCop) walks around his former house is that on some level, Murphy's soul is trying to present those events as they actually happened without the veneer of fear - he *was* an honourable man, a good father, part of a happy family, and his wife *did* love him. Peter Weller does an extraordinary job through physical acting (19:00) of expressing the mounting rage of Murphy's soul as he realises what was taken from him, and to my mind the virtual realtor's "Have you thought it over?" is another example of the crass corporate attitude which dismisses the loss of his home, family and life as just another business opportunity. Sorry for the ramble, I hope this makes sense and seems interesting.
Logan Cracraft He’s hunting known criminals, who are at the least guilty of attempted murder, armed robbery(highest level), and numerous other small charges. Part of Verhooven’s genius is how he has the protagonist act as judge jury and executioner, such as blowing the balls off the man assaulting the woman, or the lab where he busts in and kills anyone that he feels threatened by. It’s fear of the future privatization of the police, where we’re basically under Marshal Law. Unarmed civilians are shot by the police with little or no consequences, far too often. As well as invasion of privacy, and escalations of non threatening situations. When there is no consequences for harassing a citizen, because of a hunch, or a stereotyping, etc., abuse of power has become the norm. Robocop
"She also doesn't shed her femininity..." Nancy Allen had several haircuts until Verhoeven was satisfied that her look was neutral enough for her to not be considered a romantic interest for Murphy. Jussayin.
I’ve seen Robocop somewhere between 10-20 times, have spent an ungodly amount of time thinking and talking about it, and I have never considered ANY of the stuff you bring up. What an amazing movie.
Given its one of the first R-Rated movies I've watched as a kid (sorry Mom), this is an amazing insight on one of my childhood favorites. Of course I can't say I understand the science of filmmaking, but I know a good movie when I see one. This gives me a greater appreciation for how's it's made from a director's perspective (because he loves his symbolisms) as well how's it's studied.
“Throughout the first years of our lives we were forced not just to internalize a few aspects of capital, but to build up a structure of internalizations. As our capacity for coherent natural self-regulation was systematically broken down, a new system of self regulation took its place, a coherent system, incorporating all the aspects of self-repression. We participated in capital’s ongoing project of colonization by colonizing ourselves, by continually working at the construction of a unitary character-structure (character armor), a unitary defense against all drives, feelings, and desires which we learned were dangerous to express. In the place of our original transparent relations to our world, we created a structure of barriers to our selfexpression which hides us from ourselves and others.”Jay Amrod and Lev Chernyi, “Beyond Character and Morality: Towards Transparent Communications and Coherent Organization.” Howard J. Ehrlich ed. Reinventing Anarchy, Again (San Francisco, California: AK Press, 1996), 321
@@janwestermeyer8426in theory it would mean alternative systems that are not dependent upon closing minds to function Gurdjieff the fourth way for example where people function outside our existing paradigms and go beyond basic conception Capital would not be there to make useless to ourselves
I think its important to note, that in my opinion femininity is not the opposite of hyper masculinity, not even masculinity. Core ideas of rejecting programing, social expectations or whatever its called does surely applay to trans persons inhertly. But I think the movie is more about answering the question "Is that I?"
Robocop is a social commentary that ultimately touches on what makes someone human whilst showing the folly of corporations. It also shows how money overrides democracy and how America's political system is a farce (or at least how it could become a farce). Robocop being a trans icon? I'm sure if you look hard enough you could find things to justify the claim, but I don't think that's the intention. All forms of art can be interpreted differently from person to person though. That being said, if you want some intended trans related symbolism/metaphors I swear the Matrix is full of them.
Retro Cynical It’s also about how capitalism will lead to a bigger gap between the wealthy and the poor. How the number of poor grows, when everything becomes privatized. There were some who thought that cities were going to privatize police, just as the prison system did. Verhooven has us rooting for a cop who can kill at will, depending upon the situation. Even when he doesn’t kill, he shot the balls off of a man who was assaulting a woman. How many women, in the moment, wouldn’t say yes to having their rapist’s, even if just attempted, balls shot off? It’s a nod to the Judge Dredd comics as well. A Mega City, corporate police, gentrification on a large scale, with the crime so bad that police can’t handle it. And of course, the “man” is funding the crime to make the area worthless, so everyone will sell. He put a lot into the film.
At the end of the day, one of the things that distinguishes art from other uses of media is that art *endures.* It remains relevant over years and decades, with new generations finding new meanings in it. I doubt Verhoeven and/or Ed Neumeier literally intended Robocop to be a movie about transsexuality, but the smart way it plays with non-binary concepts means it can be seen by viewers as applicable to all sorts of situations - transsexuality included. (And what's really funny to think is that with current trends in transhumanism and body modification being as they are, it probably won't be too many decades until the movie can be taken absolutely literally, and Robocop is held up as an icon among cyborgs.)
It's to shoe-horn nu-age garbage ideals into an old movie. The irony of a corporation of over-commercialized internet sex-based body-part worship disguised as "unique", applied to a sexless Robocop and OCP does not escape me.
any read of a movie is dead-author stuff, unless you are just restating something the creator already made clear. One being one you dont happen to like changes nothing. Also - "new age"? What is this? 1992? LULZY
While the satire about toxic masculinity is very evident in the movie I never saw the trans aspect of Robocop before, which is interesting. However I think the movie is more about political satire, or at least that's how I interpret it: One of the very first things we learn is that cops are considering going to a strike because they are about to bought by a private company, that sequence alone is a great comment about the police's role, privatisation, the news and their anchors and well, capitalism. Btw I think you should do an analysis on Alien, especially in contrast to Aliens. I think the original is a great movie about sexual violence and femininity, in addition to Cameron's "strong female character". Very happy to see your comment on that, I was saying the same thing for years
Love Robocop even more now thanks to this video. That is so crazy though about those two slightly different takes for the same memory! Would love to see what a Robocop 2 that pushed these themes more would look like.
Great Scot! I have never thought of the societal gender layer to ROBOCOP before, but it feels like learning that there's more spices in your favorite dish than you knew about. It actually makes me love the film more. Your analysis rocks!
That's an interesting way to see it. I had never thought of it in that sense. I had interpreted this as asking hard questions about what makes us human with a framing of an action/sci-fi movie, a critique of consumerism and asking questions about the consequences of privatizing public institutions.
She is trying her hardest to let you understand she is completely nuts. Maybe to impress a les-bo or to get less prison time for the schoo1 sh0-0ting she has lined up.
The main theme even follows this reading, starting out with the incomplete main phrase on masculine associated instruments, finally culminating in the complete phrase with the hyper-masculine horn bravado that itself then gives way to something softer, played on new instruments, which then builds into it's own phrase that includes lots of woodwinds and soft horns and twinkling typically-feminine associated sounds.
It’s amazing to see someone give a brief criticism and discussion of James Cameron’s female characters. I want to see somebody ACTUALLY have a conversation about Ripley.
@@MaggieMaeFish That would be great because right now I have no idea what in your eyes separates pushing the boundaries of femininity as opposed to "shedding your femininity", especially when Lewis showing empathy with Murphy counts as her expressing her femininity whereas blowing up the bad guy whilst crawling through sewage and being in unimaginable pain doesn't count as "shedding her femininity" and not behaving like a masculine stereotype.
For me, that was also the most interesting thing in this critique. I've always felt weird about that, especially with Cameron dating Linda Hamilton... It really seemed to me like he was fetishizing female masculinity.
@Kaveighleen Jacaster Interesting but not related to my point. Suffering pain is one thing and certainly could be argued to be inherently feminine but enduring pain is definitely a masculine thing to do, hence the phrase 'manning up' and the social stigma against men crying or otherwise showing pain: that is what I was referencing.
I think I had an epiphany watching this... Murphy became something more; why should we all -- humans who construct concepts like identity -- be bound them and unable to grow, or change them into something new? Something *more?* Humanity explores, examines and evolves; so too should society and the concepts that uphold it. The body can't grow if its bones remain the same as they always have been. I think I need to do some self-exploration of my own now... Thank you for making this for all of us. I can't wait to see what you choose to analyze and explore next, as well as how it will transform us viewers and our view of this ever-changing world we all share.
My little trans heart is breaking 😭💕🏳️⚧️ I didn't watch this movie as a kid bc it was too violent and scary, I didn't watch it as an adult bc i assumed it was just a violent sexist old action movie. And now I'm crying my eyes out over here bc I'm a year and a half into transition and I just found out that I'm RoboCop. Thanks Maggie!
My mum and I were just talking about how great Robocop is! The symbolism in that movie is so layered and complex that you could talk about it for years and only begin to scratch the surface.
The first fake commercial break on the movie: A doctor saying: "Are you prepared for that big operation?", and finishing with the same doctor saying: "We care."
Maggie,I think you're great. But while you made some good points regarding duality and the cinematography and editing choices, you lost me near the halfway mark. I suppose it could be said that films dealing with transformation, especially the subgenre of cyberpunk, can get metaphoric with LBGT themes from time to time it's still open for subjective interpretation. My take is something more organic, however. Consider the scene in where Murphy, as RoboCop has the PTSD memory of his murder. On a monitor, we see a few fuzzy images of Clarence giving off the POV headshot. Murphy gets a fraction of his memory back over the course of the film, with context becoming more clear. Those memories are in no particular order: TJ Laser ad/son looking up to his police officer dad. "You are a hero in my eyes" Halloween, which includes the photo and quite possibly Murphy's wife telling him she loves him.. His death. (Follow up EDIT: these fragmented memories are in a 24 hr period before his "death"; this means it took 2 1/2 months for him to be rebuilt as RoboCop, given the drunken OCP NYE scene) The morning of him going to work that morning of his death isn't a memory from his POV, as he would be driving to work and he can,in his final moments, imagine that his family is waving him goodbye.(EDIT :it could be his rear view mirror) it was clearly stated that Murphy was a transfer on short notice. There is nothing to suggest that his marriage was on the rocks. The idea that he "becomes" his wife in his memory is flimsy. In most marriages,spouses do have life struggles, but responsibility is shared (or should be) so he would see her as an equal. If there is any strain on the marriage it would be work related, as there are a high number of officers being wounded and/or killed in the line of duty and the OCP meddling is an indirect (or direct) cause of this. Instead, both wife and son are "proud" of Murphy because he is a police officer. Murphy even tells Lewis this, when he references TJ Laser. (how did you miss that?) It is possible that Murphy's wife is frustrated that he was transferred in a more dangerous and challenging precinct (Metro South, I guess is more laid back?) but it isn't really her husband's fault so she has to tell him she loves him as the next morning he will leave for the new assignment. This will be one of the last things she will say to him.Makes perfect sense. RoboCop having the TJ lazaer inspired gun twirl might be due to Murphy's subconscious memoryas he considers it is what a "good super hero" might do; but there's also a chance it was part of RoboCop's programming, as pop culture and consumerism influences the inventions,concepts and media. Okay,maybe the data spike is flipping off Cecil, I'll give you that much. When RoboCop/Murphy goes through his old house, the virtual real estate agent's tone is seen as adding insult to injury. Why was the Halloween photos and the coffee mug left behind, with nobody packing them up or throwing them away? My interpretation was that,Murphy's wife,upon hearing her husband's death, got upset and smashed a few things in anger....once she seen "RoboCop"on TV news. It's more likely her rage was on the day her husband died on the operating table, an OCP and other companies may have owned the house, so she would have to move out soon.. But either she or her son put these items/memories out in the open to warn the next family as "corporations" like OCP ruin lives. Murphy's humanity is ripped from him.His identity as a husband an father is gone ("I can feel them,but I can't remember them") but during the course of the film he gets part of that identity back. First the memories and thoughts. Then the "eye opening", Soon the visor comes off. Then the end, which calls back to an earlier scene with Morton and Lewis ("He doesn't have a name. He is our product") that's why there's satisfaction when The Old Man asks "What's your name?" and Murphy gives his own name. Earlier, he refers to himself in third person, suggesting by thistime when the Old Man asks, RoboCop would rather be human again, or at least giving "Murpphy" the proper respect he deserves. *whew* Keep the peace -DjS
Amen, brother. The mental contorcionism required by the author of this video to force the idea of a LGBT motivation is mind blowing. Sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar.
@@chpsilva I wouldn't go so far as to say Maggie was forcing anything. Subjective interpretations, right or wrong, that's the cigar. While most of my response above was from memory, shortly after posting I rewatched the film, and edited in two more minor , yet significant, observations,..one of which skated right by me because I never gave it much thought (Murphy's 'death' being November 1st) . I will give some credit where it is due: it gave me an excuse to watch the film again.
The James Cameron dig was sort of weird. I assume it’s in reference to Linda Hamilton and Sigourney Weaver? He only created one of the characters those women portray. Would you call Rose Dewitt or Lindsey Brigman soldier moms? Also, Sarah Conner is kind of hapless and scared in The Terminator. Until the very end, everything that happens is sort of beyond her comprehension and out of her control. And again, Cameron did not create Ellen Ripley..... So I guess all we’re left with is T2? That’s his only movie with a soldier-mom of his own devising that I can think of. Unless Jake Sully has some kids we didn’t hear about....
Okay, I did not think it was possible to enjoy Robocop- a movie I’ve watched countless times and is one of my absolute favorites- any more than I already do, but god damn, this was a thoroughly enjoyable video essay. Like I’m going to rewatch Robocop tonight with all this fresh in mind. Thanks for making another dope video.
Ah, so you're arguing that the Cyborg Manifesto was actually written in 2019, then fell into a wormhole and traveled back to 1984? I'd watch THAT movie!!!!
To defend the role of Ripley in the purest and most best faith defense sans Cameron (who was likely coked out of his mind for much of the production since it was a herculean task to get done) as someone who has grown up with Aliens being one of my most favorite movies and having both positive and negative female role models in my life, I will say that Ripley herself isn't akin to Sarah Connor or just some lesser than masculine version of femininity. She is very much her own character with her own agency and ability to lead and show positive feminine/non-binary/non-masculine examples of leadership and a positive version of a matriarch in stark contrast to the alien queen, the bit archaic example of the female as monstrous construct that Ripley herself destroys. She has a similar platonic relationship with Corporal Hicks that's utterly enjoyable and equal along with her endearing relationship with Newt and let's be honest, her natural ability to be a leader and pull a group of hardened marines together to get things done in an extremely horrid situation. Yes, I won't argue Cameron himself sells feminine roles short in the writing process but Weaver easily transcends that and makes the role her own. Oh, and Bill Paxton was amazing as a foil to Ripley as an average Joe speaking on behalf of the audience that it's an express elevator to hell. Then of course there's Vasquez who, though yes is an overly masculine version of Cameron-esque femininity can hold her own and survive when wannabe alpha males couldn't and went out like a hero holding the rear and not actually being saved in the end but instead, allowed an easy way out by a feckless lieutenant who couldn't save her due to their perilous odds.
This is an interesting take on the film that I've never really come across before. It's kind of cool actually. Here's my take though -- I think Robocop is really more about someone discovering their asexuality. In the sequel, they make a big deal about Murphy being the only one able to survive the procedure. The other officers they tried to turn into cyborgs kill themselves after they lose their bodies, and with it, the ability to have sex and feel sexual pleasure. See, Robocop is Murphy's true identity, even before he was murdered. His wife has taken to wearing seductive bathrobes in what seems to be in the middle of the day because Murphy has stopped having sex with her. He has one son -- this was filmed in the 1980s, at a time when birth control was kind of shit. Murphy should be the father of at least three children yet he seems to have stopped at one. When he's resurrected as Robocop, he remorselessly emasculates a rapist; not castrate, which only removes the testicles, but emasculates him and renders him a screaming heap. He is no more sympathetic to the female victim. For Murphy, sex means nothing and has always meant nothing. His two "phalluses" in the movie, as you mentioned, offer no pleasure. His gun is for work and his interface spike is for gathering information. Even ED-209, his primary robotic rival looks like a walking uterus and fallopian tubes and Murphy has to run away from it and blows it up with a gun near the end. The very idea of sex repulses him and this is the key reason why he was able to exist as a machine for justice. You also spoke of foreshadowing -- Murphy shoots a rapist in the dick as his first mission. He regains complete control of his identity toward the end by shooting another dick, a man literally named Dick Jones. Fore-fucking-shadowing.
This is more how I see it, too. Not that he was struggling with necessarily being feminine, but more with how he wasn't naturally masculine. He still wanted to be a strong role model for his son, but couldn't quite be "manly" with the boy like society expected him to be. That's why he spent so much time practicing how to emulate his son's (presumably very masculine) TV hero. But either way, he still wanted to be a good parent, and those emotions were strong enough that they helped him break out of the emotional deadening (and hyper-masculization) that OCP forced upon him. Murphy, from the amount of time we spend with him before he got shot to pieces, was seemingly empathetic, friendly, and didn't seem particularly worried about people's gender roles outside of the one he was desperately trying to live up to for himself (he completely acknowledges Lewis as an equal without hesitation, something VERY rare in 80's action films, even ones with female leads). He wasn't macho, even though part of him thought he was supposed to be because that's what society tells him he should be. And the time he tries to be a big tough hero, he gets literally destroyed for it.
I remember reading a Libertarian review of Ghostbusters that opened with "Ghostbusters is about small time entrepreneurs struggling to succeed against draconian government regulations" and then went forth to interpret every character, every scene, every object, every line of dialogue through that lens. That's what this reminds me of. I mean, sure you can interpret all those things through that lens. If you like.
![ROSÉ (로제) - number one girl [더 시즌즈-이영지의 레인보우] | KBS 241129 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A9oByH9Ci24/mqdefault.jpg)
Can't wait for the inevitable RoboCop vs. TERFS movie.
Robocop: Your move, TERF.
TERF: That's a misogynistic slur!!!!
Robocop: *shoots her in the crotch*
That product does not exist. Please try another selection.
thenib.com/bathroombot-the-gender-defender
Kids: YAY ROBOCOP!
Robocop: STAY OFF RUclips.
@@hakasims that's what I call eunchfication
@@hakasims To be fair, TERFs are delicate snowflakes who can't handle even the mildest form of criticism. They report-bombed a meme I made on Reddit depicting the science on transgender medicine as an RPG in any argument against TERFs and they succeeded in getting my account suspended. The worst part about that was knowing dozens of TERFs got notifications that they got a Trans meme removed, TERF joy is poison to my soul.
Robocop is one of those bits of culture which, like Rage Against The Machine, is liked by people it damns.
ULGROTHA Ughhh don’t remind me about the X-men...
Along with Verhoeven's Starship Troopers
The entire Warhammer 40K franchise...
@Filthy acts at a reasonable price yep
@Filthy acts at a reasonable price Hahahaha you wouldnt believe... I've been rooting for the Empire myself as a teen back in '77 before I began to open my eyes to the world I live in!
I'd buy _that_ for a dollar!
mind blown: I've seen RoboCop about 30 times and it NEVER occurred to me how Murphy and Lewis are "designed" to look alike.
Wow.
It is really interesting, though I think it was at least partially a happy accident. Apparently in early pre-production, Orion were considering Schwarzenegger for the role of Murphy/Robocop, but the effects team pointed out that they needed an actor with a slim physique to play Murphy because (as the video points out) the costume had to look plausible; on an actor with a bodybuilder's physique, the extra breadth and width the suit would need to move and function would look completely ridiculous.
@@turricanedtc3764 this is true, but the shared locker rooms and similar outfits (not more feminine ones for women) were decisions and those do remark the egalitarian nature of the police.
The actors share the same birthday too
@@Eddie62070 Maybe they're actually twins who were separated at birth.
@@rigelb9025 yeah you never know
Lewis not being a cyborg in the sequel is the first time I was aware of Hollywood letting me down.
As a kid I thought she would come back as a Cyborg in R2.
@JohnnyTheWolf They probably thought that would be too different. It always seems to me that they want to try and "recapture the magic". See: Men in Black immediately bringing K back.
@@harvest5218 Annoyingly, a lot of sequels are: 'reset character growth to start; and tell same story again.'
I want _more_ character progression!
(Then again, I'd but Robocop 2 for a dollar...)
@@BPLOL As we saw a commercial for bionic hearts, she may have been 'fixed up' on the inside.
if you havent ever seen the deleted scene where she is in the hospital at the end it explains she recovered, of course it was deleted therefore not canon i guess but meh robocop 2 wasnt the greatest anyway dont get me started on 3
Note too, that as Robocop, Murphy's face has literally been attached to the machine-cranium. His face is rather a mask.
"What's your name, son?"
"Murphy."
"Murphy what?"
"...Murphy Skywalker."
Hahahaha XD Nice
About the similarity between Murphy and Lewis. The cherry on top is this: Nancy Allen and Peter Weller share the same birthday - and by strangest of strange coincidences, today, June 24, is their birthday.
I'm a transwoman. Robocop was one of the three movies I had on VHS as a young trying-to-be-a-boy. I watched it so many times I can practically quote it from memory. I considered it a struggle about finding an identity apart from the ones that were forced upon you by family, society, and (literal) programming. I didn't catch the mirroring with Lewis or his wife. I saw it mostly in ED-209 which was incapable of questioning its role or making independent decisions. It was Murphy's humanity that made him able to change, to discover his true self and embrace it. And he was nearly destroyed for it. I never saw it as a "trans narrative", but definitely one about transformation, acceptance, and growth. I may need to go back and watch it again now that I've transitioned. Maybe I'll see something I never let myself see before.
Mindblown!
After watching this video and reading your comment i now understand i know nothing about this world!
I need to get myself a life.
Huh, see about a year ago and I said that I didn't buy the Trans-reading. That makes a ton of sense; he's not equipped to articulate the gap between his identity as Murphy and his body as Robocop but it still causes him misery. Thank you for the comment; only a dialogue creates the fertile intellectual ground to understand something in a deeper way and not just as an iteration on pre-existing mental habits.
God, this is beautiful
I mean he's trans- or post- human, so there's thematic links fer sure
Agreed wholehearted. It was about transformation and discov
I always thought that Murphy lost his family due to him “dying”. If he lost his family before dying then it changes everything. Thank you for such an insightful reading.
I've always been very bothered by how long Dick Jones's arms are when he falls out the window, he could take his shoes off without bending over.
That shot will annoy me until the day I die. Why couldn't they just green screen the actor falling? They would have had to superimpose the puppet on the same background. It's makes no sense!
Pff. He could've flapped his way to safety.
😂 I have no words
There was a time portal, he was tried in the future for time crimes, and then the effect of putting him back made it look as though he was Stretch Armstronging it.
Simple.
Draliseth
😆 Or just grabbed another building, like plastic man.
As a kid, Lewis was my favorite female character in anything. I thought she looked cool, was cool, and I honestly modeled a bunch of OCs after her when I was little lol.
One comment about James Cameron's female heroes Ripley and Sarah - that clip of Sarah in T2 was intended to show her losing her humanity, trying to become a killing machine to protect her future, not being a hero. That said, I agree that Cameron does impose traditional male heroic qualities on female characters to make them heroes, but in both those movies, they were motivated by wanting to protect a child. So I think his version of a female hero is jamming together extreme versions of both traditional male (strong fighters) and traditional female (protective mothers) qualities.
That's what bothers me most about Aliens. In the 1st movie she was simply a smart competent member of the crew. She assumed leadership bc she had to. There are no backstory. Everyone's motive (except Ash) was simply to survive. The idea that a woman is only a hero bc of motherhood is in itself a patriarchal idea, largely coming out of Christianity and the Mary myth.
The most flawed scene in alien, is where she attempts to save the cat when her human crew members were in danger.
Not trying to be a dick here, but it's wild to me that you can watch Aliens and come away with the idea that Cameron thinks that female strength comes from abandoning womanhood to act like a man. He's specifically saying the opposite - that's the whole purpose of the Vazquez character. They even have Hudson ask her if she's ever been mistaken for a man to really drive the point home. She's the most aggressive and violent member of the space marines.
Meanwhile, Ripley's strength comes not from the masculine instinct to destroy, but in her embracing of her mothering instincts (you could certainly question the progressiveness of this message today in 2019, but for 1986, it's pretty good). She becomes strong to protect Newt. The film's iconic image is of Ripley holding Newt on her hip with one arm, and brandishing a flame thrower with the other. The climactic fight is between the two mothers (Ripley and the Alien Queen)!
I thought the Robocop stuff was great, but I had to comment on this, as it's an issue I've considered extensively.
Murphy/RoboCop, by film's end, favored the human side, the Murphy side, more, hence the final line being "Murphy," one of the more uplifting concluding lines I have ever heard. He was essentially reclaiming himself with just a one-word sentence.
The line "I really want to tell you something" and "I love you" are connected sentences that happen one after another, they're not separate scenes.
Watch again. They also happened separately
IMO, once you get to the middle of the '80s, and all of the residual weirdness of the '70s is dead, you mostly have to look to indie and underground cinema to find the good stuff. RoboCop was the little movie that could, and I think that Verhoeven and co. got away with slipping a lot of things under the radar.
See also: Heathers, Sex Lies and Videotape, Blue Velvet, The Fly, Drugstore Cowboy, Do the Right Thing, Married to the Mob, Cinema Paradiso, and Tampopo.
You have given me an entirely new appreciation for the "They'll fix you, they fix everything" line and I can't thank you enough! Also, IT'S SO OBVIOUS they're doubles... So OBVIOUS I never saw it before! I am LOVING your videos; please keep it up!
10:50 so we transitively have Martine Verhoeven to thank as well for this gem of cinema for seeing what her hubby didn't right away.
THANKS, MRS. VERHOEVEN!
Clearly, the man has good taste!
Yeah, she fished the script out of the trash. Definately a keeper
Thank you for acknowledging Lewis’ epicness. I was deeply surprised how the honest trailer treated her !
I'd argue that the house tour scene is far more about his former home (and, by extension, his identity and humanity) becoming sterilized and commodified, and I'd read his punching of the TV screen as a futile--and very traditionally masculine--act of lashing out against the artificial face of corporate America, but I otherwise found the mirroring/doubling arguments quite compelling.
I would also take a different read on his relationship with his family. While he is undoubtedly focusing on idealized memories, the memories may indicate his own insecurities about his masculinity more than they do any real disapproval from his wife and son. Murphy becomes obsessed over learning a gun trick that his son asked about in passing--and in a tone that suggests that he already idolized his father. So too, his mind latches onto a confrontational image of his wife, seemingly emasculating him with her disdain. In truth, though, he may have mis-remembered his wife's tone and body language precisely because he feels inadequate in his gender performance.
"seemingly emasculating him with her disdain. In truth, though, he may have mis-remembered his wife's tone and body language precisely because he feels inadequate in his gender performance" BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....No.
I think he'd be more annoyed at being shot to death and not being able to see his family ever again. Gender roles and masculinity would be the last thing on his mind.
@@Ash-gtr32 If by "on his mind," you mean his conscious mind, then maybe, but I'm obviously talking about his subconscious motivations.
@@Ash-gtr32 But...But...everything has to be about gender and subvertly mocking the male identity! -Triggered-
@@owenlindkvist5355 if you feel mocked, that says more about you than anything else, doesn't it?
Interesting reading of the movie to be honest. I had never thought of the movie in this fashion, but that's the beauty of art.
Aron Marczylo I think it’s more complex than that. Ever try getting a group of people to write a single piece of dialogue for a character at once? The sheer number of people mutes any individuals creative inputs, until only a common group identity survives.
Best believe the hype! Maggie is back!
:-D
Paul Verhoeven is a beast, Robocob is just another example how good he can tell storys and even today the efx looks amazing.
This is an interesting view on the film. I've always loved RoboCop, even as a wee baby who shouldn't have been watching it. I've personally never seen it that way so it's nice to hear someone speak on it like this. It really does have so many layers and that's why I've enjoyed it even more as I've grown older and my world views have broadened.
Huh. So that's why I always liked Lewis.
Well done.
You seem to of missed a part of the wife saying she needs to talk. It is shown later that she was just playing with him and that what she “needs to talk” about is that she “loves him”. Murphy seemed to have a very idealic family life, which makes his trip down memory lane all the more heart breaking.
Thanks Maggie for reminding me of why I love Robocop so much!
I'm not sure if I buy the trans reading, seems like a stretch. But a very interesting listen
that's the beauty of this movie. the message isn't shoved down your throat like, "oh look, CEO business men bad" since RoboCop saved the Old Man, and never really killed him in part 2.
Yeah. It's a real stretch. Reading way too much into it. Deliberately choosing absurd interpretations of certain flashbacks. It's trying way too hard to apply a different meaning. Same thing as confirmation bias.
@@jevansturner She acknowledges that it's a stretch in the review itself, as much a thought experiment as a reading of the movie. Whether or not you think it's a valid reading, it is an interesting one.
Gibb Charron that's the thing. It was so forced and cringe-worthy that I really felt I was wasting my time hoping for some actual insight or profound thoughts. Finishing the video, I really wished I had spent the time watching something else.
feel bad about my comment now. I don't think theres anything wrong with applying a theory, and the movie has enough body disassociation that I think it was a valid target but its just that reading it through the lens of toxic masculinity or the language of fascism has more explanatory power. Trans theory didn't work for me on this movie buy applying it generated some useful ideas such as Lewis being a metaphorical mirror to Murphy.
i enjoy your enthusiasm as much as i do your analysis!
Also, I don't think there's enough contextual material in the film to support the trans identity theory. It's fairly clear that their marriage failed as a result of him being pronounced dead and re-shaped to fit into the RoboCop mold, and there's very little to indicate that they had marital problems beforehand. The only expression of traditional masculinity that we see Murphy try to conform to in the opening of the movie is with the gun, and I think that this is more an expression of heroism and being a hero than it is something strictly masculine; to support this, Lewis also has a gun and also finds the story Murphy tells her amusing, indicating that she can empathise with this. While I agree that Lewis is Murphy's mirror in the scene where she talks to him for the first time after his death, I don't think this is carried over at all into his conversations with his wife because she doesn't look like him and doesn't behave like him. Even in the difference between the moments where she says, "I really need to tell you something!", I don't see enough context to support the conclusions you're drawing.
Ultimately the film does lampoon gender roles, but this is done to critique masculinism and patriarchal constructs, rather than a message about Murphy's gender identity. He no more conforms to masculinity than Lewis does, nor does he even try to in the early part of the movie. His involuntary transformation into the company's ideal of masculinity says a lot about how they perceive strength, but it doesn't tell me anything about how Murphy viewed gender beforehand. There's really nothing to indicate in his memories or in his behaviour that he's trying super hard to conform to traditional masculinity. By that standard, Lewis is also trying to conform to traditional masculinity, but we also know that isn't true.
I think it's fun to entertain these possibilities, but in this particular case I don't see the structural support for the theory. The entire home sequence is a testament to how his humanity was stripped away and how he lost his family as a result of it.
do you feel better now?
@@jman8904 Sure.
The trans theme seems like a stretch to me, but if one of my favourite movies of all time is even deeper than I thought, and more people can enjoy it on another level, that is awesome. I mean, I don't think I ever noticed that boardroom scene is one continuous take.
Verhoeven has done wonderful continuous takes in most of his films. But Verhoeven's continuous takes are different from Welles, De Palma's or Scorsese's continuous takes, because he doesn't want you to notice them. They are only there to drive the story forward.
I was about to post about the same thing. I'm not completely convinced that the trans angle was intentional but it does add an interesting layer to the movie which is ostensibly about transhumanism and finding your own identity...
And Verhoeven is genius enough that it could be exactly how he intended it to be interpreted so... What do I know?
@@ionvash and people are mad in the comments
@@kostajovanovic3711 Misunderstood your comment at first, thought you meant I was mad...
You can tell when you love something when the theory crafting reaches these depths!
This video is an example how people can find whatever meaning they want to in film if they look hard enough. Even if it is completely wrong.
This is a fantastic analysis! I just wrapped up my masters this past year and I was studying masculinity in history. Videos like this are always so great to me as they both remind me why masculinity and hypermasculinity are important to study but also just remind me of how much fun I had studying them
I think this is the first I've been excited about watching Robocop again. Thank you
3:40 This is said just days after Burger King rolled out their "Not Always Happy" Whopper meals.
Robocop says Trans rights uwu
Whats dose uwu mean?
@@akbarcaspian4630 Its like a face with closed eyes and a silly anime like smile.
it's all bullshit...Verhoeven had the actress slash off her hair to make her more tough and less aesthetically pleasing in order to fit into his ugliest depiction of a brutal society..one in which gender isn't an issue hence why the cops shower and dress together...just like they do in starship troopers... there is no way on this earth that the film Robocop is addressing ANY trans issues what so ever... of course in 2021 it's easy for people to attempt to read that there are trans issues in there...but there seriously ARE NOT
@@DoubleOProductions sometimes someone can put themes in a movie by accident
@@MrSchlessel nah it's just desperate liberals seeing what they want to see...
In my personal experience of trying to achieve the hyper masculine traits expected of me by my (grand)uncles between the ages of 11 and 20 (father out of picture completely, was/is incarcerated, parents were addicts, brothers and sister raised by grandmother since I was 6 and Im oldest for backstory) then finally snapped cause I couldnt meet the expectations they/I had set. Ended up diving deep into my own Jungian anima, after a few years contemplating who I really was, I became more secure in myself than ever before. Its easier to know yourself when youre not trying to fit somebody elses mold, a mold they dont even understand was also forced upon themselves originally and how much it stunted them.
A counterpoint to the James Cameron point. That shot of Sarah Connor IS her attempting a masculine "let's shoot the problem away with our guns" solution. But the narrative immediately shows how this is a wrong headed move, and how it takes a toll on her emotionally. She suffers by becoming a terminator macho lady lone gun doing it alone. She wins through collaboration with others and learning to trust.
Also, as far as the writing of badass female characters in action movies who aren't trying to be ultra masc/macho to be badass... Rose from Titanic?
Yes! Thank you. I love this video, aside from her overlooking the narratives complexities in Cameron's films with regards to their female heroines.
@@kryptonicification I wouldn't say Fish is wrong or overlooking stuff exactly. Like, I think I'd agree that Cameron's understanding of badass women is rooted in motherhood (especially since his actual mother was a WWII fighter pilot badass lady).
It's just, in my reading of his films (as opposed to Fish's), I don't think the portrayal is of macho=good uncritically and consistently. Both readings are valid.
Interesting take.
People forget that a movie can have multiple meanings, and that half the story of a movie is written by the watcher.
I think that a LOT of these things are a stretch and could easily have much different meanings, but that's because I'm watching it.
A lot of this may not even be necessarily about being trans per se, but reclaiming those aspects of your personality that are coded by society as feminine and thus supposed to be rejected.
lol'd at the James Cameron reference. Verhoeven studied Cameron's films prior to making Robocop, but that aside, Cameron's films frequently featuring very strong/masculine female characters reflects his personal life, where he was married to a string of powerful women who occupied traditionally male roles (and in the case of ex wife Kathryn Bigelow) focused their art on machismo.
I honestly think he's just fascinated by a specific kind of gender nonconformity and role switching. Like, with the exception of Arnold, his male leads are often weak, submissive, or feminized in some way. Jack Dawson is probably the best example; he's an androgynous manic pixie dream boy who gets stuffed in the fridge to further Rose's character development. Just a complete inversion of a typical male lead in an action film.
16:14 - That's a really interesting (and valid) interpretation, and to be honest I hadn't noticed the difference in the takes used until this was pointed out. I can't help but think, though, that on one hand it might be as simple as the editor or director preferring the framing or delivery of the actor's second line ("I love you") in the second take. On another hand, I recently watched videos of some panels and interviews with the case and crew of the movie, and one thing that Peter Weller mentioned was that in the original script, Lewis's "Murphy, it's *you*" and confronting Emil at the gas station happened before Robocop's dream/memory of Murphy's murder (and he pointed out that the "standard" Hollywood storytelling method has physical stimuli trigger the metaphysical realisation). According to Weller, Verhoeven emphatically insisted that the "dream" had to happen first - that Murphy's "soul" had to begin to reassert itself on its own, and then have his soul drive his subsequent perceptions and actions.
So how about this for an idea? The first time we see flashbacks is when Murphy is being worked on in the ER. Murphy is consciously aware that his body has been irretrievably maimed and that he has almost certainly been mortally wounded - he is obviously and understandably afraid of dying, and so the flashbacks represent moments in his life where he felt fear and concern. Being a good role model to his son in a crapsack world ("Can you do that, Dad?"), his family waving goodbye (as he knows he's been transferred to a much more dangerous precinct), and his wife confronting him ("I really need to tell you something") without the resolution we see later. Could it be possible that this version of the flashback is a representation coloured by the fear that Murphy's soul felt on hearing those words - another example of the "dream"?
For what it's worth, my interpretation of the flashbacks we see later when Murphy (as RoboCop) walks around his former house is that on some level, Murphy's soul is trying to present those events as they actually happened without the veneer of fear - he *was* an honourable man, a good father, part of a happy family, and his wife *did* love him. Peter Weller does an extraordinary job through physical acting (19:00) of expressing the mounting rage of Murphy's soul as he realises what was taken from him, and to my mind the virtual realtor's "Have you thought it over?" is another example of the crass corporate attitude which dismisses the loss of his home, family and life as just another business opportunity.
Sorry for the ramble, I hope this makes sense and seems interesting.
Robocop is what people mean when they say "not all cops."
@@ShadowACE1998 How are you enjoying the "Coaching Red Pill" channel you sub to?
@@MaggieMaeFish Meh. To be honest I got bored after a few videos and stopped paying attention to it.
@@ShadowACE1998 we get it, you're a racist with no attention span.
Logan Cracraft
He’s hunting known criminals, who are at the least guilty of attempted murder, armed robbery(highest level), and numerous other small charges.
Part of Verhooven’s genius is how he has the protagonist act as judge jury and executioner, such as blowing the balls off the man assaulting the woman, or the lab where he busts in and kills anyone that he feels threatened by. It’s fear of the future privatization of the police, where we’re basically under Marshal Law.
Unarmed civilians are shot by the police with little or no consequences, far too often. As well as invasion of privacy, and escalations of non threatening situations. When there is no consequences for harassing a citizen, because of a hunch, or a stereotyping, etc., abuse of power has become the norm. Robocop
no
"She also doesn't shed her femininity..."
Nancy Allen had several haircuts until Verhoeven was satisfied that her look was neutral enough for her to not be considered a romantic interest for Murphy. Jussayin.
She still looks feminine though, just not sexualized.
I never thought that anyone could give me a reason to need to re-watch RoboCop!! But now I must!!!! Love this perspective!! ♥️🔥
Okay but does Robocop go into a gay bar?
It wasn't a gay bar then, but it really is now
That was an "Anything Goes" Bar.
I’ve seen Robocop somewhere between 10-20 times, have spent an ungodly amount of time thinking and talking about it, and I have never considered ANY of the stuff you bring up. What an amazing movie.
Extremely Verhoeven voice: "THE LAYERS!!!!!"
Maggie Mae Fish Rick McCallum voice: It's so dense. Every single image has so many things going on.
Given its one of the first R-Rated movies I've watched as a kid (sorry Mom), this is an amazing insight on one of my childhood favorites. Of course I can't say I understand the science of filmmaking, but I know a good movie when I see one. This gives me a greater appreciation for how's it's made from a director's perspective (because he loves his symbolisms) as well how's it's studied.
I actually just rewatched this movie after years. And i really enjoyed this analysis.
That reading you´re presenting is making me kinda angry on the remake
“Throughout the first years of our lives we were forced not just to internalize a few aspects of capital, but to build up a structure of internalizations. As our capacity for coherent natural self-regulation was systematically broken down, a new system of self regulation took its place, a coherent system, incorporating all the aspects of self-repression. We participated in capital’s ongoing project of colonization by colonizing ourselves, by continually working at the construction of a unitary character-structure (character armor), a unitary defense against all drives, feelings, and desires which we learned were dangerous to express. In the place of our original transparent relations to our world, we created a structure of barriers to our selfexpression which hides us from ourselves and others.”Jay Amrod and Lev Chernyi, “Beyond Character and Morality: Towards Transparent Communications and Coherent Organization.” Howard J. Ehrlich ed. Reinventing Anarchy, Again (San Francisco, California: AK Press, 1996), 321
@@omalone1169 I am not firm in anarchist theory. How would you say self colonisation would not happen in other systems?
@@janwestermeyer8426in theory it would mean alternative systems that are not dependent upon closing minds to function
Gurdjieff the fourth way for example where people function outside our existing paradigms and go beyond basic conception
Capital would not be there to make useless to ourselves
Gosh, this was just amazing! Thank you so much for making quality content like this.
I think its important to note, that in my opinion femininity is not the opposite of hyper masculinity, not even masculinity. Core ideas of rejecting programing, social expectations or whatever its called does surely applay to trans persons inhertly. But I think the movie is more about answering the question "Is that I?"
Very interesting look, thank you for this input Maggie
Robocop is a social commentary that ultimately touches on what makes someone human whilst showing the folly of corporations. It also shows how money overrides democracy and how America's political system is a farce (or at least how it could become a farce). Robocop being a trans icon? I'm sure if you look hard enough you could find things to justify the claim, but I don't think that's the intention. All forms of art can be interpreted differently from person to person though. That being said, if you want some intended trans related symbolism/metaphors I swear the Matrix is full of them.
Retro Cynical
It’s also about how capitalism will lead to a bigger gap between the wealthy and the poor. How the number of poor grows, when everything becomes privatized.
There were some who thought that cities were going to privatize police, just as the prison system did. Verhooven has us rooting for a cop who can kill at will, depending upon the situation.
Even when he doesn’t kill, he shot the balls off of a man who was assaulting a woman. How many women, in the moment, wouldn’t say yes to having their rapist’s, even if just attempted, balls shot off? It’s a nod to the Judge Dredd comics as well. A Mega City, corporate police, gentrification on a large scale, with the crime so bad that police can’t handle it.
And of course, the “man” is funding the crime to make the area worthless, so everyone will sell. He put a lot into the film.
At the end of the day, one of the things that distinguishes art from other uses of media is that art *endures.* It remains relevant over years and decades, with new generations finding new meanings in it. I doubt Verhoeven and/or Ed Neumeier literally intended Robocop to be a movie about transsexuality, but the smart way it plays with non-binary concepts means it can be seen by viewers as applicable to all sorts of situations - transsexuality included.
(And what's really funny to think is that with current trends in transhumanism and body modification being as they are, it probably won't be too many decades until the movie can be taken absolutely literally, and Robocop is held up as an icon among cyborgs.)
The directors of The Matrix are two transwomen, I think
It's to shoe-horn nu-age garbage ideals into an old movie. The irony of a corporation of over-commercialized internet sex-based body-part worship disguised as "unique", applied to a sexless Robocop and OCP does not escape me.
any read of a movie is dead-author stuff, unless you are just restating something the creator already made clear. One being one you dont happen to like changes nothing. Also - "new age"? What is this? 1992? LULZY
That's not a witch over Murphy's shoulder in the Halloween picture, it's Punch and Judy...the wife beating puppet,so read into that.
3:08 - wasted opportunity for “brobot”
(Love your work MMF)
While the satire about toxic masculinity is very evident in the movie I never saw the trans aspect of Robocop before, which is interesting. However I think the movie is more about political satire, or at least that's how I interpret it: One of the very first things we learn is that cops are considering going to a strike because they are about to bought by a private company, that sequence alone is a great comment about the police's role, privatisation, the news and their anchors and well, capitalism.
Btw I think you should do an analysis on Alien, especially in contrast to Aliens. I think the original is a great movie about sexual violence and femininity, in addition to Cameron's "strong female character". Very happy to see your comment on that, I was saying the same thing for years
Love Robocop even more now thanks to this video. That is so crazy though about those two slightly different takes for the same memory!
Would love to see what a Robocop 2 that pushed these themes more would look like.
Great Scot! I have never thought of the societal gender layer to ROBOCOP before, but it feels like learning that there's more spices in your favorite dish than you knew about. It actually makes me love the film more. Your analysis rocks!
Oh yeah you should consider keeping the title of film school with Maggie Mae Fish, it's got a good ring to it ya know k great job.
Every video you make is an absolute joy to watch. Thank you for making such thoughtful and interesting content!
Wow! I love this movie and watched it a million times and this Never occurred to me!
That's an interesting way to see it. I had never thought of it in that sense. I had interpreted this as asking hard questions about what makes us human with a framing of an action/sci-fi movie, a critique of consumerism and asking questions about the consequences of privatizing public institutions.
You must have watched a different film than me.
She is trying her hardest to let you understand she is completely nuts. Maybe to impress a les-bo or to get less prison time for the schoo1 sh0-0ting she has lined up.
The main theme even follows this reading, starting out with the incomplete main phrase on masculine associated instruments, finally culminating in the complete phrase with the hyper-masculine horn bravado that itself then gives way to something softer, played on new instruments, which then builds into it's own phrase that includes lots of woodwinds and soft horns and twinkling typically-feminine associated sounds.
It’s amazing to see someone give a brief criticism and discussion of James Cameron’s female characters. I want to see somebody ACTUALLY have a conversation about Ripley.
Cool I'll do a vid on Ripley!
Maggie Mae Fish dope :D
@@MaggieMaeFish That would be great because right now I have no idea what in your eyes separates pushing the boundaries of femininity as opposed to "shedding your femininity", especially when Lewis showing empathy with Murphy counts as her expressing her femininity whereas blowing up the bad guy whilst crawling through sewage and being in unimaginable pain doesn't count as "shedding her femininity" and not behaving like a masculine stereotype.
For me, that was also the most interesting thing in this critique. I've always felt weird about that, especially with Cameron dating Linda Hamilton... It really seemed to me like he was fetishizing female masculinity.
@Kaveighleen Jacaster Interesting but not related to my point.
Suffering pain is one thing and certainly could be argued to be inherently feminine but enduring pain is definitely a masculine thing to do, hence the phrase 'manning up' and the social stigma against men crying or otherwise showing pain: that is what I was referencing.
This video is the reason why you should read deeply into everything. I love RoboCop, but had no idea it was this deep. This is awesome. Thank you.
Huh I loved this film so much already love it even more after this analysis! 💙💙💙
This is a great video. You're killing it with the video essays!
I'd have been interested to see some thoughts on how some or all of this fits (or doesn't) into the remake.
I think I had an epiphany watching this...
Murphy became something more; why should we all -- humans who construct concepts like identity -- be bound them and unable to grow, or change them into something new? Something *more?*
Humanity explores, examines and evolves; so too should society and the concepts that uphold it. The body can't grow if its bones remain the same as they always have been.
I think I need to do some self-exploration of my own now...
Thank you for making this for all of us. I can't wait to see what you choose to analyze and explore next, as well as how it will transform us viewers and our view of this ever-changing world we all share.
big fan of Paul Verhoeven and really enjoyed this take. great video!
This is the kind of in depth structural analysis I've been severely lacking in my subscriptions lately 😭 Delighted I found your work
This is the craziness shit I've ever heard regarding this movie.
JESUS! I have to go watch RoboCop again! 🤯 I'm so glad I found this channel, and I'm so glad you are making these! 🙂
My little trans heart is breaking 😭💕🏳️⚧️ I didn't watch this movie as a kid bc it was too violent and scary, I didn't watch it as an adult bc i assumed it was just a violent sexist old action movie. And now I'm crying my eyes out over here bc I'm a year and a half into transition and I just found out that I'm RoboCop. Thanks Maggie!
My mum and I were just talking about how great Robocop is! The symbolism in that movie is so layered and complex that you could talk about it for years and only begin to scratch the surface.
Love Robocop, love videos like these that open up angles that I haven't considered!
"everyone in this movie is a cop", and suddenly i realize that OCP is an anagram for COP. I'd buy that for a dollar.
Yay. Thanks Maggs
The first fake commercial break on the movie:
A doctor saying: "Are you prepared for that big operation?", and finishing with the same doctor saying: "We care."
Bring the Fish, family, I don't know if I can hold on any longer XD
The good cop in this movie,
In fact, the BEST cop,
The best cop there could ever be...
Is dead.
Maggie,I think you're great. But while you made some good points regarding duality and the cinematography and editing choices, you lost me near the halfway mark. I suppose it could be said that films dealing with transformation, especially the subgenre of cyberpunk, can get metaphoric with LBGT themes from time to time it's still open for subjective interpretation. My take is something more organic, however.
Consider the scene in where Murphy, as RoboCop has the PTSD memory of his murder. On a monitor, we see a few fuzzy images of Clarence giving off the POV headshot. Murphy gets a fraction of his memory back over the course of the film, with context becoming more clear. Those memories are in no particular order:
TJ Laser ad/son looking up to his police officer dad. "You are a hero in my eyes"
Halloween, which includes the photo and quite possibly Murphy's wife telling him she loves him..
His death.
(Follow up EDIT: these fragmented memories are in a 24 hr period before his "death"; this means it took 2 1/2 months for him to be rebuilt as RoboCop, given the drunken OCP NYE scene)
The morning of him going to work that morning of his death isn't a memory from his POV, as he would be driving to work and he can,in his final moments, imagine that his family is waving him goodbye.(EDIT :it could be his rear view mirror)
it was clearly stated that Murphy was a transfer on short notice. There is nothing to suggest that his marriage was on the rocks. The idea that he "becomes" his wife in his memory is flimsy. In most marriages,spouses do have life struggles, but responsibility is shared (or should be) so he would see her as an equal. If there is any strain on the marriage it would be work related, as there are a high number of officers being wounded and/or killed in the line of duty and the OCP meddling is an indirect (or direct) cause of this. Instead, both wife and son are "proud" of Murphy because he is a police officer. Murphy even tells Lewis this, when he references TJ Laser. (how did you miss that?)
It is possible that Murphy's wife is frustrated that he was transferred in a more dangerous and challenging precinct (Metro South, I guess is more laid back?) but it isn't really her husband's fault so she has to tell him she loves him as the next morning he will leave for the new assignment. This will be one of the last things she will say to him.Makes perfect sense.
RoboCop having the TJ lazaer inspired gun twirl might be due to Murphy's subconscious memoryas he considers it is what a "good super hero" might do; but there's also a chance it was part of RoboCop's programming, as pop culture and consumerism influences the inventions,concepts and media. Okay,maybe the data spike is flipping off Cecil, I'll give you that much.
When RoboCop/Murphy goes through his old house, the virtual real estate agent's tone is seen as adding insult to injury. Why was the Halloween photos and the coffee mug left behind, with nobody packing them up or throwing them away? My interpretation was that,Murphy's wife,upon hearing her husband's death, got upset and smashed a few things in anger....once she seen "RoboCop"on TV news. It's more likely her rage was on the day her husband died on the operating table, an OCP and other companies may have owned the house, so she would have to move out soon.. But either she or her son put these items/memories out in the open to warn the next family as "corporations" like OCP ruin lives. Murphy's humanity is ripped from him.His identity as a husband an father is gone ("I can feel them,but I can't remember them") but during the course of the film he gets part of that identity back. First the memories and thoughts. Then the "eye opening", Soon the visor comes off. Then the end, which calls back to an earlier scene with Morton and Lewis ("He doesn't have a name. He is our product") that's why there's satisfaction when The Old Man asks "What's your name?" and Murphy gives his own name. Earlier, he refers to himself in third person, suggesting by thistime when the Old Man asks, RoboCop would rather be human again, or at least giving "Murpphy" the proper respect he deserves.
*whew*
Keep the peace
-DjS
Fucking spot-on. 👏👏👏👏👏
Amen, brother. The mental contorcionism required by the author of this video to force the idea of a LGBT motivation is mind blowing. Sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar.
@@chpsilva I wouldn't go so far as to say Maggie was forcing anything. Subjective interpretations, right or wrong, that's the cigar. While most of my response above was from memory, shortly after posting I rewatched the film, and edited in two more minor , yet significant, observations,..one of which skated right by me because I never gave it much thought (Murphy's 'death' being November 1st) . I will give some credit where it is due: it gave me an excuse to watch the film again.
Jesus fucking christ your projecting alot of feelings!
@@Cyborganna not in the slightest actually :)
I keep coming back to this video, its really something
The James Cameron dig was sort of weird. I assume it’s in reference to Linda Hamilton and Sigourney Weaver? He only created one of the characters those women portray.
Would you call Rose Dewitt or Lindsey Brigman soldier moms? Also, Sarah Conner is kind of hapless and scared in The Terminator. Until the very end, everything that happens is sort of beyond her comprehension and out of her control. And again, Cameron did not create Ellen Ripley.....
So I guess all we’re left with is T2? That’s his only movie with a soldier-mom of his own devising that I can think of. Unless Jake Sully has some kids we didn’t hear about....
Robocop is now my favourite movie! Great video; and I'm looking forward for the next one! :)
Okay, I did not think it was possible to enjoy Robocop- a movie I’ve watched countless times and is one of my absolute favorites- any more than I already do, but god damn, this was a thoroughly enjoyable video essay. Like I’m going to rewatch Robocop tonight with all this fresh in mind.
Thanks for making another dope video.
Very interesting analasys of one of my favourite movies of all time. Thanks for the insight!
Interesting read, but sounds like an imposition of 2019 talking points on a late 80's movie.
Ah, so you're arguing that the Cyborg Manifesto was actually written in 2019, then fell into a wormhole and traveled back to 1984? I'd watch THAT movie!!!!
Maggie Mae Fish So would I.
You can’t see this, but I’m furiously clapping like Charles Foster Kane. Amazing analysis!
Maggie, please do a video about Starship Troopers and Gremlins 2.
To defend the role of Ripley in the purest and most best faith defense sans Cameron (who was likely coked out of his mind for much of the production since it was a herculean task to get done) as someone who has grown up with Aliens being one of my most favorite movies and having both positive and negative female role models in my life, I will say that Ripley herself isn't akin to Sarah Connor or just some lesser than masculine version of femininity. She is very much her own character with her own agency and ability to lead and show positive feminine/non-binary/non-masculine examples of leadership and a positive version of a matriarch in stark contrast to the alien queen, the bit archaic example of the female as monstrous construct that Ripley herself destroys.
She has a similar platonic relationship with Corporal Hicks that's utterly enjoyable and equal along with her endearing relationship with Newt and let's be honest, her natural ability to be a leader and pull a group of hardened marines together to get things done in an extremely horrid situation. Yes, I won't argue Cameron himself sells feminine roles short in the writing process but Weaver easily transcends that and makes the role her own. Oh, and Bill Paxton was amazing as a foil to Ripley as an average Joe speaking on behalf of the audience that it's an express elevator to hell. Then of course there's Vasquez who, though yes is an overly masculine version of Cameron-esque femininity can hold her own and survive when wannabe alpha males couldn't and went out like a hero holding the rear and not actually being saved in the end but instead, allowed an easy way out by a feckless lieutenant who couldn't save her due to their perilous odds.
I never would have considered this interpretation. Thanks Maggie!
I already loved this movie, now I super love it and will force more of my friends to watch it.
This is an interesting take on the film that I've never really come across before. It's kind of cool actually.
Here's my take though -- I think Robocop is really more about someone discovering their asexuality. In the sequel, they make a big deal about Murphy being the only one able to survive the procedure. The other officers they tried to turn into cyborgs kill themselves after they lose their bodies, and with it, the ability to have sex and feel sexual pleasure.
See, Robocop is Murphy's true identity, even before he was murdered. His wife has taken to wearing seductive bathrobes in what seems to be in the middle of the day because Murphy has stopped having sex with her.
He has one son -- this was filmed in the 1980s, at a time when birth control was kind of shit. Murphy should be the father of at least three children yet he seems to have stopped at one.
When he's resurrected as Robocop, he remorselessly emasculates a rapist; not castrate, which only removes the testicles, but emasculates him and renders him a screaming heap. He is no more sympathetic to the female victim. For Murphy, sex means nothing and has always meant nothing.
His two "phalluses" in the movie, as you mentioned, offer no pleasure. His gun is for work and his interface spike is for gathering information.
Even ED-209, his primary robotic rival looks like a walking uterus and fallopian tubes and Murphy has to run away from it and blows it up with a gun near the end. The very idea of sex repulses him and this is the key reason why he was able to exist as a machine for justice.
You also spoke of foreshadowing -- Murphy shoots a rapist in the dick as his first mission. He regains complete control of his identity toward the end by shooting another dick, a man literally named Dick Jones. Fore-fucking-shadowing.
This is more how I see it, too. Not that he was struggling with necessarily being feminine, but more with how he wasn't naturally masculine. He still wanted to be a strong role model for his son, but couldn't quite be "manly" with the boy like society expected him to be. That's why he spent so much time practicing how to emulate his son's (presumably very masculine) TV hero. But either way, he still wanted to be a good parent, and those emotions were strong enough that they helped him break out of the emotional deadening (and hyper-masculization) that OCP forced upon him.
Murphy, from the amount of time we spend with him before he got shot to pieces, was seemingly empathetic, friendly, and didn't seem particularly worried about people's gender roles outside of the one he was desperately trying to live up to for himself (he completely acknowledges Lewis as an equal without hesitation, something VERY rare in 80's action films, even ones with female leads). He wasn't macho, even though part of him thought he was supposed to be because that's what society tells him he should be. And the time he tries to be a big tough hero, he gets literally destroyed for it.
This is now my favorite reading of RoboCop.
Thank you.
Omg I love that. Thank you. I never really saw it like that when I was younger. Would have helped with accepting my own asexuality.
Perfect in depth comment.
@@JackgarPrime your in depth comment is pretty spot on.
This has always been one of my top 3 favorite movies. Thank you Maggie, for dignifying it ways I never realized it was dignified.
This was a brilliant and unexpected look at one of my favorite movies ever. Excellent work!
I remember reading a Libertarian review of Ghostbusters that opened with "Ghostbusters is about small time entrepreneurs struggling to succeed against draconian government regulations" and then went forth to interpret every character, every scene, every object, every line of dialogue through that lens.
That's what this reminds me of. I mean, sure you can interpret all those things through that lens. If you like.