username wrote:

does star wars count?

Don't do it.

Shut up, Dorn wrote:

I wanted to keep this between Superman and Robocop. I grow tired of reading everyones opinion on Star Wars. It gets to be one of those "too many cooks in the kitchen" type deal.

Since I don't believe I ever formally answered the question...

Robocop is the kind of movie you could only be serious about making in the '80's. Once that decade was over, the idea of making a Robocop movie no longer worked. I can't imagine a conversation of a sequel going any way other than, "Hey, let's make another shitty Robcop movie that some people still might enjoy."

But in regards to Superman, I can't help but think that those responsible for Superman III actually were serious about the film. With that movie, they lost all credibility and all hope. I'm not sure what they were thinking when the made IV, but there is no acceptable apology for III. With the Robocop sequels, I can't help but think they knew what they were doing and knew how the movies would be received.

For these reasons, even though Superman is my hero and I actually like 3 out of 4 of the movies, I have to vote Superman as the shittier sequels.

King wrote:

I think Robocop II was still a decent movie, would have been better if Frank Miller's work hadn't been hacked apart, but still ok. Robocop III, however, has issues. Again, I have seen Frank Miller's original ideas and concepts for III, and those were great, but not only was the original script chewed up beyond recognition, but then not only did the movie have a budget too low for a film like this, but no Peter Weller. I would say though Superman IV is WAAAAYYY worse then Robocop III.

Robocop 2 was acceptable. The year 1990 was a year that was kind of like 1980's the extended mix, or 1980's revisited. Some of the more '80's-esqe ideas still worked or were acceptable. '89 and '90 were sort of a transition to the next decade. So I think Robocop as an idea was still okay. But I think all Robocop movies made since, had to have been taken with a less serious, more over the top approach.

As far as Superman IV goes, I can't for the life of me see how anybody could think it was worse than III. At least the idea of the bad guy in IV was valid. It couldhave been a good movie if it was carried out the right way. III was just one of the worst ideas ever thought of. The part where he fixes the leaning tower of Pisa and then when he puts it back is always good for a laugh. But for the most of the movie, I can't figure out what they were thinking and why they thought this idea would work.