I actually saw this years ago, but I must have suppressed my memory somehow.
First of all, it's most certainly a B-movie, no two ways about that.
The director for this should, if not already (Not checked), get another job.
The plot stinks to high heaven, and the writers have absolutely no talent for terminology, nor logic, and least of all technology.
I'm surprised that movies that have this kind of theme, where the story plays out in the future, that they don't have proper consultants that actually understand something about anatomy (which goes beyond bright white skeletons shown in the beginning), how an android (not "robots"!) would move, talk, reason and least of all function.
None of those things has been taken into consideration, and we see actors that aren't particularly good at mimicking what an android could potentially look like, and how it would move.
In order to have any advantage over any other model, it would have to be proficient, agile and generally quick in combat.
Some attempts are made to make it look so, but fails miserably for the most part.
There are huge gaps in the plot, as what lead the "robots" to be what they've become - Not much of a backstory exactly.
Why would androids, or "robots" (really hurts my head with the terminology here!), have need for water? I could understand if it was for any form of fusion- or hydrogen fuel, something for power, but it's not even addressed. Had they been cyborgs I could understand for the human part, but they're not.
The level of knowledge they (don't) possess regarding weapons is staggering. A bullet shown could interpret as potentially a found weapons cache, but for a "robot" to try to put a rifle round into a revolver which clearly is way too big, really reeks and some of the writing team had a really bad day with that logic.
Any AI with proper ocular means to determine spacial measurements would immediately assess that task, and conclude that it wouldn't fit.
Humans can jump to conclusions, irrational thought etc, through emotions overriding common sense, but any AI (or "robots"!) shouldn't do this mistake, again with the bad day(s) for the writing team!.
Also, they keep mentioning "the weapons", and no hints to what kind of weapon, and seeing how that, what's her name, totally snowed in on that revolver (and the bullet that wouldn't fit)m I can't imagine they spent a lot of time thinking about that part of the story.
Had this been done in the 70-80's I could've swallowed it with something to drink, but this late in time, mid-90's ? Come on!
It was made when movies was starting to get good C. G. I (Ok, not all movies should use it, but I meant in general as it was actually getting pretty darn good!) and props got properly manufactured and it no longer looked like crap - In other words, from the mid-90's movies were getting way better, but no, we got this. The "head" is an example when C. G. I. Shouldn't be used, or at least done properly, and also they should be aware what a detached head actually would look like if it was trying to move, as they clearly failed to account for, as proof by the poor effects.
Usually I don't rate this low, but there are a few exceptions, and this is one of them. I hate movies that can't do the genre justice when the movie crew don't even make an effort to try to be both futuristic and logic at the same time.
I gave this a 4 on account of the late Rutger Hauer starring in it, who will forever be missed as one of the greatest actors in this genre and more, especially during the 80's.
Without him, this would be in the range between 1-2 in ratings.
All in all, pretty dull movie, and as many here states, it's like a western movie, but pretty uneventful for the most part. First minutes or so looks promising, but gets exponentially badder the longer into the movie you get, and the ending isn't a payoff either.
First of all, it's most certainly a B-movie, no two ways about that.
The director for this should, if not already (Not checked), get another job.
The plot stinks to high heaven, and the writers have absolutely no talent for terminology, nor logic, and least of all technology.
I'm surprised that movies that have this kind of theme, where the story plays out in the future, that they don't have proper consultants that actually understand something about anatomy (which goes beyond bright white skeletons shown in the beginning), how an android (not "robots"!) would move, talk, reason and least of all function.
None of those things has been taken into consideration, and we see actors that aren't particularly good at mimicking what an android could potentially look like, and how it would move.
In order to have any advantage over any other model, it would have to be proficient, agile and generally quick in combat.
Some attempts are made to make it look so, but fails miserably for the most part.
There are huge gaps in the plot, as what lead the "robots" to be what they've become - Not much of a backstory exactly.
Why would androids, or "robots" (really hurts my head with the terminology here!), have need for water? I could understand if it was for any form of fusion- or hydrogen fuel, something for power, but it's not even addressed. Had they been cyborgs I could understand for the human part, but they're not.
The level of knowledge they (don't) possess regarding weapons is staggering. A bullet shown could interpret as potentially a found weapons cache, but for a "robot" to try to put a rifle round into a revolver which clearly is way too big, really reeks and some of the writing team had a really bad day with that logic.
Any AI with proper ocular means to determine spacial measurements would immediately assess that task, and conclude that it wouldn't fit.
Humans can jump to conclusions, irrational thought etc, through emotions overriding common sense, but any AI (or "robots"!) shouldn't do this mistake, again with the bad day(s) for the writing team!.
Also, they keep mentioning "the weapons", and no hints to what kind of weapon, and seeing how that, what's her name, totally snowed in on that revolver (and the bullet that wouldn't fit)m I can't imagine they spent a lot of time thinking about that part of the story.
Had this been done in the 70-80's I could've swallowed it with something to drink, but this late in time, mid-90's ? Come on!
It was made when movies was starting to get good C. G. I (Ok, not all movies should use it, but I meant in general as it was actually getting pretty darn good!) and props got properly manufactured and it no longer looked like crap - In other words, from the mid-90's movies were getting way better, but no, we got this. The "head" is an example when C. G. I. Shouldn't be used, or at least done properly, and also they should be aware what a detached head actually would look like if it was trying to move, as they clearly failed to account for, as proof by the poor effects.
Usually I don't rate this low, but there are a few exceptions, and this is one of them. I hate movies that can't do the genre justice when the movie crew don't even make an effort to try to be both futuristic and logic at the same time.
I gave this a 4 on account of the late Rutger Hauer starring in it, who will forever be missed as one of the greatest actors in this genre and more, especially during the 80's.
Without him, this would be in the range between 1-2 in ratings.
All in all, pretty dull movie, and as many here states, it's like a western movie, but pretty uneventful for the most part. First minutes or so looks promising, but gets exponentially badder the longer into the movie you get, and the ending isn't a payoff either.