Total Recall (Remake)

al28283

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

When you think about it... it's worked out nicely that its not set on mars. With the images from the rover landing all over the internet. We all know what mars actually looks like now.

If the effects team associated with the movie made mars look close to the original (which they probably would of gone a red mars) it would look a bit silly because of recent events.

Well we've known Mars wasn't really red for a long time now, first mars mission was in late 90s i think

don ramo

not long back from it, i quite enjoyed it, it didnt drag at all, there were the obvious similarities to the story line, mainly his memory and having his pretend wife trying to kill him, i must say beckinsale really impressed me in this,

i was expecting some very cheesy moments in this like arnies ones but it was played out straight, i really think they played it wrong calling this total recall, its just leaving it to open to comparisons, even if they just called it Rekall i think it would have done enough to distinguish it,

all in all it was a good show, i dont think its essential to see in the cinema but it definitely worth a watch at some point,

Memnoch

Saw it last night. Was expecting a decent and entertaining actioner, nothing more. However...

Please do not waste your money on this film. It is utter utter trash. There is a fresh plot hole every ten minutes or so. It's bland and boring. The characters have little to no depth to them. The dialogue is farcical. Just one emotionless exposition after another.

The action is average and nothing special with several shots lifted so obviously from other films. I think they stole like 3-4 from the Matrix alone.

The only way to discourage Hollywood from churning out such utter vomit is to make this tank at the box office. The worst film I've seen this year and possibly one of the worst in a long time.

phil1nj

Went to see this last night and have to say it left me totally cold. A waste of everything (time, money,effort) on everyone's part. A pointless remake that does nothing but force comparisons to be made with the original. I left the cinema with an overwhelming feeling of "meh" all the way home. Very disappointing. I usually like Colin Farrell in a movie and to be honest, he's not the worst thing in this but alas not even he can save this. I just hope he got a ****-load of money for making it.

AllWasWell

Saw this last night and wasn't expecting much since empire rated it 2 stars, but it was surprisingly enjoyable! It was entertaining and there were some great chase scenes. The characters weren't developed well at all but aside from that i think it's worth the watch. Beckinsale was great in it aswell

al28283

Memnoch wrote: »

Saw it last night. Was expecting a decent and entertaining actioner, nothing more. However...

Please do not waste your money on this film. It is utter utter trash. There is a fresh plot hole every ten minutes or so. It's bland and boring. The characters have little to no depth to them. The dialogue is farcical. Just one emotionless exposition after another.

The action is average and nothing special with several shots lifted so obviously from other films. I think they stole like 3-4 from the Matrix alone.

The only way to discourage Hollywood from churning out such utter vomit is to make this tank at the box office. The worst film I've seen this year and possibly one of the worst in a long time.

But why? Everything you wrote about this movie makes it sound pretty good, just what I want to see

CatFromHue

Just back from it and I didn't think it was great to be honest. A bit of backstory on Cohaggen and Colin Farrel or Jessica Biel's character would have been great. Too much action/fighting that wasn't believable too.

At the rescue attempt at the very start was that Kate Beckinshaw trying to rescue him? I thought it was but it would have made much more sense for it to have been Jessica Biel.

Also the synthetics and the through the Earth transport mechanism made no sense I thought.

Edit: and why didn't the Australians speak with an Australian accent?

Savman

I'm not gonna say this was a total stinker, but it's not far off tbh. Starts off pretty well and it's visually impressive, but as the film progresses you really start to care less and less about anyone or anything on screen. A very lazy effort IMHO.

It's sorely missing a bad guy, because Kate Beckinsale is pretty unconvincing as a loose cannon secret agent and does her best to resemble a Terminatrix.

The plot seemed to have more than a nod to iRobot - hell the 'synthetics' even looked like familiar FFS. Only some of this movie is an actual remake, most of it is a blatant rehash and/or swipe from a number of sci-fi flicks of previous years.

Bill Nighy's character is in it for all of 2 minutes, why they even bothered casting him is anyone's guess.

Messr Farrell must be struggling for work in Hollywood if this is the best he can manage, he's not bad by any means just not standout brilliant either.

2/10

CatFromHue

Savman wrote: »

Bill Nighy's character is in it for all of 2 minutes, why they even bothered casting him is anyone's guess.

When Nighy and Farrel are talking about memories and the past and present just as they met for the first time I was expecting Nighy to start going on about how Christmas was all around us :pac:

LoGiE

I went to see it last night. I thought it was very ho-hum to be honest, certainly not as entertaining as the original.

The part where they stick Hauser in the chair to extract the kill code, discover it's a trap then 10 seconds later a small army kicks down the doors was just plain stupid. If they can travel that fast what the hell do they need the fall for!

2.5/5 for me.

Goldstein

"Gravity changing in 5...4...3..." FFS, that's just braindead.

Wasn't expecting much, it delivered. It wasn't 100% terrible but was the very definition of Hollywood blah-fi as the studios circle the drain ever closer.

indough

for a while i didnt think it was that bad as remakes go, the final act was garbage though.

the fall as a plot device was terribly signposted and relied upon far too much. and it wasnt even a landmark idea either

i thought the movie looked okay for the most part so that's one positive (obvious shades of both blade runner and minority report but that is hardly a bad thing). and lets face it, we knew going in that it was never going to have the charm of the original, but the few homages back to it weren't half as terrible as they tend to be in these situations (see terminator 3/4).

Bullseye1

It was just okay. No bad performances just unnecessary as the first movie wasn't very good in the first place and this was not much better if at all.

christmas2012

I think it was good,i didnt compare it to the first total recall,so i wasnt as dissapointed,i thought the action in it was fantasitic if thats what youre after..

OldeCinemaSoz

A couple of decent up close and personel fight scenes,
amusingly droll past refs to the classic original and The Col is
always worth watching...

Sweet FA else though...

:rolleyes:

LordSutch

Totall Recall (the remake) but WHY make a remake?

What could Colin Farrell & Kate Beckinsale possibly deliver over and above Arnold & Sharon?



Hard act to follow, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sharon Stone in the original classic.

Tayleur

Saw it today and its a decent action flick. Story was lacking but the action and look of the movie was good. Plus

Beckinsale crotch slide attack

CiDeRmAn

I saw it last night and it was awful.
Too much lens flare and bloom.
Felt like a big music video, but without the music.
The plot had more hole than swiss cheese.
Bryan is surprisingly spry for a man of his age, especially when it comes to CQC.
Beckinsdale can't act.
Wiseman is a hack and makes lousy movies.
Farrell should be avoiding this trash like the plaque,he did a smaller role, in a better movie, Minority Report, ten years ago, and that was a Philip K Dick adaptation too!

Philip K Dick would be spinning in his grave, if he wasn't high as a kite and living on Neptune right now.

No, seriously, it was dreadful, it never felt like it had the epic scope a movie like this needs, there were so many things that made no sense.
The only, and I mean only, thing I liked was the superconducting mag locked cars on the elevated roads, that was interesting and possible.
The rest, all the rest, was pants.

LockOut, with Guy Pearce, was funnier, faster, better made and a whole lot cheaper.

johnny_ultimate

Not sure what everyone was expecting

Also, going to see this film is supporting the pointless remake industry. Only way they'll stop making 'em is if you stop watching 'em. More than enough interesting films on in the cinema at the moment without wasting one's time on this.

indough

well, it wasnt actually that bad

don ramo

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Not sure what everyone was expecting

Also, going to see this film is supporting the pointless remake industry. Only way they'll stop making 'em is if you stop watching 'em. More than enough interesting films on in the cinema at the moment without wasting one's time on this.

i accept that challenge

i have
The Watch
Keith Lemon (seen this, this is by and far the worst film released this year bar NONE, so anyone saying that about Rekall better have seen this)
Ted (seen OOOOOVVVVVEEEERRRR hyped to the extreme)
The Bourne Legacy (seen enjoyable fluff, added noting to the franchise but could be a decent lead in to a fifth film with bourne actually in it)
Expendables 2
and A Few Best Men

keep in mind i enjoyed Rekall, its noting special in any way,

johnny_ultimate

Sorry, I should have included the mandatory "if you're in Dublin there's no excuse" disclaimer Especially in a week when Samsara, The Imposter and Berberian Sound Studio are knocking around (and all in several cinemas at that).

I just think its strange that so many bemoan this remake culture, yet still go happily along and see the films when all signs are negative or at least "not that bad". I'm a firm believer in simply not supporting films that are largely creatively bankrupt. Paying audiences are equally responsible for this cycle as studios if the films profit. It's only going to see a film at the end of the day, and many may genuinely want to see it - completely their right. I just think a quick glance at the reviews and feedback suggests this may not be the film for anyone outraged at the idea in the first place, and such viewers should make a stand.

Although I'm not going to see it since I never really liked Total Recall in the first place

don ramo

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Sorry, I should have included the mandatory "if you're in Dublin there's no excuse" disclaimer Especially in a week when Samsara, The Imposter and Berberian Sound Studio are knocking around (and all in several cinemas at that).

I just think its strange that so many bemoan this remake culture, yet still go happily along and see the films when all signs are negative or at least "not that bad". I'm a firm believer in simply not supporting films that are largely creatively bankrupt. Paying audiences are equally responsible for this cycle as studios if the films profit.

And also I never really liked Total Recall in the first place

:D

i dont understand either, bar Star Trek in 2009 i cant think of another remake that has gotten major plaudits, suppose this is Ireland, cribbing and moaning of getting "screwed" is in our nature:D:D:D

johnny_ultimate

don ramo wrote: »

:D

i dont understand either, bar Star Trek in 2009 i cant think of another remake that has gotten major plaudits, suppose this is Ireland, cribbing and moaning of getting "screwed" is in our nature:D:D:D

Yep, and Len Wiseman's presence should be another indicator of 'Danger Will Robinson!'

Apologies if I seemed harsh in my previous posts, but I'm always disappointed how successful these films are even when a lot of people seem so opposed to the idea of remakes. Especially when they shamefully distort Phillip K Dick stories

pixelburp

Yeah I find passing amusement from people decrying this films mediocrity & pointlessness, was there ever any other outcome with Len Wiseman at the helm? The guy makes Brett Rattner look like a hive of creativity & vision.

CiDeRmAn

On the decent remake very short list I'd like to include True Grit, very good indeed.
Little Shop of Horrors too, albeit going back somewhat.
The remake of Hairspray was good, ditched the counter culture stuff though but was entertaining.

B.A._Baracus

So is there any nice shots of jessica beil's butt in this one? :pac:

charlietheminxx

I thought this pretty much compared to the original. The original was cheesy and full of bad effects but it was interesting and didn't rely on an hour of overdone action sequences of Kate Beckinsale looking angry and beating people up to work. The first one had more of a sci-fi feel and a more interesting premise. This re-make was utterly forgettable, bar a few scenes.

CL7

pixelburp wrote: »

Yeah I find passing amusement from people decrying this films mediocrity & pointlessness, was there ever any other outcome with Len Wiseman at the helm? The guy makes Brett Rattner look like a hive of creativity & vision.

Live Free or Die Hard was pretty good imo. The first Underworld...

Ok the Underworld movies are crap but I still liked them. I think he's a good action director, just needs the right script.

Edit: Who am I kidding? He's a hack. Still, I enjoy his movies.

blatantrereg

It was bad and the major changes were bad.

It was the most retarded attempt at an invasion ever. All someone needed to do was drop a big rock down the hole through the centre of the earth to disable the fall and smash incoming troops. It seemed like they thought bombing that blatant choke point would seem clever or climactic, rather than hugely predictable and lame. I thought maybe the first wave would be a surprise attack, which would seal off the landing area, but no: A formal declaration of war before they set out, and lots of Australians milling about at the dock. So dumb it hurt.

Is this movie the reason we have to wait a full year for more Breaking Bad? If so, then shame on you, Walter White, if that is your real name.