Total Recall (2012)

[Deep Wang]

It's definitely a remake, which is refreshing to see.

How is that refreshing?

If only they didn't announce it to be a remake. People are biased when it comes to that word.

How could it not be announced as a remake? There is no way this could be sold as an original idea.

[Deep Wang]

Crap like The Master comes out every year too.

Uh, no. The Master is a very unique movie.

Which is the exact opposite of Total Recall, cookie cutter in every way.

[Gopher]

Say what you want about The Master, but I highly doubt you've seen another movie like it. Except Algren hasn't seen it at all, so...

[The Toymaker]

How is that refreshing?How could it not be announced as a remake? There is no way this could be sold as an original idea.

I always think that not many remakes actually re-MAKE the original idea, and with this one I thought they did. They changed enough to make it fresh, but not too much to make me think it was a different idea completely. Most remakes are scene-for-scene copies.And the comment about it being announced as a remake was theoretical, meaning that if the first movie was never made, and this new one just came out of nowhere, I believe that it would have made lots more money. I should have explained that better in my original post.

[The Toymaker]

Say what you want about The Master, but I highly doubt you've seen another movie like it. Except Algren hasn't seen it at all, so...

Movies like that come out every year.

[mattmav45]

Listening to Algren talk about film quality and taste is kind of like asking a 4-year old questions on subjects such as the origin of the universe or the meaning of life.

[Deep Wang]

I always think that not many remakes actually re-MAKE the original idea, and with this one I thought they did. They changed enough to make it fresh, but not too much to make me think it was a different idea completely. Most remakes are scene-for-scene copies.And the comment about it being announced as a remake was theoretical, meaning that if the first movie was never made, and this new one just came out of nowhere, I believe that it would have made lots more money. I should have explained that better in my original post.

The filmmakers had no idea about what makes Total Recall, well Total Recall. Best example of this, is the woman with three breasts. The reason she had three in the original movie, was because she was a mutant. They just wanted to have the chick with three tits in this movie, so there you go.

[The Toymaker]

The filmmakers had no idea about what makes Total Recall, well Total Recall.Best example of this, is the woman with three breasts. The reason she had three in the original movie, was because she was a mutant. They just wanted to have the chick with three tits in this movie, so there you go.

They didn't care for that aspect. They didn't need to. It was a remake, so the mutation theme was gone. But the film-makers still live in the real world, a world where people will remember the last one and compare, so it's nice for them to let the audience know that they are not ignoring it completely.

[The Toymaker]

Listening to Algren talk about film quality and taste is kind of like asking a 4-year old questions on subjects such as the origin of the universe or the meaning of life.

Listening? :rofl:When I read your posts, there are so many mistakes in them, I have to stop myself from laughing. Your film opinions simply mirror that of RT and the sheep on this forum. Way to be original.

[acab]

Unbelievably bland, forgettable and by-the-numbers. Nothing like the original.

[A Marvel Fanboy]

Hah, it is bad just because it's not like

the original ?

[Goffe]

Best example of this, is the woman with three breasts. The reason she had three in the original movie, was because she was a mutant. They just wanted to have the chick with three tits in this movie, so there you go.

maybe because the girl with three tits was a homage to the original movie? jesus christ! Edited November 7, 2012 by Goffe Bond

[acab]

Hah, it is bad just because it's not like

the original ?

Of course not. It's just bad all by itself. Mediocre actually.

[DoctorWho]

I just saw the extended DC version, and it's just medicocre..so much rehashed from the old movie. The best parts of the movie are WW and the visuals...I give it 6/10

[Hangman]

What was the point of living with Lori and working in the factory?

[Olive]

6.5/10

[YoursTruly]

Yet another dull, lifeless, paint-by-numbers movie from Len Wiseman. If only we could drop him on the other side of the world...and make him stay there.C-

[Lordmandeep]

Timepass but I love how Kate kept coming back and ruining everything lolAlso 3 Breasts that increases it by half a gradeB-

[TheMovieman]

Watched this earlier today and although it's fairly clinical in its storytelling, I was mostly entertained. Colin Farrell is suitable in the lead, Jessica Biel was... Jessica Biel and Kate Beckinsale was wondering where her PVC outfit was from Underworld. It's predictable and despite what Len Wiseman contends, not ambiguous at all. I also checked out the extended director's cut and there are few shots/scenes that are different but there are two differences: 1) the Ethan Hawke cameo is back in (during the apartment scene) and 2) the alternate ending actually makes it even less ambiguous than the theatrical version. Oh, and I might've missed it in the theatrical version, but in the DC, it's revealed that

Melina (Biel) was not only lieutenant to Matthias (Nighy), but she was his daughter as well.

.

Anyway, not great by any means and you can certainly see all the money being spent in each and every scene, but I was entertained for about two hours.

***½/*****, (B, 6.9/10, 2.75/4)

Edited December 14, 2012 by The Movieman

[mattmav45]

It takes everything that made the first one work (campiness, cheesy one-liners, humor) and basically eliminates it from the fold.  The remainder is a souless and basically storyless film.  Sure, it looks good, but when there's no story to support it......what's the point?