TOTAL RECALL Pre-Release Thread - Page 2

The Verhoeven/Arnold commentary is also one of the greatest things ever recorded.

 

I couldn't disagree more, but I guess I'm in the minority. I'll bow out now, and leave this to you gents.

To me it's not so much that it's brilliant or anything as that it's a distinctive, memorable movie with its own personality, which is exactly the kind of thing we need more of in our SF blockbusters. The remake seems to be actively trying to avoid being memorable, while still riding the coattails of the original.
 

Well that I can agree with.

 

That's pretty much all that needs to be said.  It's not quite up there with the likes of Terminator or Carpenter's The Thing or Predator or Raiders or Robocop, but it's certainly better than say... Explorers or The Hidden or Dreamscape.

THE HIDDEN rules.

I love The Explorers. But every movie you listed (that I've seen), succeed or fail, is still the work of filmmakers who wanted to do something unique and fun and distinctive. People who were filmmakers first, in other words.

 

I've just been reading more self-justifying, morally equivocating shit from JMS about why he agreed to write for Before Watchmen, and I realized this is all part and parcel of the same problem. It's not that you can NEVER EVER do a reboot/remake/sequel/commentary on the original material. It's that when the only motive is clearly "produce more product in order to make more money from this brand name" you're actively diminishing the culture.
 

 

Thank you. This is perhaps my favorite Schwarzenegger movie that isn't Predator. It's just so weird and gonzo and absolutely unique.

Oh so movies should be made for your age, I see! Most of us were kids when the original was released and most of us loved it at the time (I did too), and most young kids will probably dig this movie too. You seriously think they do these type of movies for the 30+?

The original is extremely unique, but also very dumb. I'd put it well below Predator, Conan (the Barbarian), Terminator, and Terminator 2 in the Arnold canon, somewhere above the total shlock of Collateral Damage and The 6th Day, in sort of a middle tier.

However, just because I don't really think the original is all that good or particularly sacred doesn't mean that this remake looks like anything but uninspired crap.

 

I think they must be, to a certain extent. Why else include call backs to the original? Why use the same title if they're supposedly going back to Dick's source material, instead of making a slightly-altered version of Verhoeven's picture? It reminds me a bit about how the comics business works these days-- largely trading on the nostalgia of the children of the 80s, and taking advantage of the extended adolescence we seem to be enjoying.

 

I agree with J.L. above-- none of this would be a problem if the new movie didn't have "Redbox rental" written all over it. But I suppose today's kids will eat it up with a spoon because they're dying to see Colin Farrell's next picture. Just like they turned out in droves to see the "Fright Night" remake.

 

Oh, wait...  

It's a good flick. On par with THE RUNNING MAN for me.

I'm on record that i think TOTAL RECALL is ok at best, but it's a masterpiece compared to THE RUNNING MAN. THAT film needs a
remake in a major way.

I enjoy the Running Man well enough, but Total Recall is a straight-up classic in comparison.

 

Right on. That is a genuine case where you could return to the source material and make a completely different-- even relevant-- movie. Less game show, more reality show.

Agreed! Although I vaguely remember me and my friends thinking it was pretty cool at the time.

 

ETA: This was in response to Judas previous post. I certainly don't find much to enjoy in The Running Man nowadays!

I know I said I'd bow out, but I'm still honestly mortified that people like Arnold in this thing. Why can't I let this go? AM I DREAMING THIS?

 

 

I liked alot of stuff as a kid.  But there's a difference between loving a film as a kid and believing that love makes the film good, and loving a film and later (through discerning adult eyes) realizing it's genuinely great or genuinely mediocre or terrible.  I used to love D.A.R.Y.L., still do, but I can admit today that it's a middling, mediocre flick.  My eyes are wide open with Total Recall.  I used to love it, still do, and now realize it's great.  As a kid, your taste sucks because you don't have a vocabulary of discernment...you don't know the rules of art, and how to judge it properly...kids like just about anything bright, loud and fast moving 

 

 

Of course kids will dig it.  Kids also dig eating paste and playing in the dirt.  

 

And any movie can be for anyone of any age.  I love Disney films and I love horror films...both target different age groups, but a film is a film is a film.  The Star Wars trilogy are the biggest kids films ever made...and my fucking grandma likes them.

Yeah, since the Philip K Dick fans have been pointing out that Wiseman's film no more faithful to the original then Verhoeven's film was........

SONY is  writing this 200 Million buck fiasco off,since,as Jacob pointed out in the CHUD box office thread, they are not spending a lot on marketing.

IF you spend 200 million bucks on a film,you had damn well better hope it has box office appeall across the board.

I think Total Recall is in a good position right now. People who were looking for a big fun action sci fi blockbuster with a gritty edge will have had their spirits dampened on Batman, and many will end up skipping Dark Knight Rises in theaters. It certainly effected my mood during that film. A month down the line though and they might be again ready for a big release, with Total Recall positioned perfectly, waiting in the wings to get the ticket sales.

 

Ha! That's a good one!

If there's one thing the original absolutely is, it's unique.  It's laughable that a studio would hire a personality-free director for a remake and expect anything but a result that's lesser than the original film and certainly lesser than the book itself, which it doesn't appear to be a particularly faithful adaptation of...so what's the point?

A personality free director is perfect in their eyes because they believe a guy like that runs the chance of offending less people than someone distinctive. The more bland, the broader the appeal.

 

Personality free directors are the new spawn of Hollywood...they literally breed these guys now.

You know what's ironic? I don't think "personality free directors" have to be a scourge on the movies. As I think I've said in this very thread, Len Wiseman is a perfectly competent craftsman. The Golden Age of Hollywood was full of directors like that, people who just pointed the camera, and they still managed to produce a lot of enjoyable films. But that's because there was a strong guiding hand in the producer, and the writers were better (or at least their scripts weren't micromanaged to within an inch of their lives). (Or were they? I got the impression they weren't...)

 

I think the real problem is the trend to, as I say, produce product that's as unoriginal and unimaginative as possible. I think if you gave Len Wiseman a good script and had a good producer standing on his neck you might get a decent result.

 

The difference between Golden Age journeyman and today's hacks like Wiseman is the old guys had a solid filmic vocabulary.  Even though they lacked a distinct point of view, they made up for it with competent craft.  A guy like Wiseman is just doing feature length music videos, and music videos have no craft other than purely technical (with a few exceptions)...alot of these hacks come from the music video and commercial world, in which (not surprisingly) the overriding objective is to sell a product, not tell a story, which is what separates them from proper filmmakers.  The new hacks are more in line with the salesman like attitude of producers and Hollywood execs.  They are an extension of corporate groupthink, and this is why films today are even worse than the bad films of yesteryear.  They feature two completely different mindsets.  I spoke about this at length in another thread.  Not to keep tooting my own horn, but....

Len Wiseman is an errand boy, sent by grocery clerks, to collect a bill

I'm all over this fucking movie opening day. The bar it has to reach for me to enjoy it is just pathetically low. I will give a full report on every stupid change, bizarre acting choice, and hamfisted reference to the original in this.

 

Personal Hopes:

 

-three breasted woman now has decency strip over nipples

 

-there's a 'Get your ass to -----" line playing on repeat

 

-Kate Beckinsale's arms get ripped of by an elevator, followed by 'Consider this a divorce!'

Predator BARELY has a love interest to be fair.  Commando applies though.

Anyone else find it curious that there are NO REVIEWS POSTED for this thing yet?  NOTHING, and it opens in 3 fucking days.  

 

Get your ass to FLOP

Anyone you know interested in seeing it this weekend? Just checking.

 

Nope.

 

also: http://blogtown.portlandmercury.com/BlogtownPDX/archives/2012/07/31/and-now-to-answer-the-greatest-question-of-our-age

At this rate, I'd rather play the NES game again.

I had to look hard, but I've assembled the perfect group for taking this in. At the Friday matinee, the way it was intended.

Will it be better than Lock Out? Who knows?

Still kind of curious about this.  This and Dredd feels like last years equivalent of Conan and Fright Night, two movies I think were actually kind of cool and fun B movies.

I actually really enjoyed Fright Night despite some flaws but thought that Conan was lifeless and awful. Judged on what I've heard about these movies, I can definitely see Dredd being this year's Fright Night, with Total Recall naturally taking its spot as this year's Conan.

 

The originals, or last year's remakes?

 

ETA: Scratch that-- I see what you were getting at.

TOTAL RECALL is "Completely Forgettable".

 

First review up.

Definitely didn't expect that kind of reaction.

 

You mean "totally forgettable?"  That's more or less exactly what I expected.

 

Apprently Sony feels the same way since they're writing this off.

Definitely didn't expect that one either.  This film has just completely proven its doubters wrong so far.

I'm constantly amazed at how all it takes to make some people forget a filmmaker's track-record is one decent-ish trailer.

Well, some of the action scenes in LFODH were well staged and exciting. Not the finale, but the jeep stunt. But other than that...

Most of these guys' movies - Wiseman, Snyder, PT Anderson, Ratner, even McG - have that one moment where you think "Man, this film could be really good, if only the other 99% of it were EXACTLY LIKE THAT!"

 

Yeah, like the bit with the bowling pin in There Will Be Blood. What a gyp the rest was!