See it if you like…
“Inception” “Mission Impossible” series “Minority Report”
It’s About
Future Colin Farrell is bored with life, so he goes to Rekall (which puts fake memories in your head), and discovers he’s actually a wanted spy but doesn’t know what the fuck is going on. All of the sudden he has these fighting abilities and people like Jessica Biel wanting his junk.
What I’ve heard
All I’ve heard from folks is skepticism. The main reasons being
- a) it’s an Arnold Schwarzenegger remake (which must go untouched).
- b) you can’t remake a cult classic. It’d be like remaking Napoleon Dynamite, Rocky Horror, or The Wicker Man.
Oh wait…
What I saw
Look if you’re going to see this movie angered because Ah-nold isn’t in it, then you’re not going to like it. This is not 1990’s Total Recall. The stories are different. Granted, there’s a good amount of similarities, but the plot is different. You will not watch this movie the same. Over it.
Plus, I understand that anger over redoing the movie, but let’s be honest here… 1990 was not ready for this movie. To make a sci-fi movie of this magnitude, you need some decent computer technology, which 1990 didn’t have.
Personally I think holograms are more believable/realistic than Arnold in a fat-chick face.
You have to go in to this movie like you’ve never heard of Total Recall, and just enjoy the updated technology they show. If you can’t do that, but want to still suffer through it, then imagine Farrell’s character is just another guy in the world of future-Earth, and isn’t trying to be Arnold’s character.
Pictured: Arnold, and not Arnold
The best/most interesting part is
The whole idea of “The Fall” and how it’s basically the epicenter of the world at the time. A very interesting concept that they definitely do more than just touch on.
Bet you didn’t even know…
The movie, Minority Report, was supposed to be a sequel to Total Recall, but ended up being its own… thing.
But don’t take my word for it… What’d you think?
a) it’s an Arnold Schwarzenegger remake (which must go untouched).
True.
b) you can’t remake a cult classic. It’d be like remaking Napoleon Dynamite, Rocky Horror, or The Wicker Man.
False. It was too big a movie and production at the time to ever be considered “cult.”
I have my doubts about the movie especially with after some of the reviews, but I would still give it a chance. I think CGI is a problem, not a benefit for the most part. I like the extra effort (on the part of both the engineers and the skilled director) that goes into producing good old-fashioned, tangible special effects as opposed to CGI cartoons.
I see your point and I agree that CGI is abused in the industry today. However, CGI is a big benefit when it comes to Sci-Fi movies and that’s the only genre that should use it. I think in order to get the vision the director and writer are looking for with that genre, you need computers to help and make the vision come true and seem more realistic/possible on the screen.
But using CGI in some stupid Brad Pitt action movie is just plain lazy.
Yes, in some ways it works. It worked in the Matrix movies because you were dealing with as artificial, computer generated reality.
Mer, as per our conversation the other night, I agree, this was not meant to be the Arnold film. However, I have to say:
“Plus, I understand that anger over redoing the movie, but let’s be honest here… 1990 was not ready for this movie. To make a sci-fi movie of this magnitude, you need some decent computer technology, which 1990 didn’t have.”
Well, I for one think the rubber Arnold looked better than CGI Collin. Also, to say that it was not right for a movie to be made without proper CG, IDK if I agree with that. I wonder, couldn’t you say the same thing about Star Wars? (Can’t you see Topher Grace as Luke? LOL!) And when you remake a movie, using the same characters and roughly the same plot, comparisons will and should be made. If someone were to relaunch TDK in a couple years, people would rightfully compare them.
But looking at it without comparing it to them, I didn’t feel any attachment to Collin’s character, OK he’s whiny because there’s a brief scene where he’s at a factory in the beginning where he looks kinda unhappy. Are we supposed to suspend our disbelief and pretend he doesn’t have a smokin hot GF? In Minority Report, I just felt you actually cared about TC’s character and what he was trying to do. Given the action was awesome in the movie (props to the guards for using Chiappa Rhinos as their sidearm) I guess I felt a little cheated because I was waiting for there to be more elements of “is this real?” than there was. There were some cool scenes of him questioning reality, but not enough.
At one point I joked to Amanda, could the movie have been made without anyone being allowed to jump onto anything?
I agree that Farrel’s character is less adaptable than Cruise’s from Minority Report, but I should clarify that I’m comparing that in terms of futuristic-action and cinematography, not character development. I get your point about the story lagging. But the whole point of me writing about this is to show how it would appeal to the target audience, which are high school boys who’ve never seen Arnold’s movie I’m guessing. That’s the only reason I can comprehend the point of the remake in the first place.
Same with how they’re re-making Red Dawn. It’ll be terrible in comparison but teenagers will love it.
I gotta stand by my statement though that had CG been possible in 1990, Arnold’s movie would’ve been a thousand times more sci-fi awesome and less hilarious.