what s wrong with Total Recall (2012)? why it bombed?

what happens in thor the dark world
to you people, what do u think went wrong with this film, and why did it bomb with very bad reviews..
i think collin farell is really here, so does kate beckinsale, but there is just maybe not the oumph feeling you get when u watch the original 1990 film, probably because arnie was the lead there, and a certain micheal ironside which is really good as a bad guy in any film, on another note i really like ironside in Top Gun.

the direction and cgi here are very good, but there is just something with the plot that doesn t tick for me, so what do you think?

I guess the boring answer would be that it does little (if anything) to distinguish itself favourably either as a remake or as its own movie so critics and audiences alike simply didn't respond to it. I don't think it's completely terrible (about a ), which I'd say makes it semi-watchable but completely inessential.

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

First thing was that it's meant to be a take on the same book as the 1990 movie... and be a remake of the 1990 movie... yet has almost nothing in common with either the book or the 1990 movie, omits all references to Mars which is a major plot within the story... in fact, the movie is so far removed from the original story that the filmmakers were actually able to not put Philip K Dick 's name in the credits.


And... it's extremely badly cast.
Farrell is awful at the best of times, nobody cares about Jessica Biel, and Kate Beckinsale got the job simply because she's married to the director.
And as for the director... Len Wiseman has never been involved with a decent movie apart from when he was an assistant janitor on Independence Day and Men In Black.

__________________

Oh, I care .

Seconded

I barely remember anything about this movie. That's point number one.

What happens here that make it stand out? It has two beautiful ladies that were cast based on their looks, not their talent. Farrell is great now, but back then he was doing money based projects and did't inject any character whatsoever into his performance.

Lots of the film was re-cut with Ethan Hawke originally in the film and it's PG-13 rating crippled any hardcore fans of the original. It simply doesn't 'feel' like Total Recall.


Many more points, but those come to my mind first.

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

She makes my flesh crawl.

__________________

Pretty simple why it bombed. It was a remake. An unnecessary remake to a huge classic action movie which is still popular among action/science fiction movie fans today starring Arnold and directed by Paul Verhoeven. It can't get any better than that. How on earth did those dumb movie producers think that a remake to a movie like that would be a hit is beyond me.

__________________
“Let me tell you something you already know. The world ain't all sunshine and rainbows. It's a very mean and nasty place and I don't care how tough you are, it will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently if you let it. You, me, or nobody is gonna hit as hard as life. But it ain't about how hard ya hit. It's about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward. How much you can take and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done!” ~ Rocky Balboa

Her attempts are welcome .

Ugh. We're never going to fight over women.

I have to admit i found jessica biel hot back in her first films, and she was hot in Stealth, but lately she grew old,and her body suffered i think, she s not as curvy as she used to be..and her face looks older..

I actually thought the remake was quite disappointing. Roger Ebert is one critic who gave it a pass surprisingly. I still say Biel is hotter than Beckinsale, but I guess that's just a side not .

My problem with the movie is that it really feels rushed. The story is very rushed, with way too much action, like they couldn't wait to get to the next battle scene it feels like. The whole thing also just looks very overshot, and over edited.

Also, unless I missed something, there is a huge plot hole in this one compared to the original.

SPOILER

In this one, they remove that there are no psychics in the movie, trying to read the villains' minds to see what they are going to do next. In the original, they blank Quaid's mind to fool the psychics. But since there is no psychics in this one, why did they blank Quaid's mind for? Does it make sense, and I missed something?

I also didn't like how they tried to redo certain touches, such as the three breasted woman, when they could have just tried to make a more original remake instead, if that makes sense, without having to have such nods.

But those are my reasons why I found it quite disappointing to the original. However, I didn't really mind that Mars was omitted and didn't think that the setting mattered, as long as it was a dictatorship setting. Does it matter if the dictatorship setting is Mars, compared to a country on Earth?

Looking older is still a common side effect of aging, yeah.

That's not a good thing??

__________________
"My Dionne Warwick understanding of your dream indicates that you are ambivalent on how you want life to eventually screw you." - Joel

"Ever try to forcibly pin down a house cat? It's not easy." - Captain Steel

"I just can't get pass sticking a finger up a dog's butt." - John Dumbear

quoted for truth.

__________________
We are both the source of the problem and the solution, yet we do not see ourselves in this light...

Careless actresses, obeying the laws of thermodynamics.

Let me know when someone figures out a way to circumvent the hayflick limit in order to prevent senescence!

__________________

Seriously though, I almost turned it off when I saw it wasn't even going to be based around the Mars story. I thought that was a terrible decision and it seems I'm not alone there. "Oh, we're gonna re-make your movie alright and it will look nothing like the original, huzzah!!!" Well played lads!

Eh, on the other hand I get the impression that, if it that tried too hard (and maybe even succeeded) to be a 1:1 replica of its source, it would come across as even more redundant than it already was. At least the version we got made up its own weird stuff like the tunnel through the Earth's core.

For me, I don't like Colin Farrel (I don't know why. "Bullseye" maybe?)

The girls are eye candy - good eye candy (one of the few reasons to watch this film), but kind of gratuitous.

I agree with ironpony that the film felt rushed.
Roller Coaster Ride and Rushed are two different things (one goes up and down, slow and fast, and is lot of fun, the other is the feeling you have waiting for the traffic light to change when you're late for work).

One thing I do remember from this movie was the tunnel that goes through the center of the Earth and the reversal of gravity. As a sci-fi fan, such concepts are things I enjoy thinking about, and gravity fascinates me - the idea that someone could be reading this right now who is completely upside down from my upright direction is intriguing.

(Watching a bit of 2001 the other day, I was thinking again about the centrifugal force simulated gravity aboard Discovery 1 and wondering if it would feel JUST like gravity on Earth, or a bit different - just in the sense that you're running all the way around inside a wheel?)

I know the construction of a trans-Earth tunnel is impossible (and probably always will be), but what about one that doesn't perfectly bisect the planet, but cuts across a portion of it so that its ends are subject to even slightly different gravitational directions - what would it be like where gravity begins to change?