Skip to comments.Are you looking forward to the new Total Recall?
Posted on 05/13/2012 8:11:27 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
When rumours of a Total Recall remake started circulating a couple of years ago, Guardian writer Ben Child gave voice to sentiments felt by many fans of the original film:
Total Recall hardly needs a remake. While it was one of the last big-budget movies before the CGI revolution, its over-the-top look has helped it stay timeless. Furthermore, modern Hollywood simply has no equivalent to Schwarzenegger that preposterous, yet magnificently magnetic screen presence. Who could carry off the mix of silly and serious required to make this an exciting adventure?
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
The end result of such a faux CONservative is that he was more destructive to the conservative movement here that even Gray Davis which, of course has now led Californians into giving Gray's old boss, "Governor Moonbeam" into the governorship once more.
Furthermore, Arnold allowed another faux conservative, Pete Wilson to advise him far too often in far to many issues and that just made matters worse than if we'd had a commie-crat Governer that could have motivated what legislators we had into stopping the commie-crat like we did Gray Davis on the Sierra-Nevada CONservancy that Gray even vetoed 2 or 3 times!!!
I had dreamed of the day we could recall "Dim Bulb Davis" and replace him with an honest-to-goodness conservative with winning ways that would lead to a conservative renisance in CA like we had between Pat Brown and Jerry Brown... Ronald Reagan.
Tom McClintock would have been such a man but all the amateur king makers even here on FR let Arnold seduce them into thinking that Tom couldn't win the election. They created an obvious "self-fulfilling prophecy" and the rest is now a devastating liberal history for the tarnished "Golden State!!!"
Now all we're left with here are "lamentations" in a public policy leach field!!!
A remake of Total Recall?
That’s silly. It’s not old enough to merit a remake, and it was well done in the original. There’s nothing that new technology really has to add.
Though... If anybody is listening... If you want to remake something then please fortheluvvaGod please remake Titanic.
A lamentable ping!!!
McClintock would have lost in a landslide anyway.
Hollywood? Why don’t they make a movie about the birth of Obama.....or.....how Obama saved us from people making 150K+.....or how Obama cured all diseases with National Health Care.....or...How Obama “”equalized” America???
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, AKA Blade Runner, is a very futuristic novel when the Earths ecosystem has been almost totally destroyed. In the book, there is a very, very high price paid for real wildlife, but the robotic versions are almost as pricey.
The book I always wanted them to adapt would be very hard to do, because it’s very involved.
“They just cannot come up with anything original anymore.”
Total Recall was a much less than faithful adaptation of We Can Remember It For You Wholesale. So first off, the movie was itself not original. The “remake” has the opportunity to be an adaptation of the story, not of the first movie - ergo the first only gets dibs on respect because it was first, not for any other claim to canonicity. If the new one plays loose with the original story, well, so did the first movie.
Arnold never seemed correct for the role. He was too ... massive. Colin Ferrel has a more normal look in the trailer, more fitting of the character.
Yeah, the first movie’s effects were the night point of the pre-CGI era. That’s nice. It’s 2012, and I’d like to see the story rendered in a far more sophisticated detail.
I’ve read the short story, and per this thread may just read it again this week.
I’m looking forward to the remake - has a chance to do the story better justice. The trailer looks great.
So ... My question to all here is ..... If a story can be told and maintain the original concept ... And REVEAL the concept and maintain that concept and pass it on to a NEW generation of leaders .... ..... Should we cast it asside .... Or pass it on to the successors?
...... The future of this world just may rely on what we do NOW .... To laugh and jeer at it now .... May be to the demise of this ideal and the future ..... And destiny of this world :-(
..... Choose wisely.
Already a remake, 2 of them.
I certainly agree with you......but on the same note, how can Hollywood possibly release a new 'blockbuster' "Spiderman"????? I mean, the last three of 'em were all done in the last few years or so.........so it's time for a remake? They didn't get it right? Their CG wasn't good enough?
The ONLY time I've seen such a strategy work was with the "Batman" franchise. The first few sucked hugely; a different Batman every time with increasingly idiotic scripts.........but when new directors took on the subject with Christian Bale as the Dark Knight, it suddenly got very interesting (vs. stupidly camp).
Only if they get the damn physics of decompression right....
you say Tom would of lost?...Well how did we win with Rnull?...we didn't we still lost and we didn't ever try Rnull 2003 is Rommey today..sold the same old way for the same old rino reason...we win we loose we loose we loose
Gads, if they’re so hot to do CGI make Ringworld already!
They could start with Protector...
I cried when Sharon Stone died. That woman is hotter than a Venusian afternoon.
Rachel Ticktin (sp?) wasn’t bad either. Quite the athlete.
Why bother with writing a brand-new script when there's over 80 years of archives available for writers in Hollywood?
I went to school with her and saw her a couple years ago at a HS reunion, she has a 6’+ tall son and her husband is her size. Very nice family.
He wanted something to care for and as a status symbol.
In a way his need to have a pet might might have be prescient insight into the way people have pets as substitutes for children.