Total Recall remake
- Thread starter Deckerd
- Start date
Well, if Paul Verhoeven's not involved, that automatically means the remake will have approximately 85% less gratuitous gore, so I'm all for it. 
Yeah, but Len Wiseman is involved and that automatically means the remake will be approximately 100% shitter.Well, if Paul Verhoeven's not involved, that automatically means the remake will have approximately 85% less gratuitous gore, so I'm all for it.
Nardpuncher
Rear Admiral
And maybe it's because I'm 37 and was 17 years old when the original came out but I think the original just isn't that dated to need a remake.
That is if you think something needs to be old fashioned and dated in order to need remaking.
That is if you think something needs to be old fashioned and dated in order to need remaking.
Agreed, The original is still a fine example of a modern sci-fi movie. Yes it's a bit vulgar, but that's Verhoeven for you. It's one of my favourite films.
However, i'm not against remakes or reimaginings, I take every film on it's own merits and i'm always in favour of people making more sci-fi.
However, i'm not against remakes or reimaginings, I take every film on it's own merits and i'm always in favour of people making more sci-fi.
MeanJoePhaser
Admiral
Yeah, but Len Wiseman is involved and that automatically means the remake will be approximately 100% shitter.Well, if Paul Verhoeven's not involved, that automatically means the remake will have approximately 85% less gratuitous gore, so I'm all for it.
"That's your director? What a bitch!"
"The guy's a fucking asshole!"
"The mutants think he's fucking Martin Scorsese."
"See you at da party, Wiseman!"
I'm hoping that this isn't so much a "Total Recall remake" as a new adaptation of Philip K. Dick's "We Can Remember It For You Wholesale." The Dick story and the Verhoeven film are profoundly different, so a film that uses the story as its launching point and develops it in an independent direction would be very different from the previous film.
I was thinking the same.
Well it's not like that was the only possible title for such a story. But you're right. The TPTB dickheads are definately going to call it "Total Recall". Just like they called the movie in which a kid in China learns Kung-Fu from Jackie Chan "The Karate Kid".
They can call it whatever they like. Indeed, if they did take a radically different direction using "Wholesale" as a starting point, they could give it yet another new title. Of course, they'll probably go with Total Recall for the name recognition, as you say, but that's just promotional, and doesn't preclude them from developing the story in a totally different way. So I'm really not concerned about the title.
I could go along with that, but a remake of the film just seems silly to me.
Hollywood doesn't care about how old something is to remake it. They're remade movies that were new just 2-3 years before the new "re-imagining" so nothing is sacred.
Total Recall remake? I'm surprised they didn't jump on it sooner. Of course the quality of it is still up in the air. Len Wiseman today, who knows tomorrow.
I have fond memories of Total Recall.
Before John Woo's films became widely known, Total Recall set a benchmark for gratuitous violence--as the following clip from Hot Shots! Part Deux will attest:
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vUD2iUr5To&feature=related[/yt]
This remake had better go in a completely different direction. Otherise, it runs the risk of sucking even more loudly than the average remake.
Before John Woo's films became widely known, Total Recall set a benchmark for gratuitous violence--as the following clip from Hot Shots! Part Deux will attest:
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vUD2iUr5To&feature=related[/yt]
This remake had better go in a completely different direction. Otherise, it runs the risk of sucking even more loudly than the average remake.
The project's been in development for nearly a year and a half already, so while the studio may now be seeing it as an opportunity to ride Inception's coattails, that wouldn't have been their reason for starting the project in the first place.
People often think of remakes as a modern phenomenon, but they often remade the same story several times per decade back in the era of silent films and early talkies.
Exactly. There were at least three different versions of DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE in 1922 alone. And Lon Chaney Sr. and Todd Browning filmed THE UNHOLY THREE twice, with pretty much the same cast: once as a silent and once as a talkie!
And let's honest here, TOTAL RECALL was twenty-one years ago (or will be when the remake comes out). Millions of modern movie-goers weren't even born then . . .
The thing older fans often don't seem to get is they're not making these movies for us. They're for a new generation of moviegoers for whom 1990 was ages ago . . ..
Yes. The Maltese Falcon for example, was adapted for the screen no less than three times between 1931 and 1941. The version with Humphrey Bogart was the third.
Well, that raises an interesting question:
Namely, if they're not making this movie for us, then why are we even talking about it? Fuck them.
That is true but it was also due to limitations of the time. Now it's just blatant they're redoing/remaking/reimagining/rewhatevering they want to call it. At one time they at least tried to limit the exposure of the fact it's just redoing a movie that was previously a huge success or a huge flop. I think the fact they're so much more open and frequently open about it now irks people. Especially when they are used to a more discreet and less common flood of remakes of classic and recent movies.
Similar threads
- Poll
