Remakes are a part of life nowadays.
You can truly see how bereft Hollywood is of original ideas. Barely a week has gone by in the last couple of years without a sequel, adaptation, or remake gracing the screen that Friday. It's getting to the point that the Best Original Screenplay award at the Academy Awards is almost null and void. They might as well just give it to Tarantino, regardless of whether or not he even releases a film that year.
I'm not saying that remakes are all in all a bad thing. We've got great films out of the Remake genre (can't believe it's a goddam genre now...). Scorsese's The Departed was a remake of a foreign film; Snyder's remake of Dawn of the Dead remains one of my favorite zombie flicks; and The Amazing Spider-Man is, in my opinion, better in almost every way to its predecessor. Hell, Clint Eastwood's Man with No Name Trilogy was based on the films of Akira Kurosawa. But that doesn't mean that remakes are going to be a success by default, and neither does the love of the original work. There are some films that just should not be fucked with. The Evil Dead remake, in my opinion, should be damned to developmental hell for eternity.
Many remakes are doomed to fail. Die-hard fans believe that remakes of original films which still hold up today (but are being remade or altered because science!) are for no good reason, and may actually harm the film's original integrity. Go ahead and tell a die-hard Star Wars fanboy that the remastered, CGI-infested, holy-shit-the-sarlacc-has-a-fucking-beak trilogy is better than the original cut. I dare you.
And now, we have Total Recall.
This particular entry isn't a review of sorts, but more a comparison between the shiny new remake released this year and the 1990 original. I'll be forthcoming with any bias I may have towards either, to make it fair. I'll go over the major differing points of both films, and designate which one I feel is the superior of the two. In the end, you can decide for yourself if the new film is worth your time.
1. THE LEADING MAN
1990: Remember what I said about bias? This is what I was talking about, pretty much. Arnold is the fucking MAN in this movie. The late 80's/early 90's were Arnie's prime in film, and this is (or should be) regarded as one of his greatest performances, plastic faces et al. He passes as the 'normal working man' despite being Arnold-fucking-Schwarzenegger, and goes all-out Arnie in the action sequences. Considering he's not exactly considered the Marlon Brando of his time, he did pretty well for having to play several distinct roles in one film. But what make this movie great for me are the one-liners that only Arnold can deliver. If you haven't seen this movie, watch it for the comedic gold alone.
2012: I've always been a fan of Colin Farrell. He made Daredevil watchable. He was a comedic genius in In Bruges and Horrible Bosses. He was a convincing enough action guy in SWAT. There were times in this film that I appreciated him there over an Arnold-type due to believing that he really could be just a normal guy, and that fit a lot of the film due to how the story plays out differently from the original. There are just two problems I have with this casting: 1) His 'normal guy' look plays the exact opposite to Arnold's, in that it's very hard to believe that he is who he thinks he is, which leads to a certain suspension of disbelief in the film (I know it's a sci-fi flick and suspension of disbelief is pretty mandatory, but bear with me); and 2) As much as I like him, Farrell isn't a very likeable guy. He is cast in a lot of roles as a goddam prick, and he does it well. Minority Report, Daredevil, Phone Booth, Horrible Bosses, Fright Night, and you know...real life, he's unlikeable, and that makes it hard for the audience to get invested. I could see a lot of people watching this movie without getting in the main character's ordeal whatsoever, and that leads to a boring-as-hell moviegoing experience. It's pretty much how I feel when I watch Mad Men most of the time.
Winner: 1990
2. THE LADIES
1990: Speaking of unlikeable, both major female roles in this film, protagonist and antagonist, come off as MAJOR bitches throughout the whole movie. Sharon Stone started off the film hateable, and that was before she started trying to kill Arnold (although maybe that's just my baggage from watching Catwoman. "I've put on so much make-up that I'm nigh-invulnerable!" ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?!). Then we go to Rachel Ticotin, Hauser's old partner/hooker. Also unlikeable, also antagonistic towards Arnold while supposedly helping him. The only thing about her that I appreciated was that she held her own in the fights she participated in, but other than that she served little purpose.
2012: It's hard to argue with Kate Beckinsale and Jessica Biel in the same movie in terms of attractiveness. Both women did decent enough jobs at what they were there to do. Kate in particular stood out as not only being hotter, but being WAY better than Stone at the same role. In the beginning, it really seemed as though she cared for Quaid and was his wife, leading to true speculation later on in events of the film. And when she was bad, holy shit was she good at it. She was badass all over the place in this. Biel played the supportive partner of Hauser better than the original as well, in that I didn't want to punch her every time she was on screen. She maintained the character's usefulness but seems more critical. Poor Colin would have spent the movie walking around with a confuzzled look about him, going 'Uh, what?' if not for her being there. Also, again, way hotter.
Winner: 2012
3. THE ANTAGONISTS
1990: Ronny Cox must be a bastard in real life because he's so good paying one on the big screen. His performance here as Cohaagen was reminiscent, if not the same damn thing, as his performance as OCP big-bad in Robocop. He's probably a standard-bearer for the 'evil corporate douchebag' role and he shines here, making no bones about his business being of the Chaotic Evil variety. It also helps that his second-in-command is a badass bad-guy extrordinaire Michael Ironside. The second you hear this guy's voice, you know he is not a man with whom to fuck. His voice could probably kick my ass. Watch the Justice League cartoon and listen to Darkseid talk: you know business is serious. He was the bad guy in Free Willy, for fuck's sake. That says something.
2012: This is a tough call for one reason: Walter fucking White. Bryan Cranston is awesome no matter what he's doing, and he follows suit here as Cohaagen 2.0. The main difference here is that he's not so much an outright 'evil corporate douchebag' as he is a political figurehead with some problems to solve, which he plans to do in a not-so-moral kind of way. I find him more realistic and even sympathetic here, and that doesn't necessarily fit the bill for the film. However, the robot cops that work for him are awesome onscreen. I was afraid that this was going to turn into a CGI-fest, but these guys looked great and gave the film an old-school action movie feel.
Winner: 1990
4. THE DIRECTOR
1990: Paul Verhoeven has made some of my favorite sci-fi movies of all time; namely Robocop, Starship Troopers, and the film in question, Total Recall. This guy was way ahead of his time. Robocop in particular looked way better than it had any right to. He also throws in a lot of satire through media presentations in his films, clearly stating he has a bit of a problem with Big Corporate. In my opinion, he did just as good a job with Recall as Ridley Scott did with another Phillip K. Dick adaptation, Blade Runner. Recall wasn't just an sci-fi action flick: it was a pychological thriller that I believe films like Memento and Fight Club have taken notes from.
2012: I'm not sure why Len Wiseman was chosen to helm the Recall remake given his lack of experience in the sci-fi realm, but he didn't do a half bad job. I'm a fan of his Underworld movies, Kate Beckinsale in tight leather notwithstanding. His direction of Live Free or Die Hard was very meh, but fun in the extremely ridiculous 'John-McClane-fights-a-plane' kind of way. However, this movie really steers from the thriller aspects of Verhoeven's work and goes straight to a shoot-em-up with robots, making it a fun but much more mindless derpy movie.
Winner: 1990
5. THE LOOK
1990: This movie probably could have looked better. The cyberpunk, rundown, dirty streets of the future were well established, but not as well as the similarly set Blade Runner (which had come out 8 years prior). The vehicles in particular stood out as being clearly unstable and rickety, and not in the rundown, gritty way that Blade Runner made vehicles appear. The mutants are another good example of how aged the film is. The mutated humans of Mars were obviously weighed down in prosthetics and almost took away from the concept. And OH GOD those rubber faces...I laughed so hard...
2012: This was probably the driving force behind remaking this movie at all. It looked fucking great. The vehicles, buildings, and overall atmosphere really did impress upon the audience that, while it was obviously a technologically advanced future world, it was a rundown, damaged, and struggling world. It reminded me of a great mix of The Fifth Element and Minority Report (yet another Phillip K Dick adaptation). And again, the robot police force looked amazing in action as the big threat to the main characters. They moved and interacted with the people onscreen as if they were real, adding to the tension and struggle the characters were going through.
Winner: 2012
6. THE STORY
1990: Total Recall is one of the great sci-fi mindfuck movies with, not one, but several twists to the plot that were well executed one after the other. This is helped with Arnie looking and behaving both confused and pissed the fuck off throughout the entire film. The emphasis of Phillip K Dick's work regarding the impact and influence of fucking up your mind is all over the place, making it more of the thriller than just the action flick we like to associate Arnie with. I feel that this film is a very well executed thriller as well as a quintessential science fiction story.
2012: It's tough to remake a mindfuck movie. Most of your target audience are going to be fans of the original and therefore know how it ends, which takes away much of the impact. If they ever remake Citizen Kane (I'm sure it's coming...) most of the audience isn't exactly going to be going, "I wonder what the fuck he means by 'Rosebud'". So remaking a film of this sort is tricky business. Thankfully, Recall 2.0 tells the intrigue and mindfuckery of the original to go fuck itself. This movie is, as stated before, a straight up action flick, plain and simple. However, this simplicity makes the film much more predictable and because of that, less enjoyable. Going into this movie, I was hoping for something more; maybe not the exact same things as the original, but something to surprise me. This movie was easy to follow, told a decent story in a sci-fi setting, and was totally not what I was looking for in a Total Recall remake. Most importantly, it misses the point of the original: the effects of playing tricks on the mind. This movie plays out more like The Bourne Identity than Total Recall. If I wanted to see that, I'd stay home and watch Matt Damon beat people unconscious with phone books.
Winner: 1990
7. THE RATING
1990: I know the rating of a film seems a little trivial to nitpick over, but trust me, it's a big deal nowadays. Action, sci-fi and horror films in particular have suffered greatly due to the impact of the MPAA meddling in the filmmakers' affairs. More than a 'fuck' or two guarantees millions in profits lost due to a hard R-rating, much less the gore and nudity that made these genres great. But I digress. The 1990 film was made in a different time, and got away with more bang for your buck in terms of content, mainly coarse language. It was glorious. Listening to Arnold curse is like music to me. I loved it. The film also contained more brutal violence, imposing a darker atmosphere on an already dark tone. I miss movies like that.
2012: The PG-13 rating on the remake led to pretty much the circle jerk of violence being present but not as brutal or prominent as it could have been. The language was toned down significantly, of course, which does the film an injustice considering the main character's dialogue should consist of 'what the fuck?' and 'bullshit.' throughout the film. I was a little disappointed in Wiseman in regards to the rating, considering the Underworld films were R-rated and did much more for me in these aspects.
Winner: 1990
8. THE THREE-BOOBED HOOKER
1990: Featured in several scenes, but obviously prosthetic. Also the woman herself was a bit of a butterface.
2012: MUCH better looking in every way, but blink and you'll miss her.
Winner: Everyone
FINAL SCORE: 1990 - 5 / 2012 - 2
There you go, folks. Of course, the original was better. It typically is. I'm not saying don't go see the remake of Total Recall. It's a decent sci-fi flick with some great action that looks awesome and features attractive women in leading roles. It's also, however, a shining example of Hollywood's desire to cash in on popular work without having to come up with anything new, and things like ratings castrating the newer films aren't doing people any favors.
Then again, you try and go original and you get Battleship. No wonder remakes happen.
Knight Owl
No comments:
Post a Comment