Skip to main content

The past is a construct of the mind.


Total Recall
(2012)

I wanted to like this, partly because I don't think Paul Verhoeven's 1990 film is some kind of untouchable masterpiece (it's got Arnie in it for a start, and the whole thing feels like it was shot on sets) and partly because there's enough material in the premise that it could stand a few different takes on the Dickmeister. But director Len Wiseman and writers Kurt Wimmer and Mark Bomback do nothing interesting with this remake. What they do change is frequently so daffy you can only conclude that you're supposed to think that Quaid's dream at the beginning is real and[i] everything[/i] else is a dream. This, despite the ploddingly literal approach screaming (or dully echoing) otherwise.

So we have the Earth divided (chemical warfare miraculously resulted in two English-speaking land masses surviving!) into two territories, United Federation of Britain and the poor, blue-collar Colony (Australia...). Workers from the Colony travel daily to UFB through the centre of the Earth in a giant lift called the Fall. Terraforming Mars in minutes while Arnie's eyes pop out of his head seems utterly believable after this. It's almost as if the writers are daring you to take it seriously, but then the subsequent film is so po-faced you conclude there was little rhyme or reason involved. Despite the window-dressing of the setting, whole scenes slavishly follow the plot beats present in the original. At one point there's a visual reference to the woman Arnie disguised himself as. It's a nice gag that works as misdirection due to the lack of originality on display everywhere else, and one of the few in the mix (for example, revisiting the three breasted woman is indicative of how devoid of ideas the film is).

To be fair to Wiseman, his highly derivative (of Blade Runner, Minority Report, The Fifth Element) future world has a physicality and tangibility despite it's reliance on CGI effects. And he stages the action competently and clearly (something nothing short of miraculous in current cinema). But there's nothing to be involved with. 

The casting is utterly bland. Not just Colin Farrell (someone pointed out that he can only be relied on to give a good performance when he uses his native accent, and this is further evidence; he's not bad or anything remotely Arnie-esque but he's completely forgettable so there's no one to root for), but Biel, Beckinsale (she makes a convincing Terminator-bitch, but Sharon Stone was a far stronger presence with a third of the screen time), Nighy (who appears for all of two minutes) and Cranston. The latter is especially  pay-cheque grabbing. It's a fairly unnuanced villain role but it it needed someone to do something "big" with it. The only time Cranston breaks a sweat is the groan-inducing extended fight with Farrell at the climax. When we're asked to believe that Farrell's supposed super spy will take a beating from a furious politician. You can see the thinking in filling a future vision with actors rather than stars, but it required those actors to be invested in, or inject some charisma into, the proceedings. Everyone present is as going-through-the-motions as the script and director (actually, John Chu made an impression with his bleach blonde cameo as the Rekall guy).

The design is, as stated, derivative, but there are some nice touches here and there. A journey by train into the London wasteland (again, logic rears it's ugly head; how are people free of pollution a few miles away when anyone journeying to the wasteland has to wear a gas mask) suggest a far more interesting milieu than the wall-to-wall cityscapes, while the only chase sequence that provokes interest requires the pursued and pursuers to dodge a criss-cross of lifts as they hotfoot it down different shafts. But it's future world building where you have to be told how it is, rather than be shown. Why is there a working London with double-deckers at ground level below the flying cars and city in the air? Particularly with the aforementioned chemical nastiness not far away? Because visually it makes you pay attention, not narratively.  At least Wiseman makes sure his robot stormtrooper knock-offs are men in suits rather than Clonetrooper-CGI, and gets points for that.

The big climax, when it comes, relies on punches and explosions and lacks anything particularly intriguing (however, it occurred to me that the invasion force can't have been that large given the means of transporting them). Indeed, any cerebral element has long since been divested in a tiring display of non-stop action, lacking any hook to draw the audience in. 

I don't think the issue with the film was getting rid of Mars, it was not coming up with different-enough plotting or any philosophical backbone to base the remake on (its food for thought is all lip-service to the Arnie film). Ostensibly there's a stronger political edge to the script this time around (Cohaagen is waging a War on Terror which, for the most part, he has instigated, engineering proceedings in order to invade another continent and make use of its "natural resources"), but there's no bite or conviction to it. Maybe someone who hasn't seen the original would enjoy it more, but I suspect even then the lack of any real enthusiasm from its makers would leave them feeling short-changed.

**1/2

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

Prepare the Heathen’s Stand! By order of purification!

Apostle (2018)
(SPOILERS) Another week, another undercooked Netflix flick from an undeniably talented director. What’s up with their quality control? Do they have any? Are they so set on attracting an embarrassment of creatives, they give them carte blanche, to hell with whether the results are any good or not? Apostle's an ungainly folk-horror mashup of The Wicker Man (most obviously, but without the remotest trace of that screenplay's finesse) and any cult-centric Brit horror movie you’d care to think of (including Ben Wheatley's, himself an exponent of similar influences-on-sleeve filmmaking with Kill List), taking in tropes from Hammer, torture porn, and pagan lore but revealing nothing much that's different or original beyond them.

You can’t just outsource your entire life.

Tully (2018)
(SPOILERS) A major twist is revealed in the last fifteen minutes of Tully, one I'll happily admit not to have seen coming, but it says something about the movie that it failed to affect my misgivings over the picture up to that point either way. About the worst thing you can say about a twist is that it leaves you shrugging.

There's something wrong with the sky.

Hold the Dark (2018)
(SPOILERS) Hold the Dark, an adaptation of William Giraldi's 2014 novel, is big on atmosphere, as you'd expect from director Jeremy Saulnier (Blue Ruin, Green Room) and actor-now-director (I Don’t Want to Live in This World Anymore) pal Macon Blair (furnishing the screenplay and appearing in one scene), but contrastingly low on satisfying resolutions. Being wilfully oblique can be a winner if you’re entirely sure what you're trying to achieve, but the effect here is rather that it’s "for the sake of it" than purposeful.

No one understands the lonely perfection of my dreams.

Ridley Scott Ridders Ranked
During the '80s, I anticipated few filmmakers' movies more than Ridley Scott's; those of his fellow xenomorph wrangler James Cameron, perhaps. In both cases, that eagerness for something equalling their early efforts receded as they studiously managed to avoid the heights they had once reached. Cameron's output dropped off a cliff after he won an Oscar. Contrastingly, Scott's surged like never before when his film took home gold. Which at least meant he occasionally delivered something interesting, but sadly, it was mostly quantity over quality. Here are the movies Scott has directed in his career thus far - and with his rate of  productivity, another 25 by the time he's 100 may well be feasible – ranked from worst to best.

Well, you did take advantage of a drunken sailor.

Tomb Raider (2018)
(SPOILERS) There's evidently an appetite out there for a decent Tomb Raider movie, given that the lousy 2001 incarnation was successful enough to spawn a (lousy) sequel, and that this lousier reboot, scarcely conceivably, may have attracted enough bums on seats to do likewise. If we're going to distinguish between order of demerits, we could characterise the Angelina Jolie movies as both pretty bad; Tomb Raider, in contrast, is unforgivably tedious.

If you want to have a staring contest with me, you will lose.

Phantom Thread (2017)
(SPOILERS) Perhaps surprisingly not the lowest grossing of last year's Best Picture Oscar nominees (that was Call Me by Your Name) but certainly the one with the least buzz as a genuine contender, subjected as Phantom Thread was to a range of views from masterpiece (the critics) to drudge (a fair selection of general viewers). The mixed reaction wasn’t so very far from Paul Thomas Anderson's earlier The Master, and one suspects the nomination was more to do with the golden glow of Daniel Day-Lewis in his first role in half a decade (and last ever, if he's to be believed) than mass Academy rapture with the picture. Which is ironic, as the relatively unknown Vicky Krieps steals the film from under him.

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

This is it. This is the moment of my death.

Fearless (1993)
Hollywood tends to make a hash of any exploration of existential or spiritual themes. The urge towards the simplistic, the treacly or the mawkishly uplifting, without appropriate filtering or insight, usually overpowers even the best intentions. Rarely, a movie comes along that makes good on its potential and then, more than likely, it gets completely ignored. Such a fate befell Fearless, Peter Weir’s plane crash survivor-angst film, despite roundly positive critical notices. For some reason audiences were willing to see a rubgy team turn cannibal in Alive, but this was a turn-off? Yet invariably anyone who has seen Fearless speaks of it in glowing terms, and rightly so.

Weir’s pictures are often thematically rich, more anchored by narrative than those of, say, Terrence Malick but similarly preoccupied with big ideas and their expression. He has a rare grasp of poetry, symbolism and the mythic. Weir also displays an acute grasp of the subjective mind-set, and possesses …

He mobilised the English language and sent it into battle.

Darkest Hour (2017)
(SPOILERS) Watching Joe Wright’s return to the rarefied plane of prestige – and heritage to boot – filmmaking following the execrable folly of the panned Pan, I was struck by the difference an engaged director, one who cares about his characters, makes to material. Only last week, Ridley Scott’s serviceable All the Money in the World made for a pointed illustration of strong material in the hands of someone with no such investment, unless they’re androids. Wright’s dedication to a relatable Winston Churchill ensures that, for the first hour-plus, Darkest Hour is a first-rate affair, a piece of myth-making that barely puts a foot wrong. It has that much in common with Wright’s earlier Word War II tale, Atonement. But then, like Atonement, it comes unstuck.