Total Recall (2012)

Total Recall

Unlike a lot of people, I have nothing against remakes, in principle.  There are a lot of classic films that are remakes - Ben Hur, Maltese Falcon, Magnificent Seven, Fistful of Dollars...I could go on.  But I am going to say right off the bat that the new Total Recall is most definitely not on this list...or even close to being on this list...I don't necessarily think it was a bad idea to remake the film, even though the Schwarzenegger Total Recall is a classic (click here to read my review of the original!).  It's a neat story, and I would be open to seeing another interpretation of it.  But 2012's Total Recall just doesn't work.  It's just bland and blah and no fun at all.

Doug Quaid (Colin Farrell) is a factory worker in the future who is bored with his life.  Even his super hot wife, Lori (played by the super hot Kate Beckinsale) can't shake him out of his funk.  It doesn't help that he isn't sleeping well.  He keeps having crazy action movie dreams where he is trying to escape with his girlfriend Melinda (Jessica Biel).  Looking for a little excitement in his life, Doug goes to Rekall, a vacation memory business.  Can't afford to really visit the rings of Saturn?  Rekall will implant the memory for you for a fraction of the cost!  You can even buy a specialty package where you can be someone else for a short time...even someone like a secret agent!  Doug thinks that sounds like a fun vacation so picks the secret agent package.  But something goes wrong during the operation.  While implanting the memory, Rekall discovers that someone has already tampered with Quaid's mind.  He might actually be a secret agent.  Suddenly guards burst into the facility, a massive gun battle starts up, and the wild ride begins!

This is a fun science fiction concept merged with Alfred Hitchcock's "wrong man" conceit (as much as many love original Total Recall for its science fiction qualities, I happen to love it because I think it is Hitchcock on crack!).  But what follows is generally a bland movie.  There's not a lot I can point to that is necessarily bad about it.  The actors are fine, the action scenes are fine, and the special effects are fine.  Everything is just kind of fine...but nothing stands out as really cool or different or interesting.  The exception is the technology used in the film.  A lot of thought went into creating some cool science fiction concepts, such as The Drop, a giant metro train that descends through the Earth, traveling back and forth between England and Australia, which is called the Colony (for fans of the original, Australia replaces Mars).  Of course, when The Drop hits the Earth's core, gravity flips, and everyone not strapped down kinda of floats around for a bit.  When you think about it, does The Drop make a lick of sense?  Not really, but I don't care.  It's a nifty little idea.

But other than the technology, Total Recall really has nothing going for it.  I think the biggest problem is they missed the whole point! The riddle of Total Recall is that the audience is not supposed to be sure if the story is real...maybe this whole adventure is just the vacation package that Doug Quaid purchased at Rekall!  The new Total Recall kind of ignores this whole idea, despite a few obligatory throw away moments, scenes that I think are supposed to confuse the audience about what is reality, but are conceived in such a half ass way that no one could possibly believe them.  And besides, this whole adventure is just exhausting!  Doug Quaid leaps from firefight to firefight, falling off buildings, getting into car accidents...if this is his vacation package, then it is the WORST vacation ever.  I would demand my money back.  In the original film, Quaid actually goes on an adventure...despite his injuries, despite the number of times he almost dies, the whole plot is a roller coaster ride.  It's fun!  And I could easily see the original film as being a Rekall vacation package, leaving doubts in the audiences' minds even as the end credits roll.  It's pretty remarkable.  But there is nothing remarkable about the remake...it's dour, way too serious, and bleak.  And despite it's title, it definitely is not Total Recall.

MVP:
I have to go with the technology again!  There are just a lot of neat futuristic ideas in this movie.  From phones implanted in people's hands to the crowded apartment complexes in The Colony to The Drop that I mentioned above, this movie just has a lot of fun art designing the future.  Technology is easily the most interesting thing in the film, and an easy MVP!

BEST LINE:

Doug: If I'm not me, who the hell am I?

Lori: How would I know?  I just work here.

Doug: Speculate.

Lori: If I had to guess, all the trouble Cohaagan's taken to hide you from the Resistance, you must be fairly important.  And with your skill set, I think it's highly doubtful you're his gardener.


TRIVIA:
The one-shot fight scene was indeed shot in one take, and was performed by Colin Farrell himself instead of a stunt man.  It took 22 tries to get the scene right. 

John Carter

John Carter

John Carter is the type of movie that makes me just a little sad.  Though it has performed decently overseas, it was crushed at the box office domestically, and Disney is estimating they are are going to lose $200 million on the film.  The movie is going to be remembered as the big flop of 2012.

And it doesn't deserve it.

I'm not saying John Carter is great.  It's not.  The movie, directed by Andrew Stanton (Finding Nemo), has some real problems and is even a little clumsy in places, especially in the film's opening scenes.  The script is a bit hokey in places, the acting is sometimes hit or miss, and I don't understand why Mars looks like Utah.  But you know what?  It is ten times better than most of these summer sci-fi blockbusters which end up making a bazillion dollars no matter how bad they are.  And that it just a shame.

Because John Carter is the granddaddy of all of them.  In 1912, Edgar Rice Burroughs, who also dreamed up Tarzan, created modern science fiction when he wrote a story about an Virginian cavalry officer who finds himself on Mars, where he has super strength because the gravity makes his human bones more dense.  He is a stranger in a strange land, finds himself siding with the locals against an evil empire and marries a princess.  Sound familiar?  It should, because we've been watching this story all our lives.  Burroughs' work has inspired writers, filmmakers, scientists - men like George Lucas, James Cameron, Ray Bradbury, Frank Frazetta, and Jerry Siegel.  Why wasn't that little fact in the marketing?!  The trailers for John Carter made it look like some lame Star Wars or Avatar clone, when really it is the other way around.

Despite its flaws, John Carter's heart is in the right place.  The film is genuinely exciting in a lot of places, and the comedy is for the most part natural and not forced.  Most importantly, you can tell that the filmmakers are involved not because they want to make a big blockbuster, but because they love the source material.  They are trying to do the classic story justice.   This enthusiasm crosses over to the cast, which includes Taylor Kitsch (Wolverine) as our title hero, Lynn Collins (also from Wolverine) as the Princess Dejah, and a solid supporting troupe that includes Ciaran Hinds (Rome), Polly Walker (Rome), James Purefoy (uh, also Rome), Mark Strong (Sherlock Holmes), Dominic West (300), Thomas Haden Church (Easy A), Samantha Morton (Minority Report), Willem Dafoe (Spiderman) and Bryan Cranston (Drive).

TANGENT: Speaking the casting, I have to address some miscasting.  Dominic West was cast as the villainous ruler Sab Than, while James Purefoy was cast a roguish good guy captain Kantos Kan.  Both are fine actors and put in solid work, but it is clear to me that their roles should have been switched.  Dominic West keeps getting cast as villain because of his dark looks and mean glare, but he doesn't have the true menace needed here to be a worthy evil tyrant of Mars.  One look at Purefoy's Marc Antony in Rome and you will see a glimpse of the charismatic, magnificent asshole-ishness that Sab Than should have had.  Purefoy would have been spectacular.  Instead, he is stuck as the dependable and noble Kantos, who has an unfunny comedic scene late in the movie that borders on embarrassing.   Purefoy just looks out of place, but West could have pulled it off.  More than than, as you can see from his vibrant work in Centurion, West would have owned this scene.  It would have been funny without making the character any less badass.  West would have been superb.  I know this is a small detail, but that simple switch would have made a big difference.  TANGENT OVER.

Anyway, overall, John Carter is a mixed bag.  It has its flaws, but there is a lot to like in it, and I think it is a shame that it got destroyed at the box office when it really isn't that bad.  It deserves better.  I think everyone reading this review should go check it out.  They might be pleasantly surprised.


MVP:  
When he was hired to write the score, Michael Giacchino (Lost) was told to go big, to write "his Star Wars."  And he does.  With some nods to John Barry, John Williams, and Maurice Jarre, Giacchino goes into overdrive, writing a grandiose (if a tad over-used) main theme and a stunning love theme.  His work propels the movie forward and gives the dramatic scenes more emotion than the script sometimes deserves.  It's terrific work.  If the movie had done better, he would have been guaranteed an Oscar nomination.  Alas, I fear that this score will be lost to the mainstream.  But I will do my best to trumpet its cause.  And I will start by giving Giacchino my MVP award!


BEST LINE:
Tars Tarka: When I saw you, I believed it was a sign...that something new could come into this world.


TRIVIA: 
Possibly, this movie has the record for being in 'development hell' for the longest period of time.  The first attempt to make the film was all the way back in 1931.  No one succeeded until now.  That's...over 70 years!!!

Drive

Drive

Do you know the old fable about the scorpion and the frog?  The scorpion comes to a river and asks the frog if he will ferry him across on his back.  Despite the fact that scorpions are dangerous, the frog agrees.  So the scorpion hops on the frog's back and the two begin to go across the river.  Halfway across, the scorpion stings the frog, paralyzing him.  Sinking, the frog cries out, "why did you do that?  Now we'll both die!"  And the scorpion just replies, "It's my nature."

I mention this because the fable of the scorpion and the frog has a deep thematic tie to Drive, one of the best movies of last year.  And no, the fable does not ruin anything about the movie, so don't think I spoiled anything.  I would never do that to you!  But I do think knowing the fable increases your enjoyment of the film and allows you to see it on another level.

Our frog is the unnamed character played by Ryan Gosling (The Ides of March).  In the credits, he is called the Driver, so we'll call him that, too.  During the day, he is a movie stunt driver and a mechanic at a garage owned by Shannon (Bryan Cranston, Breaking Bad).  In his spare time, he is a getaway driver for bank robbers and gangsters.  He is the frog ferrying these bad men to safety.  And as if there were any doubt about the symbolism, he also wears a jacket that literally has a scorpion on its back.

There is a difference between Driver and the frog in the fable.  When the scorpion tries to sting Driver, he fights back.  And damn, can he fight.  When one of the heists goes horribly wrong, Driver finds himself a target of local gangsters Bernie and Nino, played by Albert Brooks (Finding Nemo) and Ron Perlman (Hellboy).  But he's not gonna go down easy, and things are gonna get bloody.

But don't let this description fool you.  Drive is not an action film.  The violent scenes, though gruesome, are few and far between.  This is more of a character study of the Driver.  More time is spent on his relationship with his neighbor, Irene, played gracefully by Carey Mulligan (An Education).  But even these scenes are slow - the Driver and Irene spend more time looking at each other and smiling than they do talking.  And it's actually kind of sweet.

I do not want to imply that this slow pace is a negative thing.  It's not.  But I do think people should be warned before getting into it - this isn't The Fast and The Furious.  The pace works for the mostly silent character of the Driver and is an important element of the film.  If they had sped the pace up, then it probably would not have worked as well as it did.

While I want to make sure people know what they are getting into, let me be clear when I say Drive was one of the better films of 2011.  Superb direction, writing, and acting all combine to make one helluva movie.  I consider this one of the big snubs of the 2011 Oscars.  How the poorly reviewed Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close got nominated and Drive didn't...sigh, I don't get it.

MVP:

Ryan Gosling, easily.  In three different movies in 2011 (Drive, The Ides of March and Crazy Stupid Love) and with three very different performances, Gosling showed how truly versatile he really is.  With his smaller frame and cherub face, Gosling didn't really seem like a badass to me, but he totally owns this performance and is a truly powerful force of violence when he is unleashed.  But his performance is even more remarkable because it is mostly silent.  He has so few lines, and focuses on his body language and eyes to sell the emotion.  It's great work, making him an easy MVP.

BEST LINE:

Driver: You tell me where we start, where we're going, where we're going afterwards.  I give you a five minute window.  Anything happens in that five minutes, I'm yours.  No matter what.  Anything happens a minute either side of that and you're on your own.  I don't sit in the car while you're running it down.  I don't carry a gun.  I drive.

TRIVIA:

Drive was originally going to star Hugh Jackman and be directed by Neil Marshall (Centurion).  That would have been interesting, but probably would have been more of a straight action movie.  It certainly would have not have hit the cult classic status that Drive has already claimed.