IMDb > Total Recall (2012/I) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Total Recall
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Total Recall More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 4 of 55: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [Next]
Index 549 reviews in total 

17 out of 29 people found the following review useful:

Don't compare it to the 1990 movie of the same name.

Author: haikallp from Singapore
8 August 2012

I managed to watch total recall a couple of days back, and have watched it a second time. The reviews I've read so far reveals how many are comparing this to the 1990 movie staring Arnie.

Well, there are many differences in these two movies and if you want to truly enjoy this remake, you have gotta forget bout the original one. Try not to compare Arnie with Farrel and Beckinsale with Sharon Stone.

Graphically, Total Recall is beautifully crafted with good CGI work. It makes you wonder how believable the place is. It paints a future of the world where only two 'countries' exist while the majority of the Earth have become inhabitable. The difference in these two countries is vast and both of them looks amazing.

Collin Farell acting here is good but not worthy of any awards though Kate Beckinsale was amazing. She was definitely the best actor in this movie, hands down. The guy who played Cohagen was average a best. The other actors seemed blend and no one really stood out.

I have watched the original Total Recall and i have to say that these remake is slighty better. It feels more epic, saving a country seems more intense than saving a bunch of people living on Mars. The notion 'What is real' works well in this movie, especially in one of the scene in the hotel lobby i believe. What this movie lacks as compared to the original was a lack of witty lines. Arnie had some witty one-sentence line whereas Collin was pretty much serious throughout.

Total Recall started out great but by the time it hits the 60-80mins mark it starts to become a mindess action movie and it was pretty much predictable after that.

All in all, Total Recall is a great movie for someone who has never watched the original. I would give a rating of probably 7-8 out of 10.

Was the above review useful to you?

13 out of 22 people found the following review useful:

At last a reboot that doesn't just try to reshoot the original

Author: chebs1 from United Kingdom
13 November 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Before I start let me say that I too loved the original when it first came out. It was original in it's day. It was also yet another Arnie film to source for movie one-liners and quips. Unfortunately, the very things that made it fun also made it a pretty silly sci-fi film.

I'll just say straight out that I loved this reboot. It's not played for laughs which is a smart move - yes in the day Arnie's comedic one-liners where right for the time but now the audience that loved that film has grown up, moved on and wants a more serious version, what's wrong with that?

The story has been re-written and has removed the need for Mars as a back drop or the, frankly, silly premise of mind reading mutants.

There is a lot of action, in fact once Quaid gets to Rekall, the film becomes a non-stop roller-coaster of action. Again, I don't understand why people are complaining about this. It's suppose to be a sci-fi/ action film, the original was a sci-fi/action film what's is the problem?

If there is a criticism it would be that other than the main characters, namely those played by Farrel, Beckinsale and Biel, the other main characters (Cohaagen and Matthias) don't really get any explanation or introduction, then again do they need it? I'm not so sure.

For all those complaining about the fact that the original kept you guessing as to whether it really was a dream or reality. You obviously haven't seen both versions (the theatrical release and the directors cut). Lets just say in one it goes one way in the other another.

So, bottom line, if you want a really well put together sci-fi/action film with cutting edge special effects, an excellent story that is really well acted by all involved, watch this. If you want to reminisce and bitch about anything that's different, don't watch this. Either way suit yourself.

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 24 people found the following review useful:


Author: reece young from Australia
4 September 2012

I have seen the original movie countless times growing up, this remake does it great justice. The cast fit well, the acting was great and the action and directing of this movie was brilliant! until the very end, of which was not the greatest 'end of movie battle'. Besides that it was well constructed and if you had seen the original it definitely misleads you to think you know what is going to happen, but you don't. It was really well designed to correlate with the original but maintaining its own story line without letting the lines get too crossed. In order to replicate an old classic and maintaining a fresh new story would not be easy. 10/10 from me.

Was the above review useful to you?

17 out of 30 people found the following review useful:

Recall this film!

Author: alexm-3 from United Kingdom
10 August 2012

Has the world gone mad. Has Hollywood decided that bad is now good. Are we all now living in an alternate reality. Will dogs and cats start living together?

Basically I'm lead to these conclusions based on the continual re-emergence of Colin Farrell in lead roles. There are two possible reason for this.

Reason 1,

Hollywood Producer A: "Hey lets sling a film together, not something original, just a rehash of a classic."

Producer B: "humm...good idea. Colin Farrell is cheap and will do anything."

Reason 2,

Producer A: "I want to destroy the originality in film making. Why! (He says rhetorically) Because originality is difficult and risky, that's why. (He says replying to his own rhetorical question)"

Producer B: "Who can we get to deliver such a mesmerising, just missing the point of everything, kind of a performance?(Short pause) There is only one man... Colin Farrell."

There may be other reasons. Please send answers on a postcard to:

Reasons why Colin Farrell gets lead roles, Fictitious Address 395, Loudfartington, LF19 421

Was the above review useful to you?

17 out of 30 people found the following review useful:

A better than expected remake

Author: abisio from Miami
4 August 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The original TOTAL RECALL was directed by the Paul Verhoeven; the genius behind ROBOCOP and STARTSHIP TROOPERS among others masterpieces. The GOVERNATOR played the main character, and baddies where Sharon Stone and Michael Ironside and Ronny Cox. The new version, directed by the mind behind the UNDERWORLD series; Len Wiseman who happens to be Kate Beckinsale husband and starred by Colin Farrell, Kate and Bryan Cranston the baddies (Ironside character was eliminated; probably to give Kate more screen time) and Jessica Biel (in an undeveloped character in both movies). Compare the two versions is tricky. The new one has outstanding special effects and certain things, like the resolution are less disappointing than creating an atmosphere in Mars in just a few seconds; however the humor of the first movie has nowhere to be found in the new version.

Colin is a good replacement for Arnold and Kate is a total bitch so her character is credible. Action and violence are strong so the movie is easy and fun to watch. If you saw the original, there is nothing really new aside from the FX.

Was the above review useful to you?

18 out of 32 people found the following review useful:


Author: nsoderi from London, England
6 October 2012

As most of everything else nowadays, another action movie with no chemistry or identity that stole a name of a great production from the 80's in order to make money. Lots of money invested in a movie with no context. It's hilarious how there is no one out there to make great scripts like the old times. Is lack or talent or motivation the main ingredients required to make movies today? What is it that avoids producers, directors and actors to make great movies and consequently great money? Sincerely, this decade is far winning the golden globe of rubbish movies in a decade ever released.

Don't wast your time or money with that!

Was the above review useful to you?

18 out of 32 people found the following review useful:

Don't see this movie!

Author: Lukin900 from Australia
24 August 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I have just seen this film, and have to warn others not to see it. This film is rife with inaccuracies and things that don't make sense. The most obvious is, the film is set in Australia and Britain and all but a handful of characters have an English accent. Why Bill Nighy had to have an American accent I will never know. Even the chancellor of the Federation of Britain has an American accent. I find this odd, because as we all know no foreigner can be an American president. And Australia was treated even worse. Not an Australian accent to be heard, not even a fake one, as Hollywood likes to do. The renaming of Australia, I can only assume, has to be a reference to her past. It's odd how Americans forget that England had colonys in the Americas at the same time, and using these colonys for the exact same purpose. Australia's renaming can't be because of its relationship with Britain ( being in the commonwealth) because anyone who had done their research would know that Australia is a sovereign state. Then there's the issue of the currency, I understand that Barak Obama is a popular president but why would he appear on another country's currency? Also, anyone that had done research would know that military personel in both Australia and Britain pronounce lieutenant ( leftenant) only Americans mispronounce it(lootenant). I just could not follow the idea that these two great nations took all the worlds refugees after a chemical fallout, and all the other countries perished including the US, the only difference is the US had emptied. Everyone moved to the UK or Australia enough to destroy their language and culture. The last thing that didn't make sense, was the fight at the end between Quade and Cohagen. This battle takes place in the rain, but there was no water on their faces. It's a small gripe, I know. But it pulled me out of the movie. One last thing. Enough with the lense flares, looks like a design student that has just found the lense flare tool in photoshop.

Not as smart as the Schwarzenegger version. And it's odd that a company called "Original Films" made a movie that is based on a book, has already made into a film, and uses every cleche in sci fi film most notably "Bladerunner"

This movie is one long chase movie, it goes from one too long chase to another. Which would be fine, but it's at the expense of plot and character.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

It is what it is, and I liked what it is

Author: ac-156 from United States
1 January 2013

I was a little skeptical walking into this movie but I was pleasantly surprised. Now for starters I loved the original, and pretty much every other 80s/90s "futuristic world is now a $h!t hole and one guy is about to f*** people up". Im glad to see movies going back to this format (Total recall, Dredd, In Time, etc.) because its on of my favorite genres.

As for the movie its heavy on the chase scenes and loaded with 1 vs. infinity situations that make for a fun night of action and not thinking too hard. It was a CGI heavy film, which isn't a bad thing but I feel they leaned a little too hard on it (something about the cars rubbed me the wrong way). The acting was good, Colin Farrell and Jessica Biel worked well together but I felt a forced aspect to Kate Beckinsales role.

Don't go into this movie expecting to laugh, cry, or think. Go into ready for action and nostalgia (yes nostalgia, watching it feels like the 80s/90s with better acting and better visuals). I really did like the movie and I think it didn't get enough credit for being what it is.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 15 people found the following review useful:

It's actually really good!! Great special effect, action and acting

Author: anbei68 from United Kingdom
11 November 2012

A lot of people watch this movie to see mutated human and mars, but to be honest, forget about the first film, it was great but this movie did a really good job using an old name but making a great action flick. The action and acting was great (even though as a martial art practitioner i didn't think some of the fight scene was realistic, but im not expecting it to be a fighting film anyway). The highlight is really the twists of the storyline, and the futuristic landscape and taste - as a die hard science fiction movie fan, I was incredibly impressed with that. All the acting was superb, Colin and Bryan did a fantastic job, as well as Kate and Jessica (they both are my favorite Hollywood actress).

Anyway, this film is a must watch for any Sci-fi fans, and remember try not to expect any old 1990 version before watching it - this film stand solid on its own as a great sci-fi + action film!

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 17 people found the following review useful:

amaze balls

Author: sita_chez from United Kingdom
14 September 2012

OMG what is up with some people ragging on this movie I'm a huge fan of the original Arnie version, one of my faves of his work, and was very worried they'd mess this up but I loved every minute of it.

Yes they have changed the story up a little, no longer set on mars but on a damaged Earth which has only two parts of the planet actually live-able anymore (not a spoiler as this is presented at the very start, written across the screen, and on all the board and IMDb).

there is still a woman with 3 breasts but as she is wearing some kind of bra this was worthless to even have in it (and I am a straight woman, why bother to show 3 tits if no one sees them, lame) you've got two bad-ass female action stars (kate beckinsale and jessica biel), kicking a lot of ass including each others, loved it. But even everyone else's fighting very fast, very damaging, very slick, much better fighting moves than the original (still love it though).

there was a lot more robots and amazing CGI, which they couldn't really do when the original came out really, anyone who watches the original can tell when it looks off. all the bits they changed / added that I thought would make it suck I really loved, I hated what his job was in this one but it came in handy in the end. plus all 3 of the main stars look hot as hell.

for anyone would loves the original, this remake will not disappoint, there are even some bits that show off the original at times like in station/customs scene "2 weeks".

PLEASE IF YOU Haven't ALREADY WATCHED IT, DO SO NOW THIS IS AMAZE BALLS!!!! thoroughly enjoyed every minute of it, I only put it on to check quality of it but was so engrossed I had to watch the whole film right there right then, even thought it was 7:30am after having worked the night shift, its that good.

anyone young thats seen and enjoyed or plans to watch please also watch the original as its a great movie too, and we should never forget where it came from. I'm only 27 but I hate when there is a reboot/remake of something I love and someone not much younger than me has no clue of the original film/TV show even existing, sickens me.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 4 of 55: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history