Hello, hello! So, I haven't seen 'Total Recall' yet, though I'm a fan of Wiseman's work and I think it will be an interesting (albeit, mediocre) take on what is a classic sci-fi flick and one of Verhoeven's best films. After reading the synopsis of the film, though, I've decided I'm not going to see it afterall. Strictly because of the wording used to describe it:
"A factory worker, Douglas Quaid, begins to suspect that he is a spy after visiting Rekall - a company that provides its clients with implanted fake memories of a life they would like to have led - goes wrong and he finds himself on the run."
Does this make sense to anyone? Let's take the basic information from the sentence. "A factory worker... begins to suspect that he is a spy after visiting Rekall... goes wrong, and he finds himself on the run." This is awful English sentence structure. In a class, there would have been red marks all over this thing. The correct way to write it would be:
"A factory worker, Douglas Quaid, begins to suspect that he is a spy after **A VISIT TO** Rekall - a company that provides its clients with implanted fake memories of a life they would like to have led - goes wrong and he finds himself on the run."
The second wording is a lot better. The first, despite being just poorly worded and awkward, suggests that people already know what Rekall is, but they don't. One, if they did, why put the separated description of the company in there, and two, you have millions of kids that don't even know there IS an ORIGINAL. So, you're marketing to people that don't know what the company is. Again, the synopsis is poorly worded.
I'm an English teacher and a film nut, so it frustrates the hell out of me when I see awesome movies being remade, those remakes potentially being terrible, but, on top of it all, the morons in those big fancy chairs pointed towards the Pacific ocean can't take the time to word a damn sentence correctly for the sake of an up and coming generation that could give a damn about the deteriorating English language. Next thing you know, synopses will be in text lingo. COME ON, PPL!
Sorry for the rant. Thanks for listening.
Schism
"A factory worker, Douglas Quaid, begins to suspect that he is a spy after visiting Rekall - a company that provides its clients with implanted fake memories of a life they would like to have led - goes wrong and he finds himself on the run."
Does this make sense to anyone? Let's take the basic information from the sentence. "A factory worker... begins to suspect that he is a spy after visiting Rekall... goes wrong, and he finds himself on the run." This is awful English sentence structure. In a class, there would have been red marks all over this thing. The correct way to write it would be:
"A factory worker, Douglas Quaid, begins to suspect that he is a spy after **A VISIT TO** Rekall - a company that provides its clients with implanted fake memories of a life they would like to have led - goes wrong and he finds himself on the run."
The second wording is a lot better. The first, despite being just poorly worded and awkward, suggests that people already know what Rekall is, but they don't. One, if they did, why put the separated description of the company in there, and two, you have millions of kids that don't even know there IS an ORIGINAL. So, you're marketing to people that don't know what the company is. Again, the synopsis is poorly worded.
I'm an English teacher and a film nut, so it frustrates the hell out of me when I see awesome movies being remade, those remakes potentially being terrible, but, on top of it all, the morons in those big fancy chairs pointed towards the Pacific ocean can't take the time to word a damn sentence correctly for the sake of an up and coming generation that could give a damn about the deteriorating English language. Next thing you know, synopses will be in text lingo. COME ON, PPL!
Sorry for the rant. Thanks for listening.
Schism
Tell Your Friends