Total Recall (2012) 3.5 Stars (out of four)
Okay, this is something I wanted to write for awhile and have finally gotten around to it. As you can see, I rated both versions of the movie with the same amount of stars (3.5). Does this mean I like them both equally? Not necessarily. I enjoyed each of them immensely for different reasons. So this is not going to be like one of my normal reviews, but rather a rumination on each film and their place in cinematic history. As always, I would love to hear your opinions as well (please post below), this is supposed to be a fun exchange of ideas. So let's dive in.
What I like about both is that they are indicators and showpieces for the time in which they are made. For those of you who don't know, they are based on the Philip K. Dick short story, We Can Remember It For You Wholesale. Dick is more famously known for writing the story on which Blade Runner is based, as well as Minority Report, Paycheck, The Adjustment Bureau, and A Scanner Darkly. Total Recall is about a Joe Everyman named Douglas Quaid who thinks his humdrum life is not all that it seems to be. He goes to a facility that give you virtual reality trips that seem as real as any other memory. During the procedure, something goes wrong and it turns out he is a badass secret agent on a critical mission that failed and the bad guys made him an ordinary shlub. He joins a resistance unit, meets a hot woman who he knew as a secret agent, and fights back against the bad guys. At some point, the bad guys try to convince him that this is all a fantasy. Quaid doesn't believe it and defeats them in the end and lives the rest of his life as Doug Quaid. Pretty cool stuff.
Now, to be fair, I tend toward the 1989 version starring Arnold Schwarzeneggar, because, well, I like Arnold and always have. That said, the 2012 version starring Colin Farrell in the Quaid role is good for other reasons. But first, let's look at the Arnold version. The 1989 version was a textbook example of the high-concept film, popularized in the 1980s. These films emphasized spectacle over story and are best illustrated by the Don Simpson/Jerry Bruckheimer actioneers. Typical high-concept films include: Top Gun, Die Hard, True Lies, Bad Boys, Armageddon, Independence Day, Beverly Hills Cop, Basic Instinct, Robocop, Flashdance, and Preedator. The movie was tongue firmly in cheek, ultraviolent and humorously over-the-top that it can never be taken quite seriously. Arnold was a master at these films. His dumb Austrian-accented one-liners and scenery-chewing mugging for the camera reach Shatner-levels of stratospheric cheesiness (see example below). The special effects, while cutting edge in their day, are creaky and old now. The sets and props are cheap and plastic-looking, and the mutants on Mars are about as politically incorrect as they get, with a three-boobed AND another midget hooker put in strictly for laughs. But underneath all of this teetering-close-to-camp gaudiness, beats a heart of pure joy and idealism. The film brings in themes of the downtrodden and how they will rise up in the end for a righteous cause. And in the end, it is revealed that Quaid really was a bad guy named Hauser in one of the best twists I have ever seen. I was spellbound the whole wild ride of the way. Somehow, this film manages to keep from drowning in a sea of awful camp and comes out ahead in the end. The film is ultimately optimistic in its outlook, but the final twist that it may not have happened at all is the best wrinkle of all. A true mind bender disguised as camp.
Now, the 2012 version, while similar in the general outline of the story, is much more pessimistic in its view of human nature. I would not classify the movie as high-concept, although the case could be made easily. The action is amped up a lot of notches and drops us into the middle of it, as most movies do today. The original, you feel like a spectator to what's going on. In this one, you are more a participant. It is also far less bloody. The movie is actually more realistic, if that is possible. Colin Farrell is not a superman like Arnold, but rather fits the Everyman mold much better. The film is a triumph of production design, calling to mind images of Blade Runner and Minority Report, both movies which brilliantly conceived their environments in their respective production design. But for me, the critical flaw with the 2012 version is its deeply pessimistic tone. It is much more focused on the proletarian revolution than the original, giving it a meaner and harder edge. It could be argued that the movie was channeling the negative malaise of the time that spawned such things as the Occupy Movement. There is a sinister air that pervades the whole film and I think, in the final analysis, taints it. In the end, it is just not as much fun. That doesn't make it worse, just different. Both are worth seeing and I would recommend either wholeheartedly.
No comments:
Post a Comment