All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
A question that always pops up in a film like this is “why can’t the bad guys shoot straight?” I found out why the stormtroopers couldn’t in Star Wars.
But otherwise I’m lost to an answer on this one?
The movie was enjoyable enough and kept me interested but by the end I just couldn’t get past these stupid bad guys and their poor decisions. The action came off slightly repetitive until the cool zero-gravity shoot-out towards the end.
The future world in which this was set is visually stunning and the Colony had a Blade Runner feel to it which I liked. A lot of that 125 million went into this area and it showed.
Bryan Cranston was underused while I guess Kate Beckinsale was the best here combining both the Sharon Stone and Michael Ironside roles. Although for me, she was basically doing her Selene “Underworld” impression. Not surprising given the director. Colin Farrell was okay but he’s no Arnie, that’s a fact!
Saw the first one and liked the story, so I went to see the 2012 Remake.
Has anyone every seen a remake they liked? For me, there was too much gymnastics, gratuitous violence and way too much digital graphics offered as a substitute for a good story.
Yes, the first one was low budget with Arnold at his cheesy best, but the story was original and it had continuity.
I give the 2012 Remake two ho-hums and one "Did I paid for this?'
Not seen the film, but I happened to read the short story the other night.
Pretty good...like most of Philip K. Dick's stuff (one of the few writers modern who genuinely deserves the moniker "genius" IMO)
SPOILERS
In the short story it turned out that not only was he a secret agent...he'd also saved the entire world when he was 9 from an alien invasion by being so pleasant when the aliens showed up.
I guess Kate Beckinsale was the best here combining both the Sharon Stone and Michael Ironside roles. Although for me, she was basically doing her Selene “Underworld” impression. Not surprising given the director.
I'm sure it didn't hurt that she's married to the director too.
Regards, E.D.
LATEST NEWS CineVita Films is producing a short based on my new feature!
Dawn of the Dead springs to mind. I thought it actually surpassed the original.
Quoted from XL
Yes, the first one was low budget with Arnold at his cheesy best, but the story was original and it had continuity.
The original was many things, but low-budget was not among them. But when looking at remakes I think it's now an unwritten rule that if Colin Farrell is in it, don't waste your money.
I'm sure it didn't hurt that she's married to the director too.
Precisely. That guy just likes dressing his missis up in latex. I guess you can't fault him for that because she's hot but why is she always looking so glum and miserable - must be the work-out schedule or being married to the aforementioned Mr. Wisemen.
Well, I checked out the 131 minute Director's Cut of this. It took me FOUR TIMES to get through the thing. I kept falling asleep and having to reboot this sleepy remake.
The one word that kept popping up for me during this was... SANITIZED. Everything is so clean and neat that I didn't feel like I was in a world at all.
The overabundance of gunplay without a lot collateral damage was annoying. So sick of CG muzzle flashes and bullet hits standing in for action.
There was no chemistry to speak of between the characters. The stakes felt tacked on, the real estate crisis was all exposition.
In the original, the stakes of the working class on Mars was VISUAL. How could the Aussie colony not suspect anything at all? Are there no safeguards in place on The Fall?
Don't see why Coohagen needed to vilify Bill Nighy. If he's in charge, I'm sure he can cook the books to make his army.
And was it just me or was the pacing of this thing atrocious?
E.D.
LATEST NEWS CineVita Films is producing a short based on my new feature!
Saw this in the theater because I'm a big fan of Kate Beckinsale (in 'Cold Comfort Farm', 'Last Days of Disco', Etc.) but found the whole thing to be pretty bland. I guess her original intention was to play the three breasted prostitute. Now there would be an interesting addition to one's IMDB listing.
I decided to add the Netflix DVD/Blu Ray to my streaming plan (first month is a free trial, BTW).
So, as I knew I would be, I was much less than satisfied with this reboot. In fact, I pretty much hated it.
So many issues, right from the get go.
As far as I'm concerned, the entire "story" didn't make any sense. A tunnel passage between Britain and Australia? Workers traveling back and forth on a daily basis? Really? Really? No other habitable land in the entire world? Really?
The Recall element was so small here. Recall itself was so unrealistic here.
The world itself was so dark. Pretty much everything looked and felt like a retread from Blade Runner to Underworld.
The vast majority of the runtime involved chases, gunfire, hand to hand combat, and little else. The gunfire itself looked and sounded so phony. So few people were hurt or killed in so much gunfire. As others said, it's like the bad guys were all blind and unable to shoot straight. How can you have real tension when you know damn well none of the main stars will be hit? You can't.
There were a few positives, however and I'll gladly point them out...
There were a few interesting, well set up scenes - the elevator things chase, the zero gravity shootout, maybe even the early car chase.
Kate Beckinsale. Let me say that again. Kate Beckinsale. How frickin' hot is this chick? She's almost 40 and yet, as far as I'm concerned, very few can compete with her hotness and coolness. I did find it quite humorous how she was always dressed in some skimpy outfit, while everyone else has some from of combat armor on.
Oh well. No big surprise here. A HUGE flop here in the states and a surprise success overseas.
I may be about done watching Colin Farrell, as he's disappointed so many times and I think he's an arrogant prick, anyway.
Kate Beckinsale. Let me say that again. Kate Beckinsale. How frickin' hot is this chick? She's almost 40 and yet, as far as I'm concerned, very few can compete with her hotness and coolness. I did find it quite humorous how she was always dressed in some skimpy outfit, while everyone else has some from of combat armor on.
She's the reason the pause button was invented - and the only reason PVC should ever be consider as a fashion choice . . . enough said.
Quoted from Dreamscale
I may be about done watching Colin Farrell, as he's disappointed so many times and I think he's an arrogant prick, anyway.
I'm not a huge fan - the only thing 2 things I have ever seen him worth watching are In Bruges and Ondine. Okay, maybe Intermission also . . .In the past, his wild way, drug taking, drinking etc certainly didn't endear him to many people - this behaviour was the closest he got to actually acting.
I'd hardly call him arrogant though. In recent interview, he seems pretty subdued. He's actually quite humble . . .
I'd question a lot of the choices he and his agent make regards projects - they just don't pick stuff that works form him.
As far as I'm concerned, the entire "story" didn't make any sense
I wondered why, too, but from what I been able to understand is that the director did something incredibly stupid. He had no faith in the audience and made two versions. One is the PG-13 theatrical cut. The other is the dreaded "director's cut" which is available only on Blu-Ray.
Despite some of the effects which was rather nice - I really liked the "elevator shafts" part , some of the car chase (a second of which which forced me to go back in one of my old scripts and take out the reverse driver's wheel, another excuse to rewrite the darned thing) ...I also felt that the movie never had a chance to breathe. I also liked the homages to Blade Runner and tip of the hat to Minority Report at first but it got tiresome. The shout outs to '90s Recall was really annoying. (I almost expected a Next, because if Farrell was in Minority, Beil was in Next...)I was underwhelmed the first time...but I was curious...and my jaw dropped to the floor. I can't speak; the jaw remains by my feet.
See, there was talk earlier about a "director's cut" ...
Oh. My. God.
I don't know if the director had no faith in the audience. I don't know how much he butted heads with the studio. But that seventeen minutes of deleted and alternate takes makes up for a lot of the films problems. Not all of them, but I'll say at least a good chunk of them. What annoyed me visually was still there...the whole "falling to the earth's core to get from Australia to a futuristic Britain" and..how tall ARE those buildings, anyway?! And I would have liked instead of the "puke town" look that it would have been more desert-like so we have a shout out to Screamers...no, I would've liked it to be more red to have an alternative for Mars.
In any case, what was given up was Ethan Hawke as Hauser before not just a memory wipe but also surgery to alter his face. Due to this, extra reshoots and FX was added to cover this. But it also made some plot holes more noticeable as well. In other words, they covered up as best they could but it wasn't covered enough.
The annoying Lens flares was still in both cuts. The dialog didn't really fit the remake when they tripped over themselves to give 90Recall references. Super-agents who can move with the speed of sound, if not light. They can also go freerunning in and around structures that appear to be one hundred miles tall (?)
As for co-writer Kurt Wimmer: Mainstream audiences do not care much for dystopian sci-fi. Not every character should move like they are in a video game. I liked the paper phones in Ultraviolet, I hope you came up with the Hand Phone in Recall even if not every character uses them
I think the original version would have been worth the fight. It is better than the theatrical. Since the the theatrical was a dud because nobody understood it, and the shout outs to Blade Runner, 90 Recall, Minority Report, Terminator, RoboCop and Star Wars were getting a bit much...I wonder.
I wonder if some directors would not cave in and say 'I don't want to lose plot, story and/or character. Audiences need to catch their breath. They need to take in everything that is going on. If we can't really give them anything new, we need to give em something to enjoy'.
I'm sorry. I got to rant.
No, I'm not. I stand corrected.
There's no reason in the world why this picture can't be enjoyed. Instead, the filmmakers knowingly put out inferior product. They knowingly take out the beats that flesh out the characters,they knowingly take out the scenes that help pace the story.They knowingly re-shoot and add additional FX to make amends.
They will remove things to make it a PG when they intended to push an R and have such footage.Why shoot it in the first place?
Hard to know if the DC would have done better or not. What I do know is that the DC was better that the theatrical. What I do know is that the DC was preferred by the filmmakers and they went with inferior product.