Two important questions. 1) How come people aren't calling this new Bourne move 'Re-Bourne?' 2) I hope someone at the studios or production companies starts working on the reboot before the movie comes out. I'd like to see simultaneous release.

I always saw it as Universal (probably wisely) blinking against The Dark Knight Rises, not Total Recall. But that's total speculation on my part. I'm a fan of the original and love sci-fi in general, but nothing about the Total Recall remake lured me to the theater. Len Wiseman delivers pretty, but largely empty movies. So I assumed that's what Total Recall would be. Had there been good post-release buzz (like, for example, "The Grey") I would have seen it for sure. But, the general consensus about Total Recall seemed to fall in line with the rest of Wiseman's work. On the other hand, the remake of Verhoeven's Robocop looks VERY interesting. Every piece of info released about the film piques my interest. An interesting, exciting director, and an ever-growing, supremely talented cast. Remake or not, when I'm deciding whether to see a movie in theaters, it all comes down to the promise of an engaging story.

Scott, the LA Times link doesn't work (there are some extra characters appended on the end of the URL). This line caught my eye in the Guardian article (bolding added): > ... it still seems too soon to have another stab at the story, unless someone comes up with a script that resonates powerfully with our times. That strikes me as a good criteria for considering remakes. I haven't seen the Total Recall remake so no comments on the film itself.

Here's the working link to the LA Times article.

Kevin Smith summed up my thoughts on Total Recall perfectly on his show, SPOILERS. "The 3 boobed woman was a real mind bender for me, cause it felt like there were a bunch of executives in a movie studio going, "Make sure you put in the hooker with 3 boobs--cause that is TOTAL RECALL!" "In terms of Total Recall, that is so far down the list. For me, when I think Total Recall, I go--Mars. And mutants. And Cuato coming out. And stuff like that." -- KEVIN SMITH Totally agree. And, to toot my own horn, my comment on this very blog dealt with the concern of not going to Mars. Total Recall without Mars is a different movie altogether imho.

I don't know if duration between original and reboot is such a high factor. (I personally would assume so, but it seems--) THE AMAZING SPIDERMAN reboot worked out perfectly. HULK was instantly rebooted. And the 2nd movie was more successful than the first. One thing I do notice between reboots that work compared to those that fail -- Generally, there is a terrible sequel between them. The original franchise ends on a sour note. SPIDERMAN 3 was horrific. Batman and Robin was... missing Adam West? (The time between 89 Batman and 2005 Batman Begins was smaller than the 90 Total Recall / 2012 Total Recall) I can't hold Len Wiseman totally responsible. The real problem is how do you approach a remake when the original (and last film) were OUTSTANDING? (Give me a little leeway here on my definition of outstanding with Total Recall. I like it. Solid flick). If he does Mars -- there's really nothing new. He'll get blamed for "not being as good as the original." If he does what he did, go in a different route while only taking bits and pieces of Total Recall, he'll get blamed for it "not being the original." A reboot of a fan favorite is really a lose/lose for a director. The irony is, if the previous film had a terrible mishap, and a serviceable and nearly identical reboot is done -- that director is said to have "Gotten the franchise back on track." (Hell, that's what they said about Brian Singer doing Superman. Until people realized it wasn't such a great film. It's also probably what they'll say about Zach Snyder, because the Singer version was kinda "Meh.") I almost think, the only way to do a fan favorite, is to find a franchise that fell apart. So, if this theory holds, Robocop should be badass :p.

I think the Guardian excerpt is true, for the most part. I think more importantly, to have a successful reboot, the director needs to bring something completely new and his own to the table. The reboot of the Batman franchise was highly successful for many reasons, including these two counts. 1. Each of the movies in his trilogy have societal narrative going on. Especially TDK and TDKR. 2. If you watch the old Batman movies compared to Nolan's films, you realize they really aren't comparable. The tone, style, character--it's all a total 180 from the campy, nipple-laden batsuit era. Even the Spiderman reboot took the character in a different direction--from a melancholic, doomed romance story to a funny, smart coming of age story of sorts. Total Recall without Mars may have been Wiseman's attempt at "making it his own," but I think it's unimpressive performance at the box office shows that wasn't enough.

Total Recall is a B movie script. It was a B movie before with Schwartzeneggar and it's a B movie now. The premise about uncovering hidden memories is cool but it gets lost in the story that develops on mars - the "true" story - which is grade B hokey. The only reason I ever saw the original is (1) it had Schwarzenegger and (2) there must not have been anything better on the tube that night. In other words it was my first second choice. A good rental because of the star power, but not worth a ticket. I guess I'm not the only one that feels that way. They'll probably recoup their investment eventually.