GAMES: GameSpot | GameFAQs | SportsGamer MUSIC: Last.fm | MP3.com MOVIES: Metacritic | Movietome TV: TV.com
Home | About Metacritic | About Metascores | What's New | Wireless Versions | Discussion Forums | Advertising Inquiries | Contact Us | RSS
Metacritic.com: We Deal With Criticism
     Help
> Switch to Advanced Search  
Film Video/DVD Music Games TV

Film

Upcoming Release Calendar
Weekend Box Office
Film Awards & Top 10s By Year
All-Time High Scores
All-Time Low Scores
How Metascores Are Calculated
Discuss Film In Our Forums

 

Wide Releases

sort by name sort by score

Stars indicate the most critically-acclaimed movies.

 

Limited Releases

sort by name sort by score

Stars indicate the most critically-acclaimed movies.

 



Printer-Friendly Version Email This Page Discuss In Our Forums

Total Recall
TriStar Pictures

Total Recall reviews
Critic Score
Metascore: 57 Metascore out of 100
User Score  
7.8 out of 10
based on 17 reviews
Read critic reviews
How did we calculate this?
based on 10 votes
Read user comments
Rate this movie

MPAA RATING: R

Starring Arnold Schwarzenegger, Rachel Ticotin, Sharon Stone, Ronny Cox, Michael Ironside, Marshall Bell, Mel Johnson Jr., and Michael Champion

Doug Quaid (Schwarzenegger), a construction worker with a beautiful wife (Stone) and home in in the year 2084, decides to take a virtual vacation to Mars as a secret agent. When things go wrong during the aritificial memory implantation process, Quaid becomes reacts violently and must figure out if his life as Quaid or as the secret agent is his true life.


GENRE(S): Suspense/Thriller  
WRITTEN BY: Philip K. Dick (short story We Can Remember It For You Wholesale)
Ronald Shusett
Dan O'Bannon
Jon Povill
 
DIRECTED BY: Paul Verhoeven  
RELEASE DATE: DVD: September 8, 2001 
Video: August 31, 1999 
Theatrical: June 1, 1990 
RUNNING TIME: 113 minutes, Color 
ORIGIN: USA 

The film won a Special Achievemenet Award for Visual Effects at the 1991 Academy Awards.

What The Critics Said

All critic scores are converted to a 100-point scale. If a critic does not indicate a score, we assign a score based on the general impression given by the text of the review. Learn more...

88
Chicago Sun-Times Roger Ebert
One of the most complex and visually interesting science fiction movies in a long time.
Read Full Review
83
Entertainment Weekly Owen Gleiberman
Starts out as mind-bending futuristic satire and then turns relentless -- it becomes a violent, postpunk version of an Indiana Jones cliff-hanger.
Read Full Review
80
Chicago Reader Jonathan Rosenbaum
A worthy entry in the dystopian cycle of SF movies launched by "Blade Runner" (including "The Terminator" and "Robocop"), this seems less derivative than most of its predecessors yet equally accomplished in its straight-ahead storytelling, with plenty of provocative satiric undertones and scenic details.
Read Full Review
80
Time Richard Corliss
Fast, witty, glamorous, with thrill piling on giggle atop gasp. [11 June 1990, p.85]
80
Los Angeles Times Michael Wilmington
If the movie sometimes seems overwhelmed by its budget and its legendary third-act problems, it's still entertainingly raw and brutal, full of whiplash pace and juicy exaggeration. [1 June 1990, Calendar, p.F-1]
80
Variety Staff (Not Credited)
The fierce and unrelenting pace, accompanied by a tongue-in-cheek strain of humor in the roughhouse screenplay, keeps the film moving like a juggernaut.
Read Full Review
80
Empire Kim Newman
Top-flight muscleman entertainment that is not afraid to have a brain or two in its head.
Read Full Review
75
San Francisco Chronicle Mick LaSalle
A first-rate action movie, slickly done and with so many imaginative bonuses that, for a time, it feels like a classic in the making. It's not, but it's still solid and entertaining [1 June 1990]
75
USA Today Mike Clark
Both female roles are unexpectedly meaty, so much so that the film loses something once the far more lively Stone is dispatched. Hour one (more satirical) is better all around, though the falloff isn't fatal. [1 June 1990, Life, p.2D]
63
Chicago Tribune Johanna Steinmetz
From first to last frame, Total Recall is in your face. Its rather elegant little science-fiction story is as suffocated as the Martians are. The director has violated his own movie, going so far over the top he's still out there-weightless. [1 June 1990, Friday, p.C]
63
ReelViews James Berardinelli
An "intelligent" action film, because it presents the viewer with an opportunity to puzzle things out rather than sit mindlessly and watch people get blown to pieces.
Read Full Review
50
The New York Times Elvis Mitchell
Mr. Verhoeven is much better at drumming up this sort of artificial excitement than he is at knowing when to stop.
Read Full Review
50
Christian Science Monitor David Sterritt
The plot, based on a Phillip K. Dick story, is ingenious; and Arnold Schwarzenegger brings an effective blend of machismo and innocence to his role. Too bad director Paul Verhoeven lets brainless violence and tricky special effects swamp the cleverness of the tale itself. [22 June 1990, Arts, p.10]
40
TV Guide Staff (Non Credited)
Ugly, stupid, loud, offensive, and pointlessly violent--let's not mince words--this film should be called "Total Reject."
Read Full Review
40
Washington Post Desson Thomson
Actually, any fun you might encounter in Recall can be traced, most often, to director Verhoeven, who injects some of his "Robocop" camp into this mega-dumb project.
Read Full Review
12
The Globe and Mail (Toronto) Jay Scott
Guilty of gross mellerdrammer & innocent of sophistication... Guilty of being dumber than WWF wrestling & innocent of hypocrisy about its cartoon violence.
Read Full Review
0
Washington Post Rita Kempley
The overall effect is like wading through hospital waste. Verhoeven, who also directed the maliciously stylistic "Robocop," disappoints with this appalling onslaught of blood and boredom.
Read Full Review

What Our Users Said

Vote Now!The average user rating for this movie is 7.8 (out of 10) based on 10 User Votes
Note: User votes are NOT included in the Metascore calculation.

Tom V. gave it a10:
An intricate and clever plot, with cinematography that will keep you riveted. Perhaps the most intelligent movie starring Schwarzenegger ever.

[Anonymous] gave it a7:
The plot and concept are brilliant. I could almost say that this was a proto-Matrix. The political themes also seem a bit relevant in today's context, and may forshadow future issues in space colonization, and maybe colonization altogether. Action's nice. Sadly, some effects, once oscar winning, haven't held up over time. If today's FX were available back then, and the disturbing, bio-freaky parts kept to a minimum, this film would be damn near perfect, and it would get a nine. It's a miracle that T2, Arnold's peak, still looks awesome today, FX and all.

Andrew M. gave it an 8:
I'm going to bump up the average rating of this a little... I saw this when it was first released, back when I was a teenager, and it was some of the greatest fun I ever had at the movies. Not to be taken too seriously, the film does do some mild sermoning, but it's true strengths and attractions lie in its (at the time) groundbreaking effects and the futuristic other-world atmosphere. Not to mention some of the star-trekish characters who pop-in now and again. It's possibly not as effective these days in light of the leaping bounds made with special effects, but 13-14 years ago this film was huge!!!

Pat C. gave it a 7:
Damn good plot construction and storytelling. Makes the relativity of memory continuum a simple and accessible science fiction device. Borrows heavily from a slew of Hollywood genre so as to be a totally original creation made from components we're already comfortable with. Went on to perennial reruns on cable, where creative story line and clear plot execution rule. As contemplation of the hazards of artificially manipulated thought process, Robocop & Blade Runner are much more substantial, but this lesser concoction has stood the test of time as a reliable lower-common-denominator marketing war horse. Little of substance, but this is how good films are put together. The most memorable moments are the scary-in-their-authenticity interactions of Cox & Ironside as CEO and subordinate loose cannon, best viewed off-cable in their unsanitized glory. In the end, the film is haunted by an underlying silliness. Like its women, it turns out to be both demure and sleazy, although it contains an eye-popping rendition of the hypothetical effects of space vacuum on the human body.

Yoon C. gave it a 3:
Sharon Stone is hot, the other woman is not. Schwarzenegger is yet again typically Schwarzenegger in what is Verhoeven's umpteenth moronic action film which a few critics have defended as a post-modernist self-subversive exercise. This strikes me as examinging one's own feces and thinking it has value because it's been played with. I leave this kind of appraisal to critics with the sensibilities of proctologists.

Discuss this movie in our forums

Return to top of page
Home | FILM | DVD/VIDEO | MUSIC | GAMES | TV | Forums | About Metacritic metacritic.com

Popular on CBS sites: MLB | Spore | iPhone 3G | Paris Hilton | Antivirus Software | GPS | Recipes | Shwayze | NFL

About CBS Interactive | Jobs | Advertise

© 2008 CBS Interactive Inc. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use