User Score
5.9

Mixed or average reviews- based on 339 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 56 out of 339

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jul 11, 2014
    4
    It has a some great action just not enough actual story to the movie. Not enough character development in the movie. If you like action then you will like this movie but If you like anything else then you probably leave the theater disappointed and what the story really was.
  2. Mar 31, 2014
    3
    Sluggish, predictable, and immediately fading from memory, this movie is far less entertaining than such sci-fi flicks as Timecop 2 or Streetfighter, let alone Verhoven's great original. The political satire is dull and heavy-handed, the visuals are utterly undistinct and even the action scenes offer nothing of interest.
    In short, an complete waste of time. The only thing that stands out
    in this ocean of recycled tosh is the solid acting of Farell and Beckisale, who does a fantastic Sharon Stone impression. The one feeling left in me after watching the movie was that these two deserved a better script. Expand
  3. Mar 3, 2014
    4
    I haven't seen the original, but I wasn't engaged in this at all. Aesthetically pleasing with the cinematography, but no real substance to back it up which is a shame.
  4. Jun 28, 2013
    4
    Good action movie I guess. It starts to raise a cool premise, but then almost immediately abandons it in favor of CGI sequence after CGI sequence. The epitome of American "cinema". It's definitely a movie for teenagers. Sorry, guys. When I saw who directed it (Underworld clown) I was no longer surprised at what I got. A cool premise, but not much more, just like Underworld.
  5. May 19, 2013
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. So in the end, she had to wait for him to wake up to kill him? Loool worst assassin ever, simply a bad movie, some ok parts but really come on? I think there should be a council so the customers who are paying their hard earned money on cheap movies to get it back!!! Viva the revolution Expand
  6. Apr 29, 2013
    0
    This is easily one of the worst movies ever made on planet Earth. It was boring, corny, stupid, it had bad acting, and the runtime felt an hour longer than it really was. What a total ripoff money grab. I wish I didn't have to say this, but Total Recall, is Total Crap.
  7. Mar 24, 2013
    2
    Little dialogue and pure action... bad recipe for a film.
  8. Mar 12, 2013
    4
    This one pissed me off, it did. I loved the original. No story here, not even a rehash of the first new invention of the Philip K. Dick story. If you must watch it, turn off the sound. The pictures are lovely.
  9. Jan 30, 2013
    1
    I tend never to use a rating of 0, as it would state that the film is a 100% failure, not only artistically, but also technically. Hence my usual lowest rating being 1 out of 10. When the filmmakers remember to remove the lens cap prior to shooting, or when they don't film themselves while shooting against a reflecting surface, or when the boom mic doesn't swing at the top of the screen, that deserves to be taken into consideration. And that just what the rating of 1 does: acknowledge the minimum amount of professionalism put into a film.

    And that's just what can be said about Total Recall (2012). The universe the story unfolds into is sure good looking, but at the same time unimaginative and made of bits and pieces from other films. The acting is horrible -when will someone finally tell Kate Beckinsale to please just model?- The stunts are over the top, the characters bi-dimensional, and the movie fails to follow it's own logic.
    Expand
  10. Jan 25, 2013
    2
    This should of been renamed "Recalled", for both lovers of the original and fans of Philip K. Dick. This doesn't even try to follow the short story, the trailers don't even lie. Convoluted script, boring leads, and those "references" from the original are shoehorned in (including the 3-breasted prostitute), just to remind us what we should of been watching. The setting feels nice but it feels like it's borrowed from Blade Runner and Minority Report. If Philip K. Dick was alive, he'll wish that it was all a dream. Expand
  11. Jan 8, 2013
    1
    This is the biggest pile of **** Every aspect that made the original so amazing is missing here. This is the same guy that made the worst Die Hard movie. Someone should blacklist him from working in Hollywood.
  12. Jan 6, 2013
    0
    What a disaster of a movie! the movie reminded me of a bad copy of "balde runner" with a mix of the prequel "star wars". The whole movie consists of the main character running, shooting. getting into a corner. and once again shoot their way out of it. The remake of total recall was worse then the orginal.
  13. Dec 30, 2012
    4
    Don't expect a remake of the original. They succeed only in producing a completely forgettable movie. The references to the original Total Recall, were very anti-climatic and only reminded viewers where the bar was and how short this movie came to meet it.
  14. Dec 8, 2012
    0
    the original movie was excellent, this movie was a piece of s**t. They are never going to stop ruining old movies when all they see is dollar signs in their eyes. Hollywood cries they are losing money to piracy, well make some descent movies and maybe people will watch more. I have seen the movie industry go downhill for the last 20 years and i won't pay for this crap anymore. There are lots of talent movie makers out there, give them a change and stop with the bulls**t. Expand
  15. Dec 4, 2012
    4
    I think what ruins this movie the most is that it's 2 hours long and there is no story what so ever. I mean there is one but there isn't. It seems that you just jump from scene to scene with no real backstory or anything, That's what makes this movie so bad. I didn't care for the action scenes either. It really just came off as The Bourne Identity (even had the main character going into a bank and finding passports and money just like bourne identity) but in a sci fi setting. The only solid things about this movie is that the acting is good and the gadgets are cool (I really loved the phone embedded in your hand gadget). Expand
  16. Dec 2, 2012
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. If you're looking for a great example of a director destroying the story they are trying to tell, you've come to the right place. The novelty of the story has been completely butchered by a director (Len Wiseman) that doesn't seem to understand how to use perspective. If the audience is meant to question whether what they are watching is reality or implanted memories, the story has to be told from the perspective of Quaid (Colin Ferrell). Wiseman, however, frequently breaks away from the main character and shows the audience scenes that Quaid isn't even in. This destroys any illusion that the story is only taking place inside Quaid's head. How can you remember something you weren't even there for? Apart from the perspective debacle, the story is just a complete mess, with plot holes and inconsistencies waiting around every turn. The action, on the other hand, would have be great, if I hadn't already seen it in Minority Report. Expand
  17. Nov 26, 2012
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I finally saw this movie, and am a little disappointed. Having seen the 1990 version of this movie, I knew that there would be changes (a reboot) to the original in this outing, and figured that I would give this movie the benefit of being able to stand on it's own. To start, the entire setting of the movie seems off, almost as though the director decided to mesh Blade Runner with the video game Mass Effect. In fact, the synthetic security force is a complete rip-off from the video game, to name only one. It's hard to write this review without picking the movie apart, and the stigma of the first movie will always be there as a critique because this movie modelled itself completely after it. It's not really a complete reboot, but it's as though someone with a better budget and technology decided to make a visually stunning film with the story of Total Recall kind of spliced into it. Things, like the three breasted woman or the fat-woman disguise, made a cameo in this film, but they were very out of place. There was a great suspension of reality in several parts of the film, but I guess in the future, people crash through windows, survive gunshot wounds without treatment, and climb ladders on trains going 500 mph through the Earth's core everyday. At times, the fight scenes and the constant chase scenes can become very tedious and boring, and the story appears to fall on the back burner to move these scenes along. There were very few memorable characters in this reboot, unlike the original movie which had more acting and less scowling from the actors and actresses; in fact, I had a hard time keeping up with Jessica Biel's and Kate Beckinsale's characters because they looked similar to each other, and their characters weren't exactly fleshed out very well. Having seen it, I can't recommend this movie to anyone just yet. I admit that I've watched it once, and that sometimes a different frame of mind may change one's interest in watching a movie. But this movie seems to lack something that you can't really put your finger on, and the design choices, once you've seen them elsewhere, are distracting and dislikeable. Do yourself a favor and see the 1990 version first, if you haven't, then youtube Mass Effect 2's videos after watching Blade Runner before you watchi this movie, and you'll see what I mean. Expand
  18. Nov 20, 2012
    3
    I haven't seen the original Total Recall, so I'm unable to comment on how well this one matches up to it. But what I can comment on was how insignificant this reboot was. It was bland, greatly lacking in edge and originality. The first half of the film had some purpose, but the remaining half gives way to a typical, extended chase scene with typical results. Ram-packed with so many "A" list stars its almost embarrassing to watch them try to perform in this high octane mess. And thank you Len Wiseman for crafting not only some decent visuals, but also crafting something that's as forgettable as a spec on the floor. He doesn't even attempt to go beyond the 'summer flick' mold. This was a Total Failure. Expand
  19. Nov 4, 2012
    0
    Reading some of the reviews on here makes me wonder if the studios have their stooges post here. Aside from a few video effects this movie is such a piece of garbage, and it gives the original a bad name. From the stupefied plot to flat acting, is this really the best they could do with several hundred million dollars budget? Where no real actors available, or they all just tossed the retarded script in the bin? Seems so, as it ended up "starring" this Colin Whatever--an absolute zero as far as acting and looks, and Jessica Biel who was hot in the 90s playing a non-acting role, but is well pass her prime. Best skip this, watch the original, watch the Blade Runner for some dark robotic futurism. Nothing to see here other than a few very average special effects. Expand
  20. Sep 27, 2012
    3
    Wow. I'm gonna give a general spoiler here: there is a little twist at the beginning that seems to set up a cool movie, and then the rest of the movie is one giant chase scene without a single moment of story. I couldn't believe how many times the heroes are backed into a corner when at the last minute they pull out their guns and start shooting and then comes the getaway. This is nearly the entire movie. A pointless experience. Expand
  21. Sep 2, 2012
    3
    "But those hoping for a real head trip - a truly cerebral Dick adaptation - will have to keep waiting."

    forever i'll add to this review...
    This movie has nothing that reminds P.K.Dick and is not even funny as it's predecessor, basically a shame
  22. Aug 28, 2012
    4
    Paul Verhoeven's Total Recall is much much better than this remake version. I pretty enjoy this, its modern set piece but its third act is total disaster. Will always leave you bad memory.
  23. Aug 17, 2012
    3
    have to agree with your '44' concensus. this movie was all action and cgi and precious little story/substance. how come arnold is such a so-so actor yet so watchable? glad 1) he's out of my state government and 2) back in the movie biz
  24. Aug 15, 2012
    4
    eh another big money remake of a so-so movie, its official Hollywood has run out of ideas and good acting. Wait for the dv.... ah nevermind watch it once then move on yea its that "good"
  25. Aug 10, 2012
    3
    What was Sony thinking? This is total BS. First off, who told the director to plan a remake of the 1990 original classic starring Arnold Schwarzenegger? Two, why is Colin Farrell in this movie, anyway? He's not an action star yet. I used to like him since "Phone Booth," but not anymore since the new "Total Recall"
    alienated fans and critics alike. And just like that, it's a mess! I
    definitely like both Kate Beckinsale (Underworld) and Jessica Biel (7th Heaven) and the three-breated women part, but it wasn't meant to be well concrete. The action, however, wasn't that even good. Can't you see it's a lot different than the original version? Well, it doesn't quite match it. This is one of the worst remakes of all time and this year because I need an 70's or 80's style of a reboot, not living it up to 90's nostalgia, again. I hope Arnold should take notes because trust me, he's gonna be pissed off and I smell a lawsuit going on here. Collapse
  26. Aug 8, 2012
    1
    I was very disappointed with this mindless and unintelligible flick. It's a total waste of time as nothing makes any sense at all and it's just an endless barrage of running and fighting and confusion.
  27. Aug 7, 2012
    3
    Total Failure - the first third of the movie is OK (I really liked the gadgets!). Just when the story started to get interesting, suddenly the visual effects guy got in the way and the video editor decided to do his/her job while smoking pot. The story line is filled with inconsistencies to the point that it is annoying. Suddenly you will be twisting in your seat watching all the goofs throughout the last two thirds of the movie. Save you trip to the theater for this one and watch it on TV once it hits Netflix (wait, with the poor quality of content in Netflix these days you may need to watch it on cable TV - which either way is just fine). Expand
  28. Aug 7, 2012
    3
    I was hoping the critics were overthinking this and it would be worth the trip and price of admission. Unfortunately I was ready to leave after a half an hour. It's just a really soulless movie that bludgeons you with action. If you tried to analyze it, it'd be worse since much of the plot and action hinges on really implausible connections. Even by sci-fi standards it's lazy. We already live in a world that is already connected by a network. The characters in this future-set movie escape the authorities time and time again in ways that would be almost impossible even in a world of today's technology, let alone the far-off future. Expand
  29. Aug 6, 2012
    3
    Besides the good characters and the action thrills, this movie is an unnecessary remake to the original as what preview critics would say. Mars, memory and life were the main themes in the original movie, but this one just doesn't seem to have those good ones, not even the setting of Mars. This looks and feels like Star Wars meets Blade Runner and Minority Report.
  30. Aug 5, 2012
    3
    Massive disappointment. Bland, soulless action and forgettable characters. A real pity and a waste of a good cast. Somehow everything that made the original good and fun is missing here. What's even more frustrating is that it has an interesting and intriguing set up that is so utterly let down by a never ending stream of identical fights and chases as to make any memories of story distant.
  31. Aug 5, 2012
    3
    Doesn't hold a candle to the original, which was so full of original ideas that could be exploited here. Sure, it looks fantastic, but it's just dry and boring. It's missing the camp that I loved so much about the original. You know you're in trouble as a moviegoer when you first check your watch at about 45 minutes in.
Metascore
43

Mixed or average reviews - based on 41 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 41
  2. Negative: 7 out of 41
  1. Reviewed by: Peter Bradshaw
    Sep 1, 2012
    40
    It's a bit of a flavourless CGI-fest, without the character and comedy of the Arnie version, and it never really gets to grips with the idea of "reality" as a slippery, malleable concept.
  2. Reviewed by: Helen O'Hara
    Aug 27, 2012
    40
    Perhaps no more absurd than the Verhoeven version, but certainly less amusing. Farrell and Beckinsale emerge unscathed, but the endless scrabbling for novelty and reinvention leaves this feeling unaccountably stale and familiar.
  3. Reviewed by: Rob James
    Aug 17, 2012
    40
    Entertaining in small doses, but gruelling at two hours, Wiseman's derivative, spec-hackular upgrade bins the twisted wit and meaty thrills of the Arnie original.