#1 Posted by Stepside (557 posts) -

Oh, and just gotta say...Colin Farrell? Ugh...

#2 Posted by GunstarRed (5751 posts) -

Needs more Ironside.

#3 Posted by JustKamToo (804 posts) -

Needs 3 boobs & mars

#4 Posted by Kevin_Cogneto (1292 posts) -
"Quaid... Start the internet overreaction..."
#5 Edited by Welding (158 posts) -

.... At timemark 0:17

Guess this movie is secretly a Star Wars KOTOR tie in??

#6 Posted by TheCreamFilling (1229 posts) -

Looks like Mass Effect skycars and LOKI mechs.

#7 Posted by Infinityslimit (121 posts) -

Hahahaha yea man this looks strangely similar to mass effect. But why remake this? The first one with Arnie was a classic, don't remake good movies.

#8 Posted by Stepside (557 posts) -

@JustKamToo: Yessir.

#9 Posted by Subjugation (4779 posts) -

I wonder if this will stay true to the original in the slightest.

#10 Posted by mhadick (9 posts) -

Well this was disappointing.

Lots of intense stares, though.

#11 Posted by Infinityslimit (121 posts) -

Can't beat Arnie. Sorry.

#12 Edited by whyareyoucrouchingspock (1018 posts) -

Colin Farrel is about as big a cunt as you can get. Stop fucking ruining my childhood with lame name cash-ins you shit hole stabbing arseholes.

#13 Posted by Captain_Felafel (1672 posts) -

Who thought this would be a good idea? Also, what? Trailer for a trailer for a movie? What?

#14 Posted by IkariNoTekken (993 posts) -

Colin Farrell was decent enough in In Bruges. That said, he doesn't have the greatest track record and who can forget his sex tape video.

#15 Posted by Cheesebob (1285 posts) -

Hey I think this is a great idea. 1) The Special effects in the first one are now shit. 2) Arnie's acting is shit 3) Its also a book and I heard that they are being closer to the source material.

Colin Farrel is awesome btw

#16 Posted by TheHBK (5657 posts) -

I miss the days when a trailer just had to have "SCHWARZENEGGER" on a title card to sell the movie. They have to know the movie can't get better and it is not one that would benefit at all from redone special effects.

#17 Posted by weegieanawrench (1947 posts) -

Damn you Hollywood for ruining a classic. You're not getting my money.

#18 Posted by Pinworm45 (4069 posts) -

Hollywood is so fucking awful I can barely comprehend. I don't even know how they're still in business considering their blunders are routine.

#19 Posted by jakob187 (22290 posts) -

@Subjugation said:

I wonder if this will stay true to the original in the slightest.

It's supposedly based more around the novel than what the Arnold movie was. However, at that point, I would've just stuck to calling it something other than Total Recall.

#20 Edited by benspyda (2108 posts) -

The original is still a great fun movie to watch. It doesn't feel like a movie that should be remade. Especially if you remove the whole Mars thing that was so core to the story.

@Cheesebob: Ok I didn't know it was a book. But cheesy Arnie movies were/are great and the special effects still look fine to me. But then again I'm going back and watching the original star trek series and the special effects look fine to me in that. Styrofoam walls for the win.

#21 Posted by Shakey1245 (69 posts) -

A trailer for a trailer? I feel the people behind this are grossly overestimating how psyched people are for it.

I wonder though what makes them want to remake films such as Total Recall, which I am going to predict with mild confidence will just about make it's budget back, when they could re-release the original and I would happily pay to go and see that on the cinema again even if I can watch it on DVD or various internet streaming movie services?