Incannerax What a waste of my time!!!

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

AshUnow This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Walter Sloane Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

Andariel Halo I am an easy sucker for any sort of film involving memories (Memento, Rashomon, etcetera) and this one had a plot synopsis that just begged me to take it in. It also made me think of the movie "The Discovery" about a scientist who supposedly finds proof of the afterlife, and while many people are committing suicide, he develops a machine that lets him apparently view a recently deceased person's memories. I would have liked to see some manner of mystery or even a bit of incoherence done with the memories that are played back in this film. They all look too perfect; perfect vision, perfect audio, camera angles that would require the person to be behaving very oddly (such as an extreme closeup of someone's fingers playing the piano would've meant the viewer would've had their head resting on the piano). The intro video the scientist Gordon Dunn shows at a presentation looks absolutely nothing like recorded memories, and completely like something you'd see in a GoPro promo or some other HD digital camera technology. The thing about memories, even fresh and recent ones (at least in my experience) is that they can often be an incoherent mess. Sometimes I won't remember large portions of conversations, but manage to somehow understand the conversation that was unfolding. I can "feel" certain attitudes and concepts and sensations rather than hear them. Sometimes the memories are completely wrong, as well; sometimes it's foggy and blue on a summer day, and sometimes just by the act of trying to remember something, I don't so much "remember" as create a fantastical re-construction of the memory. Nothing of that sort is explored in this movie, and it's quite a shame, because the story that they did go for is very plain and straight-forward. The memories just become a sidepiece and a means of confirming people's stories in a murder investigation being conducted by one incredibly lucky and bold man. Peter Dinklage is that man, playing Samuel Bloom, some guy whose brother dies in a car accident and who now he is obsessed with getting into contact with Gordon Dunn to use his machine so he can view his own memories, obsessed with remembering what his brother's last words were as he was dying. In the process, he takes it upon himself to pretend to be various people, question people involved in Dunn's memory experimentation, use the machine to confirm their stories, and so on. He is perfectly at ease using a fake name and taking advantage of having watched people's memories before meeting them so as to better pass himself off as someone who may have worked for Dunn or with one of the subjects. But this also makes for another thing that the movie just passes over, to its detriment. Peter Dinklage is a little person. There's no mistaking it when you see him. This never comes up in a derogatory or limiting way for him or his character; his character could just as easily be played by any other actor of any other size and nothing at all would change about the film or the character. But while that's a good thing for him as an actor, it leads to some really odd moments in the movie, as well as a plothole or two, where Peter Dinklage's height would either be a liability for his character, or a benefit for certain characters who are trying to track him down. Knowing that he is a little person would make finding him significantly easier, especially when he thrusts himself into the middle of the murder investigation by stealing the memory recording machine. It feels like the film was more focused on its plot, blissfully unaware of how predictable it was, rather than filling out the details that could have made the movie much more intriguing and fun to watch. The desire for Sam to revisit his brother's death just to remember his last words loses a significant amount of impact when those words are actually revealed, and it turns out you already figured it out right at the start of the movie when the death happened. It hardly feels fair to label it as a spoiler because of how predictable and ultimately insignificant it was. It also feels like the filmmaker at some point realized this was a very insipid line to follow, and rather than commit to it in some mildly nihilistic way, they tack on a pointless twist, one which not only plays little to no role in the ending, but one for which, due to them ignoring Peter Dinklage's height, becomes a rather significant plothole. Overall, this was a movie that had a fun and novel concept to play with, toyed with us with the potential of this concept (the idea of a world in which anyone's memories could be viewed on the spot by others in perfect HD) and proceeded to do very very little with it, more focused on its boring and predictable story than with running wild with its imagination and doing something really memorable.

insuwhoo After seeing this, I wondered why I liked this 3-star story. So I watched it again. Dinklage's excellent performance showed how much he could enhance a so so screenplay.Director Mark Palansky's vision and direction was very good, except for one character. He should have directed him to drop the stereotypical hysterical lunatic interpretation..Rest of the cast were very good. Jane MacRae's use of Tripi's music and editing was superb. Her editing was the major factor that made Rememory so good.Alicia c. Snee's lighting was fantastic. She managed to have the bright rooms match the moody overcast outdoor light. On the first watch I did not notice that going from moody outdoor scenes to a well lit room were not visually jarring .The directors story-boarding and MacRae's editing made the transitions smooth. It was all of them in synch that made this a rewarding 105 minutes.

ed_bardo OK, so I travel on long haul flights all the time and decided to load up my tablet with movies I had never heard of on release, particularly science fiction. I watched films funded by fund-me sites to new, made-for-streaming movies. Of all that I have seen, this one made my shortlist of treasures I would never have found if it wasn't for this "take a chance" approach.Without any spoilers, or details on the plot (as those are supplied in abundance here), let me just say this is a quality piece of film making that deserves exposure. It reminded me a bit of Brainstorm, Douglas Trumbull's great film. Please take the time to watch this movie and share it with your friends if you like it. I am going to do the same.If you are interested in seeing my list or review of small time, sci-fi films you probably wouldn't watch or have heard of unless you looked, contact me and I will post those titles in list form.Enjoy this film!

Aly_Bird I don't like writing reviews a lot but that movie is a piece of art when it comes to the performance of Dinklage!!Wow he's a helluva an actor!! he got very deep and transparent facials!Here's the bloke's bio from IMDb itself to whom wants to know more about that magnificent actor! ======= Peter Hayden Dinklage was born in Morristown, New Jersey, to Diane (Hayden), an elementary school teacher, and John Carl Dinklage, an insurance salesman. He is of German, Irish, and English descent. In 1991, he received a degree in drama from Bennington College and began his career. His exquisite theatre work that expresses brilliantly the unique range of his acting qualities, includes remarkable performances full of profoundness, charisma, intelligence, sensation and insights in plays such as "The Killing Act", "Imperfect Love", Ivan Turgenev's "A Month in the Country" as well as the title roles in William Shakespeare's "Richard III" and in Anton Chekhov's "Uncle Vanya".Peter Dinklage received acclaim for his first film, Living in Oblivion (1995), where he played an actor frustrated with the limited and caricatured roles offered to actors who have dwarfism. In 2003, he starred in The Station Agent (2003), written and directed by Tom McCarthy. The movie received critical praise as well as Peter Dinklage's work including nominations such as for Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Leading Role at the "Screen Actors Guild" and Best Male Lead at the "Film Independent Spirit Awards". One of his next roles has been the one of Miles Finch, an acclaimed children's book author, in Elf (2003). Find Me Guilty (2006), the original English Death at a Funeral (2007), its American remake Death at a Funeral (2010), Penelope (2006), The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian (2008) and X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014) are also included in his brilliant work concerning feature films.His fine work in television also includes shows such as Entourage (2004), Life As We Know It (2004), Threshold (2005) and Nip/Tuck (2003). In 2011, the primary role of Tyrion Lannister, a man of sharp wit and bright spirit, in Game of Thrones (2011), was incarnated with unique greatness in Dinklage's unparalleled performance. The series is an adaptation of author George R. R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire series, and his work has received widespread praise, highlighted by his receiving the Emmy Award for Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Drama Series at The 63rd Primetime Emmy Awards (2011) and The 67th Primetime Emmy Awards (2015), as well as the 2012 Golden Globe Award for Best Supporting Actor - Series, Miniseries or Television Film.In 2012, Dinklage voiced Captain Gutt in Ice Age: Continental Drift. In 2014, he starred in the comedy horror film Knights of Badassdom and portrayed Bolivar Trask in the superhero film X-Men: Days of Future Past. In 2016, Dinklage provided the voice of The Mighty Eagle in The Angry Birds Movie.