User Reviews (36)

  • Reel Life Reviews31 August 2017
    5/10
    Worth the asking price
    Rememory - A sci-fi thriller with borrowed plot points and an unsatisfying conclusion. It's definitely worth the price of admission, however, being that it's free on Google Play before it comes out in theaters.

    The movie centers around an invention that allows people to view memories from any point in their life. It doesn't get bogged down in the science behind it, allowing the story to unfold. The problem is, it's not a very good story.

    Although the memories of these characters are on full display, I never felt like I got to know any of them. The main character, played by Peter Dinklage, is a figurine maker, but is seemingly Sherlock Holmes as well. I don't know how much PTO comes with a job like that, but he spends all his time investigating a murder on his own volition. It never feels like he's truly given a challenge at any point, and the movie is too busy trying to throw you off the scent that it doesn't seem to care.

    One thing that jumps out, however, is that the movie makes zero reference to the fact that Peter Dinklage is a little person. His stature is often the main focus of his character on Game of Thrones, but any actor could have gotten this role. Given what he lays out on screen here, the overall movie notwithstanding, it's clear why he earned the part.

    Another positive performance is offered by the late Anton Yelchin. He plays a troubled young man on the brink of total mental collapse. He put all he had into his small role, showing that his untimely death robbed us of decades of potential in the world of cinema.

    If you want to see a better execution of the technology featured in this movie, I would direct you to the BBC (now Netflix) anthology series, Black Mirror. Each episode is its own independent story, so you can jump in at any point. The one entitled 'The Entire History of You' delves deeper into the topic, and also happens to be my favorite of the entire series. Yes, Rememory is currently free, but you already have Netflix on every device you own. Queue it up. 5.25/10
  • redanimalwar23 September 2017
    9/10
    This is great drama movie with thriller and mystery elements - it NOT Inception.
    Warning: Spoilers
    The overall bad reviews (in the press, rotten tomatoes lists this as totally rotten with almost every critic trashing it) really surprised me on this one.

    I have this feeling that people expected this movie to me some science fiction action or something with a super twisted story ...

    The science fiction in this movie is "just" the base of the story, everything else plays out like a Drama/Thriller/Mystery. And for me it really delivered that. Especially the conclusion about the accident was something I did not expect at all. Although the part that the machine should never go into production was very predictable from early on and that memories should probably kept as they are. The ending kind of expects the audience to assume this is what happened after, at least this is how I saw it. I expected that Lawton would be confronted, some great reveal of the truth to the public ... but it was OK without that.

    Its a really sad movie and I have read reviews complaining about that. I mean what do you expect when the first listed genre says Drama.

    I get there was potential for something else with that machine story, but it was not needed for a good movie in my opinion. In the end we see Gordon delete a memory and do also do some settings on the machine never seen before. It was always just about recording and playing basically. Based on that it could be a entire different movie, memory alternation, deletion. Making people think memories of others were their own forgotten ones ... its probably thought like this that made critics not like this movie.
  • stephenw-3018025 August 2017
    7/10
    Well done and unique Sci-Fi Thriller
    Let me first start out by saying I believe Peter Dinklage is one of the most underrated American actors of our day. I believe that will change as time passes. He is as strong n stage as he is in film. His performance in Rememory is not different.

    As I typically do in my reviews, I avoid telling the story of a films narrative or plot. I try to stick to my opinion and what I feel is good or bad about a film on its merits or shortcomings.

    Rememory is a unique journey about the concept of capturing memories, good and bad, all the way back to early childhood, and being able to view them in real time on a machine built by a brilliant Psychologist.

    This concept may be very "out there" for people to believe but the film tells the story I. A very believable way. It's not hokey in any manner and the story moves at an interesting pace. I felt it started a bit slow but picks up rather quickly about 20 minutes in and is a good ride from that point on.

    Acting is terrific and special effects and concept were far above average. The sub-ploy intertwined well with the main story and gives a feel of unease which is a big reason the film works IMO.

    Again, Dinklage carries the film on his shoulders and delivers another fine performance as the protagonist on a journey seeking the truth, at his own peril, against a big corporation nipping on his heels once he starts making inquiries into the death of the designer and builder of the "machine".

    No spoilers here....I am not a big fan of Sci-Fi but have to say this film felt more like a Thriller and is in fact, and is done very well for a concept that seems highly unlikely despite the advances in modern technology.

    Any fan of unique thrillers lead by great acting and original screenplay with an added terrific soundtrack, this is time well spent.
  • Crystal_Dive27 August 2017
    8/10
    Scifi drama, not scifi action
    There are many ways how scifi is played out on screen, from mega-budgeted science action fantasy with the likes of Star Wars, Guardians of the Galaxy and the rebooted Star Trek, all the way to scifi of which science-fiction is but a frame around matters of the human heart. This film is of the later, a precautionary tale about why the malleable and fading nature of memories shouldn't be altered.

    If you come in with the right expectations , then you will not be disappointed by this film of stellar acting, and direction.

    Other films of the same vein, of which you should watch: 1. Eternal sunshine of the Spotless mind (Jim Carey, 2004) 2. The Final Cut (Robin Williams, 2004) 3. an episode of Black Mirror (The Entire History of You , Season 1 Episode 3)
  • tomvs-3139126 August 2017
    3/10
    Not a good sci-fi film. Maybe a good murder mystery
    Warning: Spoilers
    I went into this thinking I would get at least an average sci-fi film. Boy, was I wrong. I ended up feeling that this was a low-budget made-for-TV drama.

    This is definitely a murder mystery drama. The one sci-fi bit included (the memory machine) is poorly executed and only serves as device for gathering evidence. From a sci-fi fan standpoint, it's not believable.

    All acting, especially the main actor is good. Though it was a little odd that no one in the movie mentioned his size (he's a little person). That was just one bit of the movie that made it seem more like a movie and less like reality.

    As for the rest of it, it made absolutely no sense. Character motivations were silly. They appeared to act in a certain way to throw you off on figuring out the identity of the killer, but the way they acted made no sense in hindsight.

    The characters in this film frequently don't do things in accordance with how most intelligent people would do things. I was frequently asking myself "Why did he do that?" , "Why didn't he do that an hour ago?" , and "why didn't character X just tell the truth since he/she wasn't guilty?!?!" And the big plot twist at the end of the movie was done poorly. I knew what would happen about 30 minutes before it happened (because of a poorly-place spoiler/piece of evidence), and the reasoning behind it was very poorly explained. If we had only a few more bits of better-placed background information about that ending revelation, it would have been at least an average movie for me.

    But as it stands, it's bad. If you absolutely need a murder mystery and aren't too critical of them, or you really like the actors in this one, maybe give it a try. Sci-fi fans looking for an intelligent story: stay clear.
  • EatMyWords6 October 2017
    5/10
    I honestly think they called the machine "The Machine"
    Warning: Spoilers
    When not attempting at depth with its ramblings on memories--They shape our entire lives! We repress our memories over time! We escape the grief they bring and the true meaning they hold!--"Rememory" sports a decent mystery plot supervised by a quality actor desperately trying to maintain the interest of an already repressing audience. Marketed as a sci-fi-movie, fans of the genre will rightfully mock the film for using its sci-fi-apparatus (the memory-recorder) simply to highlight its themes with the gentleness of a sledge hammer to the forehead.

    The film is interesting in one regard though: Contemporary society is deep into the idea of recording events, essentially creating visual and auditory memories for the future. People go to concerts and snaps away at it with their cameras rather than looking at it with their own eyes, accident scenes are rife with bystanders whipping out their phones to capture moments of shock, sorrow, carnage etc and even criminals stop themselves in their track to document their unlawful conduct. Dealing with similar themes by introducing a device recording perfect, actual memories is therefore an interesting concept. The problem is that this particular offering and its creators are obviously not the ones to tackle them. Its conventional investigation-plot, slogging pacing and sensationalist script makes it hard to engage with the thematic material.

    That said, the aforementioned mystery that quality actor Peter Dinklage lords over is passable as entertainment. The plot revolves around dead psychologist Gordon Dunn (Martin Donovan). He is the creator of "the Machine." Sam Bloom (Dinklage) is an acquaintance of him from the past and someone who nurses some dark memories. Bloom takes it upon himself to solve this murder that happened during mysterious circumstance. With the help of the machine (acquired in contrived fashion) he proceeds to sample through recorded memories from test subjects, looking for clues as to who could've had a hand in the murder. Besides the subjects there's also Dunn's company, desperately wanting the machine returned so they can release it on the market (how they lost their incredibly valuable product and their ineptness at getting it back grates). So who did it? From here its a familiar stew of red herrings (some good ones, others not so much), final act explanations (some helpful, others completely needless) and a web of narrative possibilities (nicely visualized by scale models built by Bloom to assist him in his investigation).

    In terms of style there is not much to be impressed about either. Shot in traditionally saturnine thriller/mystery-fashion with the occasionally injected pretty imagery of "important" memories. Mood- wise it's not much better: Hallucinations appear before our main character but rather than alarming us they annoy and the horrid score by Gregory Tripi is of no assistance. When entering the memories there also seems to be a contradiction: Entering memories sometimes gives the appearance of watching it from the audience perspective (you see subjects as well as the watcher interacting with an environment) while at other times providing the first-person perspective of the watcher. Perhaps a stylistic choice by the director bearing significance at the moment evading me, but maybe just as likely plain old sloppiness or indifference.

    ----All in all, not terrible but certainly stupid, pretentious and slow. Watch it for Bloom's investigation and the excellent acting from Dinklage, especially the scenes with actress Julia Ormond (Dunn's widowed wife Carolyn) whom play off of each other well despite the forced screenplay----
  • Claudio Carvalho31 August 2017
    5/10
    Boring and Deceptive
    Warning: Spoilers
    After losing his brother Dash Bloom (Matt Ellis) in a car accident, the modelist Sam Bloom (Peter Dinklage) unsuccessfully tries to move his life on. Sam misses Dash's last words to him. One day, he watches the lecture of the psychologist Gordon Dunn (Martin Donovan), who has developed the prototype of a machine that records, erases and plays the memories of his subjects. Sam becomes obsessed with the scientist and stalks him at his hotel. However Gordon is murdered in his room and Sam has many suspects. He meets Gordon ex-wife Carolyn Dunn (Julia Ormond) and uses the device to help him to investigate each suspect. Will Sam find the truth and who killed Gordon?

    The dramatic "Rememory" is not a sci-fi film, but a boring and deceptive mystery movie. Peter Dinklage, Martin Donovan, Julia Ormond and the rest of the cast try to save this film with good performances but the screenplay is awfully written and does not help them. My vote is five.

    Title (Brazil): Not Available
  • subxerogravity12 September 2017
    7/10
    Peter Dinklage is worth the watch.
    I don't know if this is the first time Peter Dinklage leads his own movie, but hopefully it will not be his last, cause he really made this film. He just had me so into what was going on all the way to the big revealed in this murder mystery.

    In it, Dinklage plays a man who lost his brother in a car accident, and can't remember the last words he said before dying. It messes him up badly, until he discovers a man who invented a machine that can recall and playback your memories and while he attempts to get a hold of this machine, the inventor mysteriously dies and he gets caught up in trying to find out how he died.

    The movie is a little above average. It was an interesting mystery, mostly because of the cleaver plot device that centers around it (The machine that can record your memories, giving it a bit of a Sci-Fi appeal) but the real reason to see the movie is Dinklage who gives a fine performance to focus on rather than any loop holes you might find.

    I think this movie took so long to get into theaters because of Anton Yelchin's death. They may have had to do some reediting or reshoots to accommodate his passing. It does not seem to effect the movie any, but who knows how good the film could have been if his passing actually did delay it's release. Plus, he's the other reason I went to see the movie.

    I also enjoined Julia Ormond in the film, who played the inventor's widow. The parts she shared with Dinklage especially really pop out at you. I did not go into this to see her, but it was an extra added surprise.

    Definitely something great to watch. A decent murder mystery with a cool plot point made really better with the help of Dinklage, Ormond and Anton Yelchin (RIP).

    http://cinemagardens.com
  • floyd beck24 August 2017
    6/10
    A great script that goes too slow; too long...
    Warning: Spoilers
    It could have been a great 60 minutes or less movie. The actors are very good. The memories throughout the movie are broad enough to touch nearly every viewer. Personally, I was touched by the memory of the dog at the vet. The problem is that, like a soap opera, there is way too much dialog. Some scenes feel like you are watching an ad for respiratory medication. The side affects are boredom and a desire to go to the rest room. The other problem is the political push. One character paints the hunting of small, wild creatures as very bad. Then, the same character is painted as doing good when he pollutes a river or bay area. Also, the viewer is indoctrinated more than once with the theme of the movie that, "We are nothing more than the memories we keep." Personally, I am tons more than my memories. So, who is right? Apart from the soapy feel, the hypocrisy, and the moral ineptitude, this movie is really very good in presenting a Sherlock Holmes type of inquiry, and some surprises. It certainly is not a waste of time.
  • vishnu-dileep0831 October 2017
    8/10
    "A good movie, Peter Dinklage at his best"
    Summary (no spoilers)

    This movie is about a widow of a wise professor who trips upon one of his inventions that's able to record and play a person's memory.

    My Review (no spoilers)

    The plot of this movie was a perfect mixture of Mystery and Sci-Fi. When you watch this movie it had a perfect start but towards the end you're going to feel like this is leading nowhere but I would say to keep watching as its going to be enchanting. It had the perfect and unpredictable ending. Peter Dinklage the GOT star did some exceptional acting. Overall a good movie with the perfect ending.

    My Recommendation

    Yes why not give it a shot.

    My Rating

    8/10
  • Harrison Tweed (Top Dawg)25 August 2017
    6/10
    Well executed for a poorly written screenplay
    Warning: Spoilers
    This film had great potential with a such a great cast, good directing and interesting story, but fell short of that potential with a dragged out screenplay full of unnecessary scenes and plot holes that could have been easily omitted. This 2+ hour film should have been just over 1 hour, and then it would have held my attention much better, and I would have enjoyed it much more.

    The directing and cinematography were on point for this film. The acting was also good, but would have come across much better had the pace not been dragged out so slow. Each time you begin to sympathize with each character, you get bored and just want to move on to the next scene. Why and what was the point of Peter Dinklage's character to have time so set up and paint small statues (and use a label maker) to set up his crime timeline model?

    My biggest problem with this film are the major plot holes and that from the start, you can't help being annoyed at how easy it was for anyone to break into a home (how did it even up up there from the crime scene anyway?) and steal such an integral one of a kind machine - and all of his classified patients memories. You would expect the best security measures in the world to be in place to protect such an asset - including the headquarters where just anyone can walk into the scientists main office with a gun, fire it, and no one notices it.

    Then top it off with a corporation that fails to do anything drastic (and expected) to get their prized possession back. Add the fact that Peter Dinklage's character just wanted to know what his brother said before his last breath, and it takes him until the end of the film to play out that memory.

    Let's not forget the absence of normal policing in an investigation where shots are fired. One would think the police would have been the first to get their hands on the machine to play back Gordon Dunn's memory to find out how he died.

    For such a poor screenplay, it was executed as good as possible, and for that it's a 6/10 from me.
  • bootoir25 August 2017
    9/10
    Reflection of a time gone by
    Warning: Spoilers
    This movie is not for the action loving, sci-fi addicted and fast paced viewer. But it is for the thoughtful, reflective and pondering viewer. Plot: Sam Bloom (Peter Dinklage) lost his brother in a tragic accident and desperately wants to know what happened during the last moments of his brother's life. His search leads him to a scientist, Gordon Dunn (Martin Donovan) who invented a machine that can unlock every single memory that a person has lived through. His theory is that our brain stores every moment of our lives; we just do not know how to unlock those memories. He invented the machine to do just that-unlock, extract and save those memories on the device. Gordon Dunn died suddenly through mysterious circumstances. Sam becomes obsessed with his death, but more so his journey of unlocking his own memories. He embarks on a quest of piecing together the people involved in Gordon's life and around Gordon's death, stealing the device to accomplish his task. He meets Gordon's wife whom he develops a special relationship with, helping her as well throughout his journey. He is able to give her peace, understanding, closure. The movie is close to 2 hours long, for some folks it may be a tad too long, I however did not feel this way at all. The depth and development of the characters involved is well thought out and meaningful. Peter Dinklage takes you on a journey of self-discovery and leaves you pondering if you would want to use the device yourself given the chance. He portrays Sam Bloom wonderfully and people can identify pieces of themselves within him, excellent work on his part. The music is haunting, sometimes daunting, a nice fit to the movie. Would you be willing to use such a device, finding long forgotten memories, joy, pain, fun, anger, good and sad times....would you be willing to take that risk and accept it's possible side effects of not being able to turn those hidden memories off that are hidden for a reason?
  • janmarju28 August 2017
    9/10
    Recording and playing back memories.
    When the movie started, I thought it was going to be very similar to The Final Cut with Robin Williams. It was similar in one sense, but very different as you will see if you give The Final Cut a watch. I enjoyed both movies. This movie also reminded me of an episode in the Black Mirror series, The entire history of you. Season 1, Episode 3. All three goes to show that memories are nothing to play around with.
  • omendata28 September 2017
    5/10
    Too simplistic and plodding to be worth paying to see
    This is more of a murder mystery with a bit of scifi thrown into the bargain and it never seems to know what it is or how the story should proceed or unfold.

    Don't get me wrong all the acting was superb and i didn't figure out the crash significance but i did figure out how the murder/death happened within 10 mins of the scene unfolding - I guess when you have watched films like "Forbidden Planet" and other movie scenes where humans try to over-reach their capability you would also have surmised what happened to the inventor chap! Yip its all been done before and in a much more interesting way - the actual box itself looks really cheap and the special effects are woeful - there is even a scene where the plastic visor screen opens up and instead of gliding like it would if it had a proper electronic motor it moves like it is stuck - i actually started to laugh at that point it was really very poor effects!

    The movie itself was plodding and nothing groundbreaking as some reviewers are suggesting - its very sad how there are so many shills on IMDb trying to sway the votes and getting people to view movies that really aren't what they are expecting.

    I guess we are all still waiting for another Matrix, Saw or Oblivion movie with a great idea but this isn't it sadly.
  • XweAponX29 August 2017
    10/10
    What if "God" really does "See All" and could play it back instantly?
    The idea of using a "Memory Machine" to dig out truth may not really be an original idea, there was a "Golden Age" classic science fiction story by "Lewis Padgett" (Catherine L. Moore and Henry Kuttner) called "Private Eye" that I have in an "Astounding Science Fiction" Pulp magazine from 1949, which expounds a similar future gadget that records all memories to be used in various murder trials, in fact in that story it became a representation of "God's ever seeing Eye" like we have on the back of a Dollar Bill, and the literary gadget is used simply as the means of exploring the paranoia such a device would engender, if in fact we knew ALL of our memories were being recorded. This happens a bit in this film, but used they way it was here, it was less of that, because this machine was just being introduced and it was the single Prototype in existence- So not many people had experienced it yet, and it was being introduced as a Psychotherapy tool rather than a Truth-telling tool. Which made it more interesting as Dinklage/"Sam" uses it to connect the dots rather than expose anyone outright as a possible murderer. If in fact a murder has occurred.

    Not to mention, this machine only records from One person's POV at a time, so it requires cross referencing to other people who had experienced the same thing at the same time to get a clear idea of the truth, and this happens in the Climax of the story. Memories from 2 people paint a picture for one of Sam's forgotten memories.

    Ergo, there are several suspects, several people acting guilty, one of them a woman who is suspiciously paranoid about having her memories shown on an Imax screen to the World. This makes her the obvious prime suspect for most of this film, barely edging out Anton Yelchin's "Todd" who was acting very finicky and crazy in this, his possible final role.

    The End credits names Sarah-Jane Redmond (Lucy Butler/Legion of Chris Carter's "MillenniuM" fame) as the woman "Allison", whom Dinklage tries to meet, but we don't get to see her, only her arm getting a Tattoo. But since all I saw was a sneak peak of this film, perhaps an extended version will show her face.

    Other than that, I disagree that this film is not memorable, it is very well made, well directed and well photographed. How do we judge a film's memorability? Because we are thinking about it for the next 24 hours or more. Like "That was a nice little kick in the Arse", and it was.

    Try to find the Lewis Padgett story "Private Eye" to see the similarities, and the differences, to Rememory.

    RIP Anton.
  • mihai_chindris14 September 2017
    7/10
    Life represents the sum of our memories, indeed
    First, I thought that it wouldn't be much to see about this movie, but after I was digging through the story I noticed where it was headed and what it wanted to communicate. Yes, the message of it is simple and straightforward, but the facts that got me fascinated were not only the scenes, but the manner by which they were filmed and how all was put so well together to form something so beautiful. The staff that made this has my appreciation. You created a piece of art.
  • Michael Ledo6 September 2017
    7/10
    Time heals all wounds
    Warning: Spoilers
    Sam Bloom (Peter Dinklage) is involved in an automobile accident and can't remember his brother's dying words. Gordon Oliver Dunn (G.O.D.) (Martin Donovan) has created a machine that extracts our real memories, the ones that are not clouded over in fiction or our mind blocks out. Sam wants to remember, but there are consequences. When Gordon suddenly dies, the film turns into a bland "NBC Mystery Movie" as Sam tries to figure out who killed Gordon...or did he just die? The film became interesting at the end as things unfolded different than what we expected. Gordon's middle name "Oliver" is never stated but we see it in writing as the camera lingers on it for that extra "clue" second. This is important in order to understand the confusing ending.

    Guide: F-word. No sex or nudity.
  • eeclarkjr29 August 2017
    7/10
    Free movie From Google Play - worth every penny
    Warning: Spoilers
    Good movie. Not great but good. Yelchin has a supporting role and he is really good. Good drama and not too sci-if. I opened my Google Play account and it was free. Just waiting to accept the offer from Google. Dinklage puts in a believable performance as usual. Spoiler: not sure how he could reach the pedals in the station wagon. Seriously. That's not a jab at his height.
  • bmco-247-72102525 August 2017
    6/10
    Science Fiction - Not....
    Warning: Spoilers
    Less a science fiction film and more of a murder mystery revolving around who killed the scientist, Gordon Dunn. The acting was good, however, sometimes the story dragged a bit and probably could have been shortened vs. for instance, repeatedly rehashing some of the memories played back on the revolutionary play back device.

    There is nothing flashy or remotely interesting when it comes to the actual memory device. It's simply a means for allowing the story to gradually reveal the secret around how the inventor's life ended. At times it seemed the story was striving for some emotional depth, however, I didn't find the theme that compelling. In the end, I didn't feel that I wasted my time watching Rememory and think on average, most people will find it entertaining, but not particularly memorable :)
  • chasburnsesq24 September 2017
    7/10
    Man of the moment
    Man of the moment Peter Dinklage takes main role in this little beauty. I've never been keen on his acting (tortured soul type) - but hey it obviously works. I've been watching him for a long time (check The Station Agent 2003 which is when his career really kicked off) "Space Pants" aside - which is probably the reason for his tortured soul - Rememory is a nice little detective /mystery / Sly-fi (my new term for sci - fi films that aren't that futuristic, you have my permission to use it, the entire new series I'm working on at the moment is Sly-fi.. But I digress..) Finally a film that doesn't concentrate on his size.. although you might still.. He really appears to be spear-heading the small person in a film without prejudice. 7.4/10
  • pikia-ivan20726 August 2017
    8/10
    More than average notice...
    Warning: Spoilers
    The film settles as a science-fiction/drama/mystery whose play is focusing on and consisting of three things, and those are: 1. The life of Sam Bloom (Peter Dinklage) and his accident, and the memory of his brother who died in that accident. 2. The new machine which can present, play, and save people's memories (which is practically the only reason it is a science fiction movie) 3. Solving the murder of Gordon Dunn (Martin Donovan), the man who made the machine and the only one who knows how to make it and the owner of the only working prototype. There is a thing that many people do not see, or get in the film. Let me first trigger a memory, okay? Fellow reader, you must know the types of films that are boring to watch because the end is pretty obvious? And there are the mystery films which have a sudden plot twist at the end. Well this is neither of them, and both at the same time. As I am familiar with Mark Palanskys work, I expected a good film, and a good plot. There is one sentence which makes the center of the movie: "We are nothing more than the memories we keep." Whilst the sentence repeats continuously the plot tends to prove it. The plot of the recalled memories shows the most, but the key elements of the hardest moments are deleted from the patients' brains by themselves to avoid future mental trauma. And well, the machine brings them back (also with additional side effects). Through the whole film there were hints, through which the viewer could suspect/predict the ending. It was seen that the murder was not the real theme there, it was the story of Sam Bloom which mattered there. This was more of a Predestination resolution with hints hidden through the film. Sam Bloom caused an accident while drunk driving, bumping into a car, which resulted killing his brother. While he couldn't remember the moments after the impact, the only thing he remembered was that his brother told him something (when he set him on the driver position) and then walking away in the forest. In the mean time we get that he makes his wish and promise to find what his brothers last words were, trough that he meets Gordon Dunn. While solving the murder we are going deeper and deeper into the background of the plot, and really there are hints everywhere. Let me state a few obvious: Carolyn Dunn (Julia Ormond), while first using the machine had the exact moment before the impact in the thoughts, and the audience can notice that. And the most important one, the key sentence ("We are nothing more than the memories we keep.") is what it is all about (that's why its continuously repeating). The sample group was made of people with the potential to have a self-erased memory which could change their lives to be better, and while unveiling them everything became worse for them. While Gordon Dunn made the machine practically only so he could be with his daughter (which was killed in the car accident), he did understand the key sentence, and while seeing what the invention did to others, he wanted to kill himself. For that, he deleted his memories and ended his life proving the key sentence, for nothing more than zero memories he had left he also became nothing (for 0 less or equal than x less or equal than 0 x=0) so he become nothing(dead). Technically Sam Bloom was the beginning and the end of the whole story, he was the one who caused the loss of Gordons daughter, which caused in Gordon creating the machine, which then caused in Sam looking for Gordon (to find what the last words of his brother were). While seeing that the last words of his brother were just song lyrics, he found out a deleted memory of his, he was the one who killed the professors daughter. He caused every event involving creating and using of the machine, killed two people in the crash (which he set-up on his brother), and he was responsible for the murders that the machine caused, concretely of the girl killed in testing, but also it was him who caused the suicide of Gordon Dunn.
  • SteveJ_8885 December 2017
    6/10
    Dark and Gloomy
    Warning: Spoilers
    Rememory has many positive aspects. It is sincere, well-made, and attractive visually. It is atmospheric and uncluttered, and there is a stillness that I liked. The premise is interesting, and generally the acting is good. The lead actor, Peter Dinklage, gives a strong performance - subtle and understated. The characters are believable, though some of performances seem forced or melodramatic at times. On the minus side the movie is morose and humorless, which left me unengaged.

    The movie is so full of pain that I felt desensitized. There's a one-dimensional feeling emotionally and a sameness to the characters - all tortured and self-pitying throughout. The music and production design are continually dark and and echo the emotional states of the characters. The movie would have been greatly improved with the inclusion of some comic relief, or more lightness in terms of characters and events.

    The story is OK, but lacked suspense and depth. The inclusion of science relating to the movie's premise would have helped. What is offered seems cartoonish and superficial. Slap on a headphone-like device, hit record, and a person's memories are transferred onto a glass storage medium. The memories can then be accessed in order to verify events from the person's life. Just press playback and find out what you need to know. But how can an entire lifetime be processed so quickly and easily?

    Rememory is probably not for anyone who likes to be entertained or amused - or engaged by a clever plot. On the other hand, if you want immersion into a gloomy world of amplified pain, confusion, and regret, it might be just right for you.
  • chewywater-707-40070115 September 2017
    7/10
    A good murder-mystery/Drama
    Warning: Spoilers
    I won't review the plot because everyone else already has. I would highly recommend this film if you like murder-mysteries and dramas. Don't go into it thinking it's sci-fi, or you'll be disappointed.

    The Good * it was a good drama/murder-mystery, not really a science fiction movie. * An emotionally heavy film. Probes same issues as Manchester by the sea. * The acting is excellent.

    The Bad * Not science-fiction, and the trailer made it seem like it was, leading to a lot of disappointment I think. * The memory machine is a rather formulaic as a way to slowly reveal what really happened, but hey a lot of mysteries are formulaic in their slow exposure of the truth. * very gloomy all the way through, but I guess that was appropriate for the issues involved. * (SPOILER) it's not clear who ran the stop-sign and you have to re- watch the movie to find out, or go look in reddit. And that really matters because you need to know how forgivable Dinklage's character is.
  • Aly_Bird23 November 2017
    9/10
    Awesome Performance
    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.
  • hovigisg11 October 2017
    7/10
    We are nothing without our memories...
    Warning: Spoilers
    The idea of the movie is the kind i like, an advanced tech professor invents a device that animates humans memories, even those one that is hard to remember. Peter Dinklage was as usual awesome. But the movie itself was lacking some action, it was boring in the middle, the device which was animating the memories was so primitive & anybody was able to operate it, i think such an advanced high tech machine would be hard to operate, but at last it helped the hero to confront the bad memory which he was trying not ot remember, & he finally found peace. In general it was worth to watch.
loading
An error has occured. Please try again.