I love this movie so much

the audience applauded

So much average

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

I watched this about two weeks ago, and being a fan of the original, I always like to watch the remake and talk smack about the terrible changes they made. With that being said....This wasn't terrible. I really liked that even though the premise was the same (man gets poisoned, man goes to police to tell the story, movie unfolds in a flashback), I did not feel like I was watching the original movie after about the first 10 minutes of the film. Now the original is a noir classic, This movie though I would not say is a classic in the NEO NOIR category, it definitely is worth a watch.Quaid gives a slightly manacle performance that is fun to watch, and he does a pretty good job of holding the movie together. Some of the other cast members, well they work but their motives to me do not lead up to the results that are laid out, but this is a movie, so who cares? The production is spot on. The lighting is what I always imagine a noir picture to be. Fan shadows, lights through blinds, lit cig smoke. All the stereotypes that make a Noir a Noir are here. It does work and looks spectacular. This movie would be a great movie if you were to be studying lighting techniques.The end, I did see coming but it felt underwhelming. Noir is known for having some twist, or cool plot device that is set up without even knowing was set up, and then BOOM last ten seconds changes everything....not so much here.Is it as solid as the original? Well the original is a classic, but to me is a different movie, and other than the set up and the title, are different and should be judged on their own.I enjoyed it and will watch it again.

This so-called remake of the 1950 movie by the same name is probably less similar to said movie than Avatar is to Dances With Wolves... It shares the premise of a man learning he has a limited time to live, and tries to find out who poisoned him in that time. The settings, characters and execution is very different, though, and personally I much prefer this "remake" to the 1950 movie.I was especially caught by the cinematography and color effects, which I found quite unique. The main character is properly fleshed out, and likable, and his story is fascinating and told in an effective and well paced manner. I found the resolution rather predictable, but it didn't really take away from my enjoyment of the movie.

D.O.A. is directed by Annabel Jankel and Rocky Morton and adapted to screenplay by Charles Edward Pogue from a story by Russell Rouse and Clarence Greene. It stars Dennis Quaid, Meg Ryan, Daniel Stern, Charlotte Rampling, Jane Kaczmarek and Christopher Neame. Music is by Chaz Jankel and cinematography by Yuri Neyman.A loose remake of the 1950 film noir of the same name, the story finds Professor Dexter Cornell (Quaid) staggering into a police station proclaiming that he is dying because someone has poisoned him. Told in flashback by Cornell, we see the events that led up to the point he was poisoned, but not who did it, and then track the frantic Professor as he tries to solve the who done it mystery before he keels over and dies.Not as bad as the poor box office returns suggest it is, D.O.A. is still very much a frustratingly shaky experience. Lifting only the basic idea of the 1950 movie, the makers stamp their own mark on the premise but add too many red herrings to the already fishy stew. Some plot developments are daft, as is the casting of Meg Ryan in the key femme role - seriously she is just too cookie cute and homely for this material – while the motive reveal is a bit much to swallow. Yet there's still a lot to enjoy and sample here for the neo-noir faithful.Visually the picture is stylish and appreciative to its noir roots. Opening in black and white to set the story in motion, Jankel and Morton then infuse the film with angled shots and frame distortions. Shadows often come into play, with Venetian blinds and roof rafters impacting, while the addition of a spiral staircase late in the day is most pleasing. Quaid is ever watchable in what is a tricky role that calls for him to garner sympathy whilst not being likable! While elsewhere Stern and Rampling provide good characterisations, even if as written the roles are too small given the importance the characters have to the plot shenanigans.A bit over cooked on the page, and basically a race against time thriller dressed up in neo-noir clothing, D.O.A. is still none the less worthy of a viewing. 6.5/10

OK, so this film may not have won any Oscars, but it is not a bad film. The original "D.O.A." is undoubtedly a better film, but that does not mean this film is bad.The film stars Dennis Quaid in one of his early roles, when he was first becoming really famous, after "The Right Stuff" made him a star, and a very lovely looking Meg Ryan, when she was still now quite famous.This is more of an "update" of the 1950 film, rather than a remake, since the setting is different and the characters too, are different. The plot is pretty much the same. A man (this time an English professor at the University of Texas at Austin) is poisoned and he has only 24 hours to find out who poisoned him and why. Meg Ryan plays a young college student who tries to help him. Jane Kaczmarek plays Quaid's estranged wife, in a low key, but intense performance; she steals every scene she is in. Daniel Stern (also in an early role, before "Home Alone" made him famous) plays Quaid's colleague. Charlotte Rampling is fine too in a supporting role.The entire cast is top notch; The film is stylish, with a quick pace that keeps you guessing until the end. I think this is a film that is certainly worth watching as a thriller, and as a modern version of a classic film.