Ensofter Overrated and overhyped

Forumrxes Yo, there's no way for me to review this film without saying, take your *insert ethnicity + "ass" here* to see this film,like now. You have to see it in order to know what you're really messing with.

Aiden Melton The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

Frances Chung Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

davyd-02237 I cant think of a film in 2018 that has come anywhere near close to as boring as this one. NOT a patch on the original 1950 version. This one does NOT have 1 redeeming feature, even the "dying hero" of the title hasn't any redeeming qualities, PANTS and find something different to do would be my advice, give this a very wide berth....the reason for "dead" is explained close to the end and its as poor as the rest of the film

cartman_1337 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.

LouisRenault In the original, the main character and the premise are established in a few minutes. The plot moves along briskly and as O'Brien tries to find out who did it and why, you are as interested to learn the answers as he is.Here, for more than half an hour you have no idea what the picture is all about; at one point it crossed my mind that it might not be any sort of remake at all. How is this half hour spent? In establishing that Quaid's character is someone who could live or die and you couldn't care less either way.Learning form other reviewers that the denouement is a colossal letdown comes as no surprise; I couldn't say myself because I couldn't be bothered to watch it through.Meg Ryan is gorgeous and Quaid gives a solid performance, but apart from that it is hard to find much good to say about this.

tamuccstudent I'm a fan of the 1950's original and about 20 minutes into this remake I started to think this was going to be as good as the original but it wasn't. The motive for the murders was incredibly stupid. Two of the lovers in the movie turn out to be brother and sister-excuse me while I barf. The main character stops in the middle of the movie to have sex which doesn't make sense considering the situation he's in. If the film makers wanted a sex scene they should have put it earlier in the movie before the main character (Dexter played by Dennis Quaid found he's about to die and that he's accused of a crime. There is a reason for where the sex scene is at. Early in the movie Dexter isn't living life to the fullest so he's not interested in sleeping with Meg Ryan. I still feel it would make more sense for the sex scene to have either been cut or earlier in the film and the two siblings not to have been lovers.One of the dumbest parts of the movie involves a gun fight, a couple people getting killed and one person being run over all within 15 yards of a crowded carnival and yet NOBODY AT THE CARNIVAL NOTICES!!! Also in the scene is the tar pits the university where the movie takes place is built on. If you fall into the tar you sink to the bottom and in a matter of seconds. Not only is it hard to believe stuff would sink that fast in tar, but more importantly who builds a university on tar pits. I would say more about how stupid the end of the movie is but I don't want to put a spoiler in my post.