MovieChat Forums > The Mummy (2017) Discussion > Never seen a movie like this...

Never seen a movie like this...

posted 7 years ago by JohnReacher (2)
26 replies | jump to latest

I am one of the biggest Cruise Fans out there and enjoyed almost all of his work (besides Interview with a Vampire).

But I have never seen a film like this. Who was it made for ?
Let's break it down (minor spoilers)

Horror Elements:
- Transformation of the mummy after the crash and the turning of both police men was creepy, scary and absolutely disturbing for a PG-13 movie. This is some Resident Evil type stuff.
But okay I can see that. The original Mummy was a horror film and they are going back to the roots. Perfectly fine with that.

Comedy Elements:
- Cruise is throwing jokes everywhere and there are comedic moments thru the whole movie.
Why ?! I thought it is a horror movie, you made it clear with the creepy Mummy stuff.

Action Elements:
- Plane crashes, Explosions, sandstorms. It's all in the trailer.

And an ending that is sad and creepy.

Who is this movie made for ?
Children ? No to scary !
Teens ? No to silly !
Adults ? We remember the good old Fraser Mummy. Yes it was also creepy and funny but It knew when to be funny and when to creep everyone out.
I have never seen such a genre mix where absolutely nothing worked.

And the grey filter over the whole film. I thought the only colors here are yellow and grey-bluish.

I love Tom and I will definatly give this film a second chance on Blu-Ray, but damn...
Crowe and the whole Organisation stuff was cool, but that's kinda it.

I have high hopes for the sequel and the Frankenstein film...

[–] Wuchak (8774) 5 years ago

It has the same spirit of high adventure/action of the 1999 movie, which mixed-in horror and a bit o’ comedy, albeit this one lacks the goofiness. The Indiana Jones flicks did the same thing decades ago -- meshed adventure/action with some horror and a little comedy. It's nothing new.

While the curious inclusion of Dr. Jekyll (Crowe) smacked of pushing the new franchise, it didn’t ruin the viewing experience for me. And winsome Wallis doesn’t hurt. I enjoyed the movie for the most part, although it coulda been more compelling in the latter portions.

[–] Stratego (30582) 4 years ago

The filter is horrendous!

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 4 years ago

I actually loved the fact that it was all over the fucking place. Basically everything you described lol. The strange, genre-defying sequences combined with a surprising amount of worldbuilding somehow worked for me.

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

I hated the way that it was "all over the place"!

Okay, I do like a movie that mixes horror, suspense, humor, action, etc., if it's done well. But this wasn't done well, it was done very badly. And I presume it was done this badly because Cruise's ego was SO monumentally out of control that he insisted on being both the hero and the villain.

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 3 years ago

lmao, I guess I'm biased towards two things: the trope of the conflicted hero/villain, and tom cruise as a villain. Another reason why I'm disappointed in the end of the dark universe. I think tom cruise works better as a villain than a hero...but...we never really see much of that side of him, and probably never will at this point. (Unless he acts against type when in his 70s or some shit)

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

Well, it's nice that somebody liked something about that movie! And we may see Cruise play the occasional villain but very occasional, he got good reviews for playing the creepy exec in "Tropic Thunder" and might be willing to do something similar again.

And yeah, I'm disappointed that the Dark Universe thing didn't pan out. I mean, most of it was crap, but I kinda liked that Dracula movie and wouldn't have minded a sequel for some evening when I had nothing better to do than watch a hot man for two hours, and Russell Crowe was very fun as Dr. Jeckyl in this movie and seeing him go to town on the role for a whole movie might have been fun.

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 3 years ago

I forgot about Tropic Thunder. I guess when I say villain, I'm specifically think of the cold, sinister persona he had in Collateral (and a few brief scenes in Mission Impossible 2 due to facemaker shenanigans). I can see him doing more of the Tropic character for sure. Don't see him doing many more Collaterals unfortunately.

Yeah, the story they were setting up with Jekyll's character/organization, man it would have been sick to have seen him engage with Luke Evans' dracula. (Though I think by the time The Mummy came out, they were gonna ignore that movie anyways XD)

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

I don't know that Cruise is going to make any more films like "Collateral", which BTW I haven't seen because I don't like Cruise much. He's pushing sixty, he's made enemies in Hollywood, I suspect that the "Mission Impossible" franchise is all that's keeping his career going. Now because of that he might decide to do another supporting villain role like he did in "Tropic Thunder", just to do a bit of real acting for once, but I suspect he doesn't find acting all that interesting any more.

Too bad about Crowe's "Doctor Jeckyl", really. Now there's an actor who still seems to like acting!

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 3 years ago

Hmm, it's a tricky bit. I've known some ppl who can't stand cruise but do enjoy Collateral, but there's some ppl who tried but can't get into it because he's half the movie lol.

That's a good point too regarding his limited options/appeal, but I think you're right about the acting bit. He's dialing shit in at this point. Doing his stunts. He's become a caricature of himself. XD

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

Well that's the thing, he's getting older and has gotten less interesting as an actor over the years, he's not one of these serious actors who keeps working well into old age because they find the craft so fascinating. He's not an actor, he's a star!

He's at the stage of his career where all the big stars realize the game is up and find something else to do with their time, producing or worthy causes or whatever, and rumor has it that Cruise is in line to take over as top dog of his cult. Eh.

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8761) 3 years ago

I liked it as well. It can't hold up to the '99 film, but if you can resist the urge to make the comparison then in all fairness it's a fun adventure/horror movie.

I didn't understand all the criticism when the film came out, though I was appreciative of the fact that a lot of movie fans WERE willing to speak up and say they enjoyed it.

It's also very weird that a film that made over $400 million was deemed a failure. If you can't recoup your expenses and turn a profit when your film makes $400 million then you're spending too fucking much money on your movies.

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 3 years ago

Exactly. It's just another iteration of a universal monster, and it's not particularly fair to hold it up to the 1999 one. Yeah, it's crazy that it made so much money...but not ENOUGH money lol. In these superhero-obsessed film market right now, I thought it was a nice contender, but alas, we'll never see that epic dark universe crossover.

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8761) 3 years ago

It seems that instead of fun, pulpy, more family-friendly fare such as The Mummy they're now wanting to take the Universal Monsters in a more realistic, adult-oriented direction. Case in point is The Invisible Man. Pretty sure I saw something the other day about Ryan Gosling signing for a new Wolfman movie and the article said that the style and vibe would be akin to Invisible Man. This is a disappointment for me.

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 3 years ago

Ah, not a fan of The Invisible Man, or are you just disappointed to have lost the pulpy, family-friendliness?

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8761) 3 years ago

I watched half of The Invisible Man, paused it, and meant to get back to it but never did. I guess that says something.

I wouldn't say I disliked the film, but it's not really what I think these movies should be. They should be fun, escapist entertainment. I think that trying to make them overly realistic will result in a dry, clinical final result, which is exactly what I think happened with Invisible Man.

Plus, I liked the Dark Universe idea of allowing these characters to intermingle and that's dead now.

[–] jewoogle (2269) 3 years ago

i lost you at "i am one of the biggest cruise fans". i cant understand how people can stand that guy he is such a weirdo scientology nutjob every movie he is in gets ruined by his presence. i am one of the biggest Mummy fans but skipped this movie completely for the sole reason they put this asshat jabroini into the film