The Mummy (2017 version)

[gnoel809]

Tonight I watched the latest version of The Mummy, starring Tom Cruise. It had been sitting on my DVR for a while, finally got around to watching it.

I have to admit, in the first part of the movie, when they were showing Ancient Egypt, with pharaohs and such, I kept expecting their eyes to glow (time to take a break from the latest SG-1 rewatch).

I'm torn about this movie. I've liked many Tom Cruise movies over the years (Top Gun, Edge of Tomorrow, Oblivion, A Few Good Men, among others) and I like the idea of re-booting some of the classic monster movies (The Mummy, Frankenstein's Monster, Jekyll & Hyde). But while this movie was fine, with a good amount of action, I don't know that TC was the best leading man for it.

Tom has been a good leading man for quite a few years, but to start a new franchise ... not so much. He's in his mid-50's, too old for the latest generation of movie-goers to identify with. They probably would have been better off going with The Rock or someone else more trendy.

Though all in all, taken by itself, I thought the movie was pretty good. I especially liked Anabelle Wallis, she's always good in anything she does.

[Looney]

Tonight I watched the latest version of The Mummy, starring Tom Cruise. It had been sitting on my DVR for a while, finally got around to watching it.

I have to admit, in the first part of the movie, when they were showing Ancient Egypt, with pharaohs and such, I kept expecting their eyes to glow (time to take a break from the latest SG-1 rewatch).

I'm torn about this movie. I've liked many Tom Cruise movies over the years (Top Gun, Edge of Tomorrow, Oblivion, A Few Good Men, among others) and I like the idea of re-booting some of the classic monster movies (The Mummy, Frankenstein's Monster, Jekyll & Hyde). But while this movie was fine, with a good amount of action, I don't know that TC was the best leading man for it.

Tom has been a good leading man for quite a few years, but to start a new franchise ... not so much. He's in his mid-50's, too old for the latest generation of movie-goers to identify with. They probably would have been better off going with The Rock or someone else more trendy.

Though all in all, taken by itself, I thought the movie was pretty good. I especially liked Anabelle Wallis, she's always good in anything she does.

I agree with your assessment that Cruise was not the best choice for this role. I disagree that this movie was "pretty good", but I can see where people might enjoy certain aspects of the film. There is some good stuff in there, but it doesn't make the overall effort a quality effort. I think this movie is definitely flawed and lacking. I wouldn't say it is as bad as MANY people have said it is, but I think it is definitely weak. I agree that the action is there, but not much else. I don't think people realize how much humor is attempted in this movie because I don't think it seems like humor when they deliver it. The script isn't great. The relationship between the lead actors has no real chemistry or spark. The relationship with the of the hero and his buddy seems a bit forced. Russell Crowe might have been my favorite part of this movie, but his character has a couple of real eye-rolling moments. About halfway through the film I was disappointed because I already knew the likelihood of a Dr. Jekyll movie was pretty much non-existent, but my feelings changed by the end.

I feel this film also suffers because the public has become all too familiar with how Hollywood works these days. My least favorite part of this film is the ending. I don't mean the climax. I mean the obvious attempt at letting the audience know there will be sequels and that these movies won't just be about Universal Monsters. I wanted to like this movie. I wanted it to be a success. After I saw the ending and I realized what Universal was doing I was no longer interested in seeing future installments of this "Dark Universe".