CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › The Mummy (the one with Tom Cruise)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Mummy (the one with Tom Cruise) - Page 28

post #1351 of 1382
I only saw the tail end of this movie, didn't seem a terrible as it was made out to be. I don't know, maybe it's worse if you watch the whole thing.

I did find it kind of funny that this and Star Trek Beyond both seem to have Lifeforce stuff in them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post

I think replicating the formula is a mistake - but so is rushing into things and having no plan. The key is adopting the lessons learned in both broad strokes and strategically. A huge key is giving us films that in the beginning stand alone, with any connective content being secondary or tertiary to the main story. Studios, predictably, want Avengers money and thus rush to the team up or emphasize the shared world aspects without bothering to create compelling characters or standalone stories.

They didn't exactly rush into this. This whole Dark Universe thing was announced back in 2014 while Dracula Untold was in production. And they'd been kicking this idea around since like the 1999 Mummy. Marvel seems like less of the reason other studios came up with these things, and more just the reason they're finally pulling the trigger on them. I'm pretty sure the time between announcement and release is like the same as when Marvel announced everything they were doing leading up to The Avengers and the first Iron Man movie.

I don't see any problem with jumping right into the team up. We watch movies with groups of character or teams all the time without a series of films before telling us what everyone's deal is. We didn't need the Han Solo, Princess Leia, Obi-Wan Kenobi, and Darth Vader movies before Star Wars.

Only reason Marvel didn't jump right into an Avengers movies was money. They were a little studio when they started, and they only had the rights to characters nobody really knew or gave a shit about. They were counting on people enjoying the individual movies enough to artificially create something bigger when they all teamed up a few years later...and they just happened to luck out and have Iron Man become a hit.
post #1352 of 1382

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dark Shape View Post
 

RIP Dark Universe: 2017-2017

 

 

Called it!

post #1353 of 1382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloq87 View Post

The prospect of turning the reins over to Jason Blum to produce smaller, horror-driven movies based on the Classic Monsters is exactly the sort of move I've been hoping for.  Fingers crossed that comes to pass.

I've been thinking for a while that this is exactly what they should have done from the beginning. Smaller budget preferably R-rated Gothic Horror films given to interesting directors to play around with and using the Shared Universe conceit to set up some fun Monster Mash flicks. They'd probably make a killing doing that.

This whole Blockbuster CGI fest filled with A-listers just felt wrong from the start and I'm glad this Dark Universe bullshit has had a stake driven through it's heart.
post #1354 of 1382

Don't hold your breath on that. I think Universal won't attempt anything with their classic monsters for awhile.

post #1355 of 1382
All of them should've been period pieces as well. From Hell had EXACTLY the tone I'd have salivated over being applied to all these classic monster's movies. With JUST a dash more humor and excitement..
post #1356 of 1382

Ooh, From Hell. Now there's a movie I wish was better.

post #1357 of 1382

This thread makes me miss PENNY DREADFUL so damn much.

post #1358 of 1382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post

Ooh, From Hell. Now there's a movie I wish was better.
Me too if I'm being honest but it's got atmosphere and visual flair that deserve a more thought out film. If they could've somehow combined From Hell and Sleepy Hollow.

Or just went back in time and had both of them made by Hammer in the 60s..
post #1359 of 1382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headless Fett View Post
 

This thread makes me miss PENNY DREADFUL so damn much.

I caught up with that series two weeks ago leading up to Halloween.

 

My gosh what a masterpiece. Of acting, writing, directing, cinematography, costumes, makeup, everything. Such a grandly literate series, and Eva Green should have all of the awards.

post #1360 of 1382
Welp....time to start watching Penny Dreadful. Heard too many good things. It seems practically unanimously loved..
post #1361 of 1382
Oh you won't regret it. The praise for that show is 100% deserved and then some. It's a masterpiece from top to bottom.

It even made me go 'Damn...Josh Hartnett can actually act.'
post #1362 of 1382

Hartnett always had some solid chops but he was saddled with a host of lousy, underwritten, cliched roles when Hollywood was trying to make him into a big thing circa early 2000s. Although he didn't always help himself, either. 

 

But in any case, all is forgiven and then some because he was excellent on Penny Dreadful.

 

Rory Kinnear rocked my world. I remember discovering who he was somewhere around the middle of Season 2 while perusing his bio online. "He's that expository character Tanner in the Bond films?!" Then I read all about him and his dad and theatre background. 

 

Timothy Dalton is, of course, always grand.

post #1363 of 1382

I felt Season 1 was too short though.

post #1364 of 1382
I'm just sad we didn't get more Hannibal so we could've eventually gotten Timothy Dalton as Uncle Lecter..
post #1365 of 1382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headless Fett View Post
 

Don't hold your breath on that. I think Universal won't attempt anything with their classic monsters for awhile.

I don't think you're wrong, and this is the reason I was pulling for THE MUMMY to be a hit even though I didn't particularly like the movie or the direction the "Dark Universe" appeared to be going in.  I'd rather have Universal continuing to take shots with their monsters instead of keeping them in the vault.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraid uh noman View Post

Me too if I'm being honest but it's got atmosphere and visual flair that deserve a more thought out film. If they could've somehow combined From Hell and Sleepy Hollow.

FROM HELL and SLEEPY HOLLOW would be fine blueprints in terms of atmosphere, but I really do think that, aesthetically, the WOLFMAN remake was a very respectable update of the classic Universal approach for modern audiences.  That movie was a troubled production with multiple release dates, but I really think with a stronger push and an October release, the film could have made money for Universal and we might have gotten another couple attempts in that style.

post #1366 of 1382
Bram Stoker's Dracula and Mary Shelley's Frankenstein don't strike you as better Belloq? Or are they too operatic and not pulpy enough?

Just for the record....flawed as they may be....I prefer them to ANY of that other stuff. There's some real by god filmmaking going on in those two..
post #1367 of 1382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraid uh noman View Post

Bram Stoker's Dracula and Mary Shelley's Frankenstein don't strike you as better Belloq? Or are they too operatic and not pulpy enough?

Just for the record....flawed as they may be....I prefer them to ANY of that other stuff. There's some real by god filmmaking going on in those two..


Better movies, absolutely.  I think BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA is absolutely fabulous, and I'm a defender of MARY SHELLEY'S FRANKENSTEIN.

 

However, they don't feel like Universal Monsters movies (and not just because they're literally not from Universal) in the way that I think THE WOLFMAN very much feels like a contemporary update of that style.  To me, anyway!

post #1368 of 1382

Personally, I think that...going forward...the Universal Monster movies should be in black and white.  Whether they go period or present day, make them black and white.  Maybe add red for any blood, but whatever.  Good, gothic horror excells in black and white and creates a specific mood.

post #1369 of 1382

I don't think we'll ever see that happen, but I'd be all in favor of it.

post #1370 of 1382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judas Booth View Post

Personally, I think that...going forward...the Universal Monster movies should be in black and white.  Whether they go period or present day, make them black and white.  Maybe add red for any blood, but whatever.  Good, gothic horror excells in black and white and creates a specific mood.
That's a GREAT idea! Black and white. And definitely be period pieces. Use just enough modern special FX to give em a visual edge over the films from the 30s.

Damn, that's sexy.

You want more of that opening scene from Van Helsing so bad that you can't stand it!
post #1371 of 1382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraid uh noman View Post

You want more of that opening scene from Van Helsing so bad that you can't stand it!

 

It's the best part of the movie.  The B/W looks gorgeous here, in my opinion.

post #1372 of 1382
I'm undecided if I'd like only the blood to have color or not. I'm leaning towards not because that might give it a Sin City look at a glance and I hate Sin City..
post #1373 of 1382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraid uh noman View Post

Welp....time to start watching Penny Dreadful. Heard too many good things. It seems practically unanimously loved..


It's good. It seems to be taking a whole lot from the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen comics...which if they were smart they would have probably done with this new Universal Monsters Universe they were going for. Not as good as those LoEG comics, doesn't hit as many notes, but it an enjoy two or three seasons; however long it was one.

It does kind of just abruptly end. Know now that the thread with Dorian Gray will go nowhere, so don't count on that buildup leading to anything big like it seems it will.
post #1374 of 1382

I finally caught this.  It's ridiculous in the same way Dracula using bats to punch people was in Dracula Untold, but I did have some fun with it.  Tom Cruise is completely miscast, though, and the American Werewolf in London aping didn't work for me.

post #1375 of 1382

I also watched this last night. It's....weird. And not in a good way.

 

As with a number of effects-heavy would-be tentpoles from the last several years, it became clear that the wrong character was lead. This should have been either Jekyll's story or even better Jenny's. Having Jenny and Ahmunet be the dual leads would've been a refreshing change and it would give us two characters who are competent and knowledgeable to follow. Crowe was a lot of fun, in full Oliver Reed mode here, and I frankly loved the Prodigium stuff. And there were some really neat effects work and sequences at play. Boutella acquits herself nicely, though the character should've been more than just Sexy Woman Mummy. 

 

Cruise and Johnson are the film's huge and ongoing problems. They're not funny. They're neither likable nor compelling. Cruise is playing TOM CRUISE; he's even less of a character than he is in the M:I films, and that's saying something. Nothing about Johnson and Cruise together works. The film stealing the undead friend bit from American Werewolf was....a strange choice, one that also goes wholly unexplained. None of the humor in the film really works for me, other than that one shot when Jenny busts into the chamber when the Mummy and her minions are about to stab Cruise. The simultaneous, silent head turn was pretty great.

 

Ahmunet's powers are never delineated or given limitation; she can do whatever the movie needs her to do, which actually hurts her as a villain. The same goes for Cruise once he stabs himself. Can they just raise anyone from the dead? Are those raised actually alive or undead? And so on.

 

I actually liked the twist on the chosen one idea, and I liked that the film ends with the chosen one an unknown amalgam of Set and human. I just wished they'd cast an actor that would've allowed them to go more overtly monstrous and more in the grey zone between light and dark. 

 

I tend to believe both Cruise's control freak tendencies and Kurtzman's rookie status as a director are what doomed this. 

post #1376 of 1382

What in the hell were you thinking?

post #1377 of 1382

Curiosity got the best of me. Plus it was a library borrow, so zero money from me made its way towards anyone in the film! It was even a library in the next suburb, so not even my taxes went to support it!

post #1378 of 1382

You know what else you could've gotten from the library?

post #1379 of 1382

Nope! They don't have it!

post #1380 of 1382

Somebody fucking talk to me about I Don't Feel at Home in This World Anymore.

post #1381 of 1382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post

Somebody fucking talk to me about I Don't Feel at Home in This World Anymore.
It's a pretty good country-style hymn!

post #1382 of 1382
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post

It's a pretty good country-style hymn!

That one's been a favorite of mine since I was a kid. The congregation that my parents used to drag me to was country as fuck, for a church in Connecticut, but having a military base in town tends to inject a little southern culture into the mix.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › The Mummy (the one with Tom Cruise)