You lied, Sup Forums, The Mummy (2017) was kino. A solid 8.5/10.
The effects were top notch, the actors brought their A game (especially Cruise), and the story was by no means groundbreaking but it hit all the right beats and kept you hooked from beginning to end.
So what was Sup Forums's beef? Are you letting Tom's religious beliefs effect your enjoyment of his films? You are supposed to be better than that.
I'm sorry, that's the wrong Mummy. You want the one made two decades earlier.
Look, I like Cruz a lot, but the movie was trash. Couldn't decide of it wanted to be more horror or camp and ended up trying both. It felt like it had 2 directors.
Don't really remember that one t b h, which tells me all I need to know about it. Mummy 2017 on the other hand, this will have a lasting legacy and while it's by no means perfect, I know that in 20 years I will look back on it fondly and will have watched it from time to time, at least once a year.
Face it Sup Forums, you got this one wrong. Happens to the best of us.
The first two mummy movies were charming and hokey and funny. The third even had some redeeming qualities. The third film is more ridiculous than most movies, and it's quite hilarious. It's an absolute shit film though. The new one is atrocious. The writing is so bad, and there's no humor or charm whatsoever.
Yeah I was surprised too. It was your usual Tom Cruise affair. I thought it was a disaster or something with the way people here we're talking about it. But then again this place spends most of the year worshipping the latest Marvel trash.
It was a good movie. the only people that don't like are just edgy contrarian faggots with toy collections
Is that Stargate?
>8.5
Gee i wonder what is 10/10 for you. Logan or Baby driver?
This movie has nothing to do with the Fraser Mummy.
I respect your opinions, but I think you are looking at this the wrong way. So looking for the movie you wish it would be, and appreciate it for what it is.
Cruise has stated himself that this would not be one of his typical action flicks. So you can leave that notion right at the door where it belongs. This movie is something different, something fresh, and it's to be expected that not everyone will get it at first.
So I will break it down for you:
#1. (The plot) Looking for your typical paint by numbers action/ adventure story line? Wrong movie. This movie attempts to turn your expectations upside down and in this it succeeds in more ways than one.
#2. (Comedy) Did I just say comedy? Yes. I did. This is NOT a horror film. This is NOT The Ring or The Grudge. I'm talking less Paranormal Activity and more There's Something About Mary. But with a twist.
#3. (Tom Cruise) Yes I'm aware of the connotations associated with the name. Yes I'm aware of the horrors of Scientology. I've read Going Clear. But this is a Tom Cruise movie through and through, don't let the hype fool you, Tom shows up on set each and every day too do what he does best, and it shows. In a big way.
I can go on, and sometime I will. But of I proved to you in just a few paragraphs that everything you knew about this movie was wrong, then you owe it to yourself to at least check it out. Then you will see that everything I said was the truth.
I kinda agree with you user. For me, it was solid “B” flick. Just anything that Mr Hollywood is in for, get super high expectations for everywhere. Y’know I guess they just can’t make up their mind from the start because of having high profile actors. Surprisingly there hasn’t been much successful example like Robert Rodriguez’s efforts.
stop making this thread
I would rather do a headstand in a bucket
of shit. Also this is my first thread ever on Sup Forums
Logan I'd give a. 9. A hair above The Mummy. Haven't seen BD.
How many xenu coupons are the church paying you for this thread?
i was really enjoying it up until the bit where russell crowe showed up. it was a really shitty way to shoehorn in this cinematic universe and wrecked the flow of the movie.
I do appreciate where you're coming from, but I think that Crowe is getting a lot of hate for no reason other than the fact that his character was Jekyll/Hyde.
I can count the number of minutes the movie spent on universe building on one hand. Why does Sup Forums hate Jekyll/Hyde so much? Hmm... should be obvious if we take a minute to think about it.
And how come nobody ever mentions the Jake Johnson building? Building him from a gruff, no nonsense sidekick type character into the ultimate Jake Johnson spirit that ultimately embodies what we like to imagine the ghost of Tom Cruise would be. And nothing was funnier/ more exciting than that.
Need proof? Two words: Tom Cruise.
Because if the whole subplot of Crowe and his organization was cut it could've been a comfy Mummy movie with just Cruise they should've had faith in him
Why is Logan highly rated? It was contrived as fuck.
The movie was one giant bumbling mess that had none of the heart of the previous films and existed solely as an overpriced commercial for future movies.
Which is why he said New Mummy...
/thread