Fuck you this was adventurous af! Russel Crowe as Dr Jekyll

you're some kind of shitskin, aren't you?

all I know is I want to get raped by her

From the point they first introduced Cruise's character up until the plane crash was pretty bad. The rest was alright but kinda slow and boring compared to the first The Mummy (didn't watch sequals).

>>87634255

To be honest I'm not entirely sure I get why people panned the Mummy unless they honestly thought it was going to be a revamp of the Brenden Fraser romps.

Which...confuses me even further because people usually bitch the loudest when it's a direct remake/reboot of something.

It was a mindless blockbuster with some pretty fun introductions/cameos. What the hell were people expecting?

7/10 for me

Always rate in 10 step scale.
Screenwriting (1-3 points)
1. for fresh idea, not extact story remake
Visuals (1-3 points)
1. Great locations, sets, decorations
2. Great specail effects, practical and CGI
3. Good shots, everything clearly visible. Even dark night shots, visible enough. Chaotic cuts.
Audio(1-2 points)
1. Great sounds mixing
Acting(1-2 points)
1. Great performance from Sofia, Cruise delivers what he is best at. Crowe was self-aware too.

DVD/Blu-Ray is supposed to come with almot 1:30 hour of extras bonus content, so can't wait.

>>87634587
I doubt You even seen the first"The Mummy", as it is from 1932. Hell, I even think You don't know any other 'mummy' movie than Brendan one from 1999.

>>87634877
Okay... I don't mind admitting to that. By the first The Mummy I meant the 1999 one. Whatever.

>>87634943
That's main problem. People were expecting something similar. Another Indiana Jones rip-off.
Actual movie is more related to older mummy films. The quote at beginning is directly from 1932 one.
>Death is but a doorway....
Placing action in Great Britain may be similar to Hammer 1959 "The Mummy" staring Christopher Lee. However, making monster a female may be taken from 1971 "Blood from Mummy's Tomb" where they also replaced bandaged guy with undead princess.
Overall, as big "Mummy" movies enthusiast I enjoyed this one. Bit chaotic and messy with Prodigium scenes, but made up with original story, slightly twisted ending and arousing Ahmanet character.

>>87635323
I only mentioned the 1999 version because OP said the 2017 "was adventurous af" and it really isn't compared to 1999.

mummy panty?

The problem is ultimately the "dark universe" stuff. Too much time is devoted to that. It's hard to set up an expanded verse intentionally from the start.

I feel like almost nothing happened in the movie, they spent waaay too much time on hallucinations and establishing the Daaaark UUUUuuunveeerseeee, the use of colors was beyond bland and the coolest shot was at the very end where there is a sandstorm following him though for some reason some shots looked really dynamic like when the car fell or during the underwater chase.
The chemistry between leads never felt real though and cruise character's "upbeat" personality, not a care in the world felt beyond forced and comparing him to fraser makes the whole thing beyond laughable.

>>87634255
Russel Crowe was the only good thing about this shitpile.

>>87635522
Of course it isn't. They went back to roots, or at least tried to. Untill Ahmanet has been cought in forest and imprisoned in that lab is had lot of gothic romantic horror charm placed to XXI century layout. Loved these details such as ISIS destroying ruins of ancient cultures or drone bombing them as they were pretty related to current years. Wish there were more movies at least briefly exposing this problem. If nothing will be done, our successors won't be able to admire remains of past.