REVIEW: The Mummy
Here’s thefanboyseo.com’s review for The Mummy starring Tom Cruise, Annabelle Wallis, Russell Crowe and Jake Johnson. Written and directed by Alex Kurtzman.
Goodbye Brendan Frasier, hello Tom Cruise.
Universal is jumping in on the “shared universe” and their doing it by rebooting “The Mummy” franchise yet again and they employed a real-life “mummy” Tom Cruise to do it (seriously the dude ages slowly). The trailer tells us that its going to be darker and serious and we’ll be getting a serious shift the way we see “The Mummy”. And it kinda did but it also kind of didn’t.
The story’s mired with plot holes and a rather weak story that will require you to suspend belief first and foremost. The visuals can be tiring at times but still hits the spot in some cases. There are also some points in the movie that can either be tiring to watch or too repetitive.
Tom Cruise is an established action hero for the last decade or so already. In “The Mummy” though we barely get to see that. Or maybe we do see those action hero moments but it’s in such small doses that we barely noticed it. I can count the number of times the action scenes for “The Mummy” stood out thanks to Cruise’s acting. (I do have a bias and that would be Edge of Tomorrow).
Annabelle Wallis didn’t work for me in this film. She neither had the screen chemistry with Tom Cruise, was hard to watch as a leading lady and her lines weren’t that striking. I tried to like to her from start to finish but by the time we reach the second act of the film, I had forgotten to cheer for her. Felt that her character was more of a hindrance rather than a support.
Russell Crowe’s Dr. Henry Jekyll was something worth noting. Though his characterization is on the weak side, its a very interesting to see both versions of his character. Jake Johnson was such a great addition to Jurassic World and he injected that movie with his brand of humor. For this film, he tanked. Remember how annoying TJ Miller was in “Transformers: Age of Extinction”? Johnson irritated me more than that.
The film is straight-forward, predictable but you’ll get your kicks here and there. Sofia Boutella as The Mummy was a treat too. Got some bias for the actress ever since I saw her in Kingsman: The Secret Service. Although sorry to say this, she’s a victim of bad writing. We don’t get enough reason to hate her character because come on, her dad was a dick and you can relate as well to being promised something then not getting it because of somebody new arriving in the scene. Sure we don’t tolerate patricide and infanticide but we could all agree that she’s been dealt a bad hand.
The musical scoring and visuals had its ups and downs too. I didn’t like the effects for the crows. There’s also my bit of gripe over the confusing status for the creatures that get reanimated. Are they zombies or mummies too? Because they definitely look like zombies and even act like one. But then again they act like mummies whenever Ahmanet orders them too.
‘The Mummy” however did give me something I haven’t experienced this year: A good scare. Without spoiling it involves trains and zombies. You’ll know what I’m talking about when you watch the movie.
So the biggest question remains, is The Mummy worth my time and money? The answer is it depends on you. While I was amused at most points in the movie (including points I shall tag as spoilers) it’s not as fun as the last batch of Mummy movies which starred Brendan Frasier. There’s something lacking, a missing oomph that can’t be hidden behind fancy graphics or an edgier storyline. There’s a possibility of a sequel here with the way they ended the first movie and I hope they do better next time around. For now I’m giving this…