The Mummy (film) - Tom Cruise

[Neil]

[EvilNed]

Here's the trailer What's the point of remaking the Mummy if you're just gonna make it into another Mission Impossible film? Hands up anyone who'se intrigued by this trailer. Anything here you haven't seen before?

[Neil]

You know... I thought it felt like "Missions Impossible"... Anway, Cruise generally makes quite watchable films, so might be nice to see him in a supernatural apocalypse time affair...

[shootemindehead]

That looks awful. I wish Russell Crowe would stop trying to do posh accents. I'm going to watch the Hammer film now, just out of spite.

[bassman]

Definitely feels like Mummy: Impossible.... In case any of you haven't heard, this film is Universal's start to an attempted shared-universe. Like Marvel, only with their classic monsters. Sigh. Anyway, Crowe is likely another classic character. They got these big name actors involved, because of their pay or the quality of the material? I'm leaning toward pay. Hopefully I'm wrong.

[Moon Knight]

Definitely feels like Mummy: Impossible.... In case any of you haven't heard, this film is Universal's start to an attempted shared-universe. Like Marvel, only with their classic monsters. Sigh. Anyway, Crowe is likely another classic character. They got these big name actors involved, because of their pay or the quality of the material? I'm leaning toward pay. Hopefully I'm wrong. Shared universe? Good luck.

[bassman]

After Universal’s “Dark Universe” ended before it really began, they’ve now gotten Blumhouse involved for another attempt with The Invisible Man, with Leigh Whannell signed on to direct. Originally, Universal had prematurely hired a handful of A-list stars to headline their proposed shared universe, including Johnny Depp as The Invisible Man, but now they’ll be going in a different direction with another actor in the title role. https://www.joblo.com/movie-news/upg...-for-universal Even though their previous attempt crashed and burned(I actually thought The Mummy was acceptable as a generic action film), I do think these characters are ripe with possibilities in a film universe. It will be very tricky to do it right, but I do think the possibility exists. I’m also a big fan of the original monster films, so that may make me a bit biased toward the proposed series...

[JDP]

All these flashy "special effects", Hollywood "mega-stars" and all the other blah, blah, blah, but they still can't beat the old Boris Karloff or Peter Cushing & Christopher Lee classic versions, LOL! There's no substitute for real top-notch, classy iconic horror actors. I miss those guys!

[bassman]

They are indeed icons of the genre, but Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee were part of the Hammer films that came later in the 50’s-70’s, rather than the original Universal Monster films of the 20’s-40’s. Bela Lugosi, Lon Chaney, and as you mentioned, Boris Karloff, are the memorable icons of Universal’s films.

[EvilNed]

I thought this was a bad idea from the start. Especially the roundup of A-list actors that they did. They tried to emulate Marvel, but Marvel didn't really set sail with a ship of A-list actors. They had RDJ, Chris Evans, Chris Hemsworth and Edward Norton (arguably the only a-lister in the crowd). It's tempting to think of RDJ as an a-lister, but at the time he really wasn't. It was his comeback.

[bassman]

^ Yeah, currently Downey is one of the biggest actors in the world, but before Iron Man he was still struggling to get over his drug use and rocky behavior from the nineties. He was still making films, one of which is Shane Black’s criminally underrated Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, but it wasn’t until Iron Man that he began gaining the recognition he has now. Indeed, Universal really screwed up and put the cart before the horse with their A-list Dark Universe attempt. I’d be curious to hear how much they lost on pay-or-play deals for Depp, Bardem, Crowe, and Jolie!

[MinionZombie]

They made the big mistake of trying to force it. Audiences hate being force fed something. You've gotta earn the right to make more movies. Seeing an ending that's wide open for a sequel without the film having earned that right is cringey as all get out. Marvel had hopes of doing bigger and better things, but the MCU didn't really get into full swing for a couple of years and Iron Man was a risky proposition ("Iron who?"). As for TC's The Mummy? Utterly forgettable aside from that plane crash. It felt more like "Tom Cruise runs a lot and has some funny banter" than a Mummy movie. Don't get me wrong, I love a bit of TC running his arse off and having a bit of funny banter (the Mission: Impossible movies are feckin' awesome), but it just wasn't the right fit for The Mummy. Going smaller is definitely the way to go, and bringing on Blumhouse is a sensible move. They've pulled off a lot of surprises. Fingers crossed this time around.

[bassman]

Exactly....go smaller, ditch the constant action, and lean more into the psychological horror roots of the characters. In some ways, the 1999 Mummy remake may have had as much of a hand in it as Tom Cruise. That film also took a more action-oriented approach. It was an okay adventure film for it’s time, and did much better financially, but was still quite far from what Universal’s original Mummy was. With horror films doing well at the cinemas these days, I see no reason they couldn’t hunker down and make some real horror films rather than the action with a sprinkle of horror that we’ve seen recently.