I want to start by saying that, yes, The Mummy is not a very good movie, for various reasons that I will explain in the following paragraphs. Yet, for some reasons, which will also be exposed in the following paragraphs, it managed to be very entertaining… at least to me.
In some ways, but to a lesser degree, I find the extreme backlash from the critics an extreme overstatement maybe even caused by a bit of ignorance. In this case also seems to be caused by certain expectations (given certain reasons) that were probably either born outta nowhere or, not less likely, prepared beforehand.
So, here’s the deal: some people were disappointed in this flick because it wasn’t horror. Yes, you read that correctly. Given the movie was promoted as an action adventure close to the like of Uncharted, the guy (a critic) either went to watch the movie point blank, or he didn’t watch it and reviewed it (a not so uncommon practice, by the way).
Anyways, let’s get by the stupid reasonings, and let’s see why The Mummy is a bad (but not so bad) movie.
It’s a bad movie because it tried to be multiple genres at the same freaking time. While the first 30-45 minutes are pretty clear regarding what genre the movie is (action-adventure), afterward it tries to be much more on top of that: horror, comedy, mystery, political thriller… And sometimes it’s also clear that the script went on the PG-13 border, and probably the movie was edited to stay within those limits.
To me, it seemed like that they didn’t really know/they weren’t sure what genre this franchise was going to be, so they just put a little bit of everything and then asked the audience to choose the best part, from which the future movies will be alike.
Oddly enough, that’s the only drawback of the movie, along with the uninspired script and an unnecessarily over-exposed (in terms of story, not frame) prologue, as Russel Crowe’s Doctor Jekyll tells us the story of Princess Ahmanet… while we are watching it… and then we are retold that story later on in the movie. Yes, kind of stupid.
But if I have to look for other things… I found none.
Not even for our protagonist, Tom Cruise: while the film plot still resembles his classics like once outlined by the late Roger Ebert, the character of Nick Morton is the opposite of Cruise’s usual, as he is arrogant, morally ambiguous and more often than not a complete idiot. And Tom nailed it, as far as I’m concerned. I honestly wanted to see more of him and Jake Johnson together, as they both had great chemistry.
I didn’t have any problems even with Annabelle Wallis, as she has been deemed to be unrealistic as an Archeologist. While I may agree that a beautiful blonde woman with blue eyes (she has blue eyes right?) might not be the best choice for such role, she actually did a decent job to convince me. Sofia Boutella keeps surfing the high tide after Kingsman and Star Trek Beyond, confirming once again her talent (her body language is one of the best in Hollywood right now, can’t wait to see her back in action in Atomic Blonde beside Charlize Theron). Russel Crowe’s double role may not be the best in his career, but it’s undeniable he had fun doing this.
The action sequences and special effects are also top notch. Nothing is out of place, and nothing seems to have been put there just for the sake of it.
Does it suffer from the ‘set up a universe syndrome’? Not really, actually. The movie is quite shorter than the likes of Batman v Superman (The Mummy runs at 107 minutes while generally movies like this go over 140 minutes), yet it creates interests for what’s next.
So, what do I think about the movie?
The Mummy is not a very good movie, for various reasons that explained in the previous paragraphs. Yet, for some reasons, which were also exposed in the previous paragraphs, it managed to be very entertaining… at least to me.