Related Posts:

11 Comments


Vic said,
December 11th, 2007 

LOL, that title is right up there with the Indy 4 title regarding the “hard to remember” factor. :-)
Vic

Niall said,
December 11th, 2007 
With that title it sounds like it should be going straight to DVD.

Niall

Shane said,
December 11th, 2007 

This actually has a decent cast though, arguably better (in the genre department) than the previous movies. Brendan Fraser, Maria Bello (so good in Payback), Jet Li, Michelle Yeoh, and a screenplay by those Smallville guys Millar and Gough. This might be fun, if not taken too seriously.

December 11th, 2007 

Shane,

Good points. Who knows? It could end up being far better than the previous ones… although the odds are against it.

Vic

Niall said,
December 12th, 2007 
Ron Cohen films have a bit more of an “edge” than Stephen Sommers films, so there is a chance that this could be more mature. I use the term mature loosely. Very loosely.
Endri said,
December 12th, 2007 

So the scorpion king is a prequal right.

December 12th, 2007 

It wasn’t just the Scorpion King SFX that were poorly done, but nearly all the CGI effects, especially toward the end when the pyramid implodes, sucking in all the vegetation in the oasis. Granted , SFX have only in more recent years generated believable daylight effects in CGI, but the ones we got in “The Mummy Returns” looked woefully incomplete, more like a digital rough sketch for an idea than finished work.

I agree that only the first part of the movie holds up against the excitement of the first film.

As for the word on the new one, I’m not excited. Changing actors for the same role often only translate into a jarring experience.

And Oded Fehr’s “Ardeth Bey” character was 1/2 of the likability generated in the first two (the other half being Frasier’s “O’Connell”. Omitting his character cuts out a lot of the “fun” factor and camaraderie the first two had going for them.

Shane said,
December 13th, 2007 

Sometimes changing actors works though. Harrison Ford was easily as good if not better than Alec Baldwin in the Jack Ryan movies (never saw the Ben Affleck one). Michael Keaton and Val Kilmer both played Batman and I think I liked Kilmer better in the role, with Christian Bale being better than all of the previous Batmen. So it depends, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t.

December 13th, 2007 

Got to disagree with you on your examples, Shane. I like Ford as an actor, but felt his persona didn’t fit with Jack Ryan, in my opinion. The age difference between one episode and the next proved too jarring for me. Baldwin, despite not being among my favorite actors to watch, still set my expectations for the character.

I hesitate to say Bale’s Batman is the same character, since they effectively re-booted the franchise and the universe with that film. It can work if you’re starting from scratch, but if you’re dealing within the context of the same continuity as previous films, it tends to be jarring. Just my 2 cents worth.

December 13th, 2007 

Gotta agree with Jersey on Jack Ryan. Having read all the Tom Clancy novels where Ryan is the hero I’d say that Baldwin was an excellent fit for the role. Harrison Ford was just his usual self and didn’t work nearly as well for me.

I was bummed when Baldwin didn’t return.

Vic

Seffy the Weffy said,
July 16th, 2008 

My father and second eldest brother think Mummy will do better in the box office than TDK. I think they are idoits. Any comments.

Considering I win, I get Fifty easy ones.

What's your opinion? Leave a comment!

 Name (*required)

 Email Address (*private)

 Website (optional)

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.