The Mummy

A bit of horror, a bit of humor, always adventure. I liked The Mummy very much, and I was quite surprised, because I really like the original 1932 film and this newer version as well. It's a very entertaining spectacle with many imaginative scenes (that doesn't mean, of course, that something similar has never been done before), pleasantly quick but not frantic momentum, a sympathetic cast, and the bombastic music of Brian Tyler. The non-forgettable finale gave me similar joy as the zombie crusaders. And I didn't expect to ever see Tom Cruise in a “girl in trouble" role. (16/06/2017)

It's a real shame about this new Dark Universe attempt. It's always nice when a classic gets a new coat of paint so that even the youngest generation can enjoy a new take on it and discover the original at the same time. But this is where it all ended prematurely. Genre-wise it's an unbalanced mess and the whole thing feels terribly confident, and no alternative admits that The Mummy should be a solitary film. But unfortunately, it is, and in retrospect, the aftertaste of the unfulfilled fragment remains. Moreover, Tom Cruise is no longer the rascal he would probably like to remain until his death. Annabelle Wallis, the queen of historical series (The Tudors, Peaky Blinders, and Pan Am), didn't particularly impress me either. Sofia Boutella and Russell Crowe are slightly better, but it's not enough. I was hoping the classic duo of Kurtzman & Orci were enough for it to be great, but Hercules and Zorro were more successful. (29/11/2019)

The immortal Cruise has found himself another excuse for stuntmen to kid about, this time in Iraq and England. The Mummy lacks a director with balls. Kurtzman does his work, but brings no surprise in the form of visual awesomeness or a clever idea. Luckily the screenplay seems quite original. The bad guy is a girl and Cruise is a jerk who releases her by mistake during his quest for treasure. Very refreshing. As the beginning of a bigger story about monsters, the Mummy works excellently and I’m intrigued to see what follows. Similar to Tom, gentlemen will wonder whether it will be Sofia Boutella or Annabelle Wallis. P.S: This has nothing whatsoever to do with Sommers’ Mummy and frankly this version can’t touch that one, but neither can most movies. (13/06/2017)

The beginning of a new cinematic universe and one of the most entertaining blockbusters of the year. Tom Cruise is once again in Mission Impossible mode and there couldn't be a better choice for the main character. The great Russell Crowe, the beautiful Annabelle Wallis and the sexiest Mummy Sofia Boutella are also a delight. The film hits the gas right from the start and doesn't let up until the very end. The action is perfect, visually varied and imaginative, the film looks decently gritty for a PG 13, there are some scares and a slight horror atmosphere (the scene with the rats or spiders Brrr). The strongest moment for me was probably the plane crash, one of the most intense scenes of the year. After a long time I left the cinema excited, entertained and relaxed, and perhaps no one could expect more from a fun silly blockbuster. 85%. (11/06/2017)

Totally unworthy of Tom Cruise's star power. Well, yeah, there's a shortage of good original writers in A-list Hollywood productions, or there's no interest in them, so they recycle and reboot to the point of madness to create new film universes. Marvel has theirs, DC Comics has theirs, and starting with this film, Universal has theirs, with the starkly original Dark Universe title that seeks to revive the iconic monsters of the 1930s and 40s horror franchises. But the first runner they sent was a lazy bum who would have lost a 100-meter race to a turtle. This is a fairly routine, formulaic, almost B-movie 100 minutes. Well, let's say that the first 40 minutes or so follow in the footsteps of a mediocre adventure flick with a protagonist and a cute female scientist by his side, with some nice location changes and Cruise talking for his life, culminating in an excellent airplane scene in weightlessness. But with the arrival of Dr. Jekyll (and Mr. Hyde – for the less astute), the film becomes regular crap, throwing in one B-movie cliché after another, with the set never leaving the doctor's office and the dull backdrop of the London catacombs, all drowned in darkness to make it easier to render the CGI. At the end, there is no door, but a gate open for the next sequel and I will definitely not be there anymore. I've always considered Cruise to be a 100% pro who chooses his roles carefully, but he stepped in some serious shit here. Yet he is the only good thing about the whole film, he plays with such commitment that it makes me wish I had as much verve as him at 55. But the positives end there and the overseas reviews really didn't lie this time. This is truly one of the worst films Cruise has left his signature on. (10/06/2017)