So, last night, due to another offer from Google Play on my TV for an "any movie" hire for .99 cents, we watched the widely panned "The Mummy".
[On a side note: I feel very sorry for anyone who might have invested in DVD hire vending machines, thinking there would be a market for them after the disappearance of video hire shops. I mean, I hired perhaps less than 10 times from a DVD machine myself, and thought it was a pretty good system. Then I bought a Smart TV (Samsung - it's excellent), got the NBN connected (it works well at very acceptable cost), subscribed to Netflix, and now I just don't see much incentive to ever hire a DVD again. If there is nothing we want to watch on Netflix, Google Play hire for even quite recent movies is usually around $6, and I don't have to drive to return the DVD.
Have I mentioned how sorry I feel for newagents, too? And what is it with the occasional surviving one that stocks crappy, kitchy gift items? Have you ever seen anyone in a newsagency buying a porcelain angel, or cat, for someone's gift? I don't believe I have ever seen anyone even looking at the crap gift shelves. It's one of life's mysteries...]
Back to the story: surely The Mummy was worth .99 cent hire? Yes, actually, I think I would go as far as to say it was worth a $4 hire. Maybe not $5, but a solid $4.
It's hardly perfect, but it's not as bad as people say. It looks expensive, has some good action, Tom Cruise running (as Honest Trailers says, it's in his contract for every movie - "must have running sequence") and I even liked some story elements. (The use of mercury to contain a Mummy).
On the downside, it does this strange thing where at the beginning, it feels too simple a story, and then towards the end, too complicated. I don't think anyone quite understood the curse thing, and what exactly was going on with Cruise's flashbacks (I thought reincarnation was being suggested at one point.) Maybe it would make more sense on a second viewing, but the screenplay was definitely flawed. What was Tom meant to have become by the end? Surely there could have been a better hint than the murmuring explanation of a very tubby looking Russell Crowe. No doubt it was going to be explained in a subsequent movie in the Dark Universe, which I see Universal has now abandoned completely!
On another minor note: it was probably a mistake to have Dr Jekell as a key figure in this film, without giving some of his backstory to a young audience. My son didn't even know the character from fiction, which is a bit of a worry, but I would be sure he would not be alone.
Anyway. You could worse than watch this movie. If you like Tom Cruise, generally, I don't think you're going to hate it.
And speaking of Tom, I'm feeling sorry for him having two underperforming movies this year: the one I just discussed, and the much better reviewed (actually, well reviewed) American Made. The latter seemed to have some sort of marketing fail, to me. I'll watch it soon.
But as for proof that Tom is actually a good actor, I reckon that this performance with Conan O'Brien is not only funny, but actually a convincing bit of performance by Tom. Watch it if you haven't before:
No comments:
Post a Comment