The Mummy (2017) review

From 1923 to 1960, Universal Studios was best known for their wide variety of monster films, featuring iconic characters like Dracula, Frankenstein’s monster, and the Wolf Man, just to name a few. Many of them were huge critical and commercial hits in their time and, thus, still stand as some of the greatest films in the horror genre. Since then, these classic monsters have gone through various re-imaginings over the years, though usually not through Universal. Their only credited ‘remakes’ to date are the Mummy trilogy starring Brendan Fraser, a 1979 adaptation of Dracula, 2004’s Van Helsing, 2010’s The Wolfman, and 2014’s Dracula Untold. That last film was intended to be the first in a new line of Universal Monster films set within a shared universe a la the Marvel Cinematic Universe. However, in the years since its release, it’s been retroactively dismissed from the studio’s overall plans. Thus, here we are now with the ‘real’ first official entry in this new line of Universal Monster films; The Mummy. Alex Kurtzman, co-writer of the first two Star Trek reboot films and other various franchise efforts, directs the first installment of a series that’s being dubbed as the Dark Universe. Several ‘re-imaginings’ are in the works at this moment, but for now, it all starts with Universal’s second major reboot of their 1932 horror classic, The Mummy. However, despite the best efforts of Kurtzman and his stacked ensemble cast, led by Tom Cruise, Russell Crowe, and Sofia Boutella in the title role, this new take on The Mummy suffers from a bland script that ultimately makes it a rather dull affair.

In modern-day Iraq, a team of military operatives, led by Sgt. Nick Morton (Tom Cruise), come across an ancient Egyptian tomb despite being thousands of miles from Egypt. Morton and his team, including Sgt. Chris Vail (Jake Johnson) and archaeologist Jenny Halsey (Annabelle Wallis), soon learn that this tomb is the resting place for a former princess named Ahmanet (Sofia Boutella). Back in her day, she was slated to be next in line for the throne of Egypt as the only offspring of the current king. However, those plans change when her father’s new wife ends up having a son. Making a deal with the deity Set, she kills her father, his wife, and their newborn son, but is mummified alive before managing to give Set a human body to inhabit as per their agreement. Back in the present, the efforts of Nick’s team to excavate Ahmanet’s coffin from the tomb cause a chain reaction of events that results in the destruction of their plane when they leave the area, with Nick having seemingly gone down with it. However, he somehow miraculously survives this, something that confounds him just as much as it does his peers. To make matters worse, Ahmanet ends up escaping from her coffin and continues her efforts to become ruler of the world. And as Nick finds out, these plans of hers end up involving him as well when Ahmanet prepares to have him be her new human sacrifice for Set. While this is going on, Nick also comes across a mysterious organization known as ‘Prodigium’, led by scientist Dr. Henry Jekyll (Russell Crowe), that investigates into matters like this. 

It seems like this new Mummy is trying to be a mix of both the 1932 original and the 1999 remake. In other words, whereas the 1999 remake was primarily an action-adventure flick, this new film tries to combine elements from both that and the original, which was strictly a horror film. It’s a shame, really, that it ultimately doesn’t deliver as either a horror film or an action-adventure film. I mean, it may just be because I’m not a big horror fan compared to others, but I didn’t find this film to be that ‘scary’. Instead, it ultimately feels more like the action-oriented romps that the Brendan Fraser Mummy films were... and yet even that aspect of the film is mediocrely done. To the film’s credit, the action sequences are, at the very least, well-directed, and everything’s fine from a technical perspective. However, it feels like these action sequences are few and far between in this because every other scene is exposition-based, making the entire film feel slow and uneventful. I’m usually not one to criticize trailers for revealing too much, but this is a legitimate instance where the trailers basically showed off every major sequence in this film. But then what about the film’s efforts to establish a full-on cinematic universe based around the Universal Monsters? Well, even that aspect feels underdeveloped as there are no real allusions to other monsters in this aside from the appearance of Dr. Jekyll and his evil counterpart, Mr. Hyde. I mean, I’m not saying that these films should be exactly like Marvel, where they can have other characters appear in films where they’re not the focus. This is, after all, just the first installment of a new series. But, still, it would’ve at least helped in this instance because it could’ve made this film more interesting. As is, it feels more like it’s setting up future Dark Universe films instead of trying to be a Mummy film.  

The dull and underdeveloped nature of the script also ends up affecting the film’s main characters, who are all generally bland. Tom Cruise is fine as he always is, and Annabelle Wallis is solid as well as the film’s main female lead, but neither get anything major to work with. This is the case despite everything that happens to the former in this film, while the latter is simply relegated to being a ‘damsel in distress’ most of the time. Technically speaking, Jake Johnson gets more to work with in this than either of them combined, and yet his whole role in the film is to just pop in and out from time to time with what I can basically describe as ‘humorous’ commentary (I use the term ‘humorous’ loosely because this film’s efforts at humor are lackluster at best) that only Cruise’s character can witness because, minor spoiler, Johnson’s character gets infected by Ahmanet and becomes one of her minions. Speaking of Ahmanet, Sofia Boutella is also fine enough in her respective role and it is a nice twist to have the main Mummy villain be a female this time around. However, like her co-stars, she is severely hindered by the mediocre material that she’s working with. In fact, she doesn’t really do that much in this which, sadly, means that her character comes off as being not much of a threat in the grand scheme of things. Thus, the most interesting character in the film ends up being Russell Crowe as Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde. Again, this is another prime example of a character who’s clearly being set up to have a larger role in future films. Still, for the brief screen-time that he has in this film, Crowe ends up having the best screen presence out of the entire cast, especially when he’s in his ‘Mr. Hyde’ phase.   

Going in, you wouldn’t expect a Mummy film starring Tom Cruise to be dull… and yet, this film somehow ended up doing exactly that. Now, I don’t blame this on director Alex Kurtzman; he, at least, does a solid enough job when it comes to directing, especially in terms of the film’s action sequences. Ultimately, the film’s biggest issues lie in its script. Not only does this film suffer from a mediocre plot, but it feels like it’s just meant to be set-up for future entries in this new Dark Universe instead of being a Mummy film. And because of this, it fails to make much of an impression, effectively stranding its talented ensemble cast in a slow and ho-hum attempt at mixing elements of action and horror. However, I’m still generally optimistic about this Dark Universe. For one thing, out of all the proposed cinematic universes that have been tossed around in the news from Transformers to Ghostbusters, this plan of doing a universe around Universal’s monsters arguably has the most potential because it has happened before back when this series was in its prime (e.g. Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man). Besides, we just came off an instance where the fate of a planned Cinematic Universe was saved with a critically-acclaimed outing via Wonder Woman and the DC Extended Universe. In other words, one disastrous effort, even if it’s the first installment of a new series as this film is, doesn’t automatically mean that the entire franchise is dead on arrival (no pun intended). Thus, I’m looking forward to the next installment of this Dark Universe franchise; a new take on Bride of Frankenstein directed by Bill Condon. I strongly feel that this one could work because Condon is no stranger to the material, having directed a 1998 film titled Gods and Monsters which focused on that film’s production. As for The Mummy, though, it’s not ‘god-awful’ or anything; it’s just that it could’ve been a lot better given the talent involved.

Rating: 2/5

Noah (2014) review

One of the most controversial films of this past decade, if not of all time, was 2004’s ‘Passion of the Christ’, directed by Mel Gibson. The tale of the final 12 hours of Jesus Christ’s life sparked much debate due to its extremely violent content; regardless, it was actually a big hit commercially as it grossed over 600 million worldwide. This year we have ourselves another religious-based film that has also caused some controversy; ‘Noah’, an adaptation of the ‘Noah’s Ark’ narrative from the Old Testament. This film has already been banned in a few countries such as Pakistan and Indonesia. However, in the case of ‘Noah’, the controversy is not on the violence, but on the ‘creative liberties’ that were taken by director Darren Aronofsky in regards to his vision of the story; bottom line, it is a very bold take on the story of Noah’s Ark but controversy aside, this is still a pretty damn good film that is not only visually stunning but one that also gives us a fascinating different take on the story. It may not be completely accurate when compared to the original story but it is much more character driven than what some people might expect.

The titular Noah (Russell Crowe), the descendent of Seth, one of Adam and Eve’s offspring, receives a prophetic vision that God (referred to in this film as ‘the Creator’) plans to destroy the world by way of a massive flood in order to rid the world of the many misdeeds that mankind has committed over the years since Earth was first created. Noah realizes that the Creator had chosen him specifically to be the one who would save those who were innocent and so, with the help of his family; his wife Naameh (Jennifer Connelly), their three sons Shem (Douglas Booth), Ham (Logan Lerman), and Japheth (Leo McHugh Carroll), and their adopted daughter Ila (Emma Watson), Noah begins to build an ark in order for them to survive the storm. However, he soon finds himself dealing with his nemesis, Tubal-Cain (Ray Winstone), the same man who killed Noah’s father years ago who poses a threat to the safety of both him and his family both before and after the flood begins.

Like I said, there definitely are some creative liberties taken in telling this story. Probably the most notable aspect of these liberties is the portrayal of this group of characters known as ‘Watchers’ who help Noah and his family (these characters have been absent from the marketing). But perhaps the most interesting aspect of this adaptation of the story is how it is much more character driven than what one might expect. I mean, religious or not, we all know the story of Noah; he builds an ark, two of each kind of animal get on it, then Noah, his family, and the animals spend 40 days and 40 nights on the boat before the waters recede. But there’s much more to the story in this version, like how much burden is placed on Noah to perform this deed that the Creator has given to him or how sometimes he doubts whether or not he and his family are worth keeping alive. The latter dilemma especially becomes relevant during the final half hour of the film. I won’t spoil what the scenario is, but it does involve another ‘task’ that the Creator wants Noah to do and a pretty damn dark one at that. That’s another thing about this movie; it may be PG-13 but it can get pretty brutal at times. Regardless, it’s a fascinating character study showing how no one’s perfect and that there is darkness in all of us.

Religious aspects aside, this movie is very visually stunning and that’s mainly for two reasons; both the visual effects done by Industrial Light and Magic and the cinematography by Matthew Libatique. This film also benefits from a strong cast from top to bottom. Russell Crowe gives one of the best performances of his career as Noah, really capturing the personal struggles and sometimes anguish that the character goes through. Just like how the movie itself can get dark, this is not the Noah that some might expect but even with that in mind, Crowe is fantastic here. Equally terrific here is Emma Watson who, like Crowe, also gives one of the best performances of her career here, as she provides quite a bit of the emotion that arises during the final half of the film. Everyone is very good as well; Jennifer Connelly, despite sort of being stuck in a role that just has her stand around, works well alongside Crowe and Ray Winstone is quite intimidating at Tubal-Cain, a role that is actually a bit more substantial than what one might expect from watching the trailer.   

‘Noah’ is no doubt going to be one of the most controversial films of the year, but I get the feeling it won’t just be for the religious aspects of the film. For many, this will not be the Noah that they are familiar with. In fact, the trailers aren’t really conveying the real nature of the film at all. At times, this film can be very dark mainly in regards to some of the moral dilemmas that Noah faces during the course of this film, particularly the one he struggles to deal with right at the end of the film. But at the same time, these darker moments in the story make it a fascinating character study of how one man dealt with the monumental task of protecting the innocent while also questioning whether or not he is among those worthy to live. This is sort of a hard film to recommend because if you are a very religious person, you may find yourself not liking the way this story is told here. However, from a film perspective, ‘Noah’ is visually beautiful, well-acted, and well-directed. Again though, it won't be for everyone.

Rating: 4/5