Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
1999’s The Mummy is a perfect adventure movie. The cast is excellent, the story is great, the special effects hold up and the epic music makes you want to book a ticket to Egypt to raid some tombs.
I love that movie, perhaps even more than Raiders of the Lost Ark.
Yes, I said it.
It’s had an undeniable influence on my personal work and is directly responsible for my interest in pulp adventure, despite its sequels and spin-offs doing their best to make me hate it.
If you have not seen it, go and watch it immediately.

Now, the reason I hate remakes is because 99% of the time they’re lazy, uninspired trash, slapped onto which is a name that people are familiar with. It’s a cheap sales tactic to peddle mediocre pap and because people fall for it every time, it’s not going to go away any time soon.
1999’s Mummy flick was a remake of a 1932 endeavour and, quite clearly, fell into that glorious 1% slot where the people behind it actually gave a sh*t and put some effort in.

Next year’s Tom Cruise vehicle appears to be aiming for the 99% broadside.

When I heard that the movie was in the works, given my undying love for the ’99 incarnation, I naturally bristled. It felt like the moment I heard Tom Cruise was going to be in a War of the Worlds remake. Before details of that started to leak out, I was quite eager to see anyone, even Cruise, running around Victorian London, dodging Martian war machines.
We all know how well THAT went.
Lesson learned; Tom Cruise being attached to The Mummy was an immediate signal it was going to be set in the present day, and what ho, it is.
The trailer presents a movie devoid of fun, charm or any hint of creativity. It looks a lot like the original Tomb Raider movie, only with one tit on screen rather than a pair.

Rumours are that Universal is trying (again) to create a Marvel-style interlinked series of movies based around their monsters, with “Mummy Impossible” here aiming to be its Iron Man.

Didn’t work with Van Helsing. Isn’t going to work now.


Tom Cruise in..... I don't actually know if this is from The Mummy, Mission Impossible or Jack Reach-around...... or care.
Add a Comment:
 
:icontrigun240:
Trigun240 Featured By Owner May 19, 2017
hee hee reach-around XD 
Reply
:iconmattdark:
MattDark Featured By Owner Feb 7, 2017
Didn't they try to start this off with Dracula Untold?  I'd heard rumours a year or so ago about them wanting to create a monster universe to have a big combination, but it didnt do well enough at the time.
(Shame, because it was fairly decent when you looked at it as a b-movie, rather than a blockbuster)
Reply
:iconarchangel9363:
archangel9363 Featured By Owner Dec 14, 2016
Unless Tom Cruise dies in this repeatedly, I'm not gonna watch it...
Reply
:icontkfox007:
tkfox007 Featured By Owner Dec 12, 2016  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I don't see this new Mummy as a a remake though, more of a reboot which is different. A remake tries to imitate the original, like Peter Jackson's King Kong is a remake of the 1933 film, it's trying to be a similar film.

A reboot however is taking the concept but doing you're own thing of it, the 1999 The Mummy is a reboot of the 1932 version. It takes the concept of a Mummy being resurrected and puts a more action adventure spin on it, the original 1932 is a love story and for the most part, incredibly boring. 

Reboots work with similar themes but have different stories, like the 2014 Robocop versus it's 1987 counterpart. They're taking the theme of a cyborg police officer but have completely different stories, just like next years The Mummy, it's a reboot, the characters and story is completely different. I'll give a reboot leeway because I know that they're not going to try and redo an original shot for shot as a remake would but are trying to take a different spin on an older property. I loved the 1999 Mummy movie, I thought it was one of the best action adventure movies of it's time, but I am interested in seeing the story this one has to offer.

I will say that I don't think that Tom Cruise was a good choice since he's the same character in all his movies. That caption puts it perfectly, you really don't know what action movie he's in because he doesn't act anymore, he's on cruise control.
Reply
:iconwdcain:
WDCain Featured By Owner Dec 11, 2016
I love Van Helsing.  It's the best Castlevania movie we're ever going to get.  While I expect the Mummy remake to suck, I do hope it's good.  I love the old monster movies and wouldn't mind seeing modern reinterpitations of them like the Brandon Frasier Mummy movie.

I've got a fun pitch for a Creature from the Black Lagoon with the Gill-Man being reawaken due to massive offshore dumping and he becomes the ultimate eco-terrorist.  It'd be corny and shlocky but I think it could work.  There have been Aquaman comics that show what an utter bad-ass he is so why not make the Gill-Man into one?
Reply
:icondefcon613:
DEFCON613 Featured By Owner Dec 11, 2016
I just watched the trailer and....nothing, just numb, I was a little shocked at first for like three seconds, then nothing. This movie looks so uninspired, so by the numbers. I have The Mummy on blu ray and watch it every once and a while and although a little cheesy, still holds up, its so adventurous and fun (real fun, not that bs shlock that Summers would go on to do in G.I. Joe ) like the Mask of Zorro the year before it's a example of 90's summer movie magic. This movie will go by like a fart in a hurricane. 
Reply
:icondegalon:
Degalon Featured By Owner Dec 11, 2016
"Hey BENNYYY, you're on the WRONG side of the RIVEEEERRRRR!"


It took me years to even remember where I knew that line from.

I miss Brendan Fraser.
Reply
:iconbruiser128:
bruiser128 Featured By Owner Dec 10, 2016  Student Traditional Artist
It seems like a trend since the 2000s for all entertainment to be joyless and full of misery.
Reply
:iconjiminysticket:
JiminySticket Featured By Owner Dec 10, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
At least, as a concept, an interlinked series of movies based around classic movie monsters would quite interesting, especially if it ends "Cabin of the Woods" or "SCP"-style. Maybe if they make it sorta like those Ghost Hunter shows, one or four guys obsessed with finding monsters, IDK.
Reply
:iconlarkspurdiblock:
Larkspurdiblock Featured By Owner Dec 9, 2016
Eh, look on the bright side - the new Kong movie looks fuckin' great.
Reply
:iconquentinlars:
quentinlars Featured By Owner Dec 8, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
well.. Tom Cruise is one of the bigger cash cows out there now and they're desperate to get him into anything before he gets too old to do his own stunts.... bear with it....
Reply
:iconjiminysticket:
JiminySticket Featured By Owner Dec 10, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
Just Cruise, look at Dwayne Johnson!
Reply
:iconsephirothwolf:
Sephirothwolf Featured By Owner Dec 8, 2016  Professional Artist
"Only one tit on screen instead of two..."

JollyJack? Can I... hug you for saying that?
Reply
:iconwoodgiro:
woodgiro Featured By Owner Dec 8, 2016
Ive got to admit that there ain't a lot of inspired films going round. Far to many sequels and reboots. I dunno it feels like there is a distinct lack of imagination at the moment. I understand that its far easier and there almost guaranteed to make there money but heck i wanna see more films where say "we're willing to take a risk on this new idea". but i fear that it may be wishful thinking on my part.
Reply
:iconimagineemmajun:
ImagineEmmaJun Featured By Owner Dec 8, 2016  Student Writer
It could work if it was a steampunk comedy horror fest
Reply
:iconrizzyda:
RizzyDA Featured By Owner Dec 8, 2016  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I just don't understand with all these studios wanting to have their own respective "Cinematic Universes", stick to what works and improve from them... 

Don't get me started on Warner Bros. business model of releasing unfinished movies then months later only to release the Extended Cuts which essentially movie equivalent to DLCs
Reply
:iconstreaked-silver:
Streaked-Silver Featured By Owner Dec 8, 2016  Hobbyist Digital Artist
You're looking at Van Helsing wrong.

Just picture it as "CastleVania the movie" and its all good.
Reply
:iconcathto:
Cathto Featured By Owner Dec 8, 2016  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I love that movie too. It was funny that Van Helsing was the same director.
Reply
:iconcindicaremint:
CindicareMint Featured By Owner Dec 8, 2016  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Now I just want to watch the 1999 Mummy again.
Reply
:iconbrother-orin:
Brother-Orin Featured By Owner Dec 8, 2016  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Only thing memorable about that trailer was that scream, it needs to be a meme.
Reply
:iconvirtual-sg:
Virtual-SG Featured By Owner Edited Dec 8, 2016
... So we're printing the teaser one-sheets for The Mummy - a poster graphic with no billing.

The poster is in the light-box, ready for trimming and the account management/sales team guys are a little concerned.

When in the light-box, the shafts of light in the image do not look cool (as in white and blue), they look warm (a misty yellow).

Bottom line - It looks fantastic in the light-box - but these guys don't care if it looks right artistically
 - they're concerned about the client's reaction to this glaring difference from what everybody signed-off.

Of course, these client-cats don't have any cash tied up in the poster's artistic merit.

It's just possible they'll be concerned for their own butts after all.

The poster looks 100 times better in the light-box - with "rays of the morning sun" instead of "glaring spot-lights".

It feels like it's the beginning of something (you know, sunrise), which suits the tagline "Welcome to a new world..."

The proof  feels stoic and cold, like being locked in a freezer. - "Welcome to a new world..." - I don't get it.

I don't know if I'd enjoy The Mummy 1999, but I know that this is the humdrum of big-budget cinema.
Reply
:iconbabermirza:
babermirza Featured By Owner Dec 7, 2016
I swear, what is with all these sequels and reboots nowadays? Aside from a few films, mostly all that's advertised falls under what I just mentioned- is the nostalgia effect really so strong?
Reply
:icondinshino:
dinshino Featured By Owner Dec 8, 2016
Hollywood is scared to take risks so they're just recycling old ideas over and over again.
Reply
:iconmarvelousharvey:
MarvelousHarvey Featured By Owner Dec 7, 2016
Remember when the trailer came out for the Suicide Squad...and it actually looked cool? That it actually looked like DC was listening to their audience and was going to right the ship? Well, we all know how THAT turned out. Trailers don't necessarily represent the movie accurately. Tom Cruise has been making some fairly decent decisions in the last couple years. So, I'm going to reserve judgement until I hear from people who have seen it. Hey, you might be surprised.
Reply
:iconalienex1234:
alienex1234 Featured By Owner Dec 7, 2016  Student
I've seen both the orignal and 1999 remake

but this one...I agree with you 100%
Reply
:iconmakocrab:
MakoCrab Featured By Owner Dec 7, 2016  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Didn't they already try starting a linked universal monster movie universe with Dracula Untold? They left off on a cliffhanger & never did anything with it.
Reply
:iconkalnaur:
Kalnaur Featured By Owner Dec 7, 2016  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Because Dracula Untold essentially tanked, from what I remember.  Which is sad, because it's not impossible to make an interconnected Universal monster world; you just have to be willing to let some movies establish your more ancient monsters (and the ancestors of your heroes), and then go for an avengers level movie.  Maybe it's all the monsters banding together for [plot reasons], maybe it's some heroes they've established pulling together into a League of Extraordinary Genetlemen (though that property rests with 20th Century Fox, so not that team specifically).

However they'd need to do it, it'd have to be a more deft hand than simply, "we need what Marvel has for reasons", which seems to be what most studios are doing at the moment.
Reply
:iconmakocrab:
MakoCrab Featured By Owner Dec 7, 2016  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
That's too bad. Untold was a good little flick.
Reply
:iconanthroloverjay:
AnthroLoverJay Featured By Owner Dec 7, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
I'm a strong believer in cautious optimism, so for the time being, I'm going to be reserving my judgement. For the record, I enjoyed the "War of the Worlds" remake. No, I haven't seen the original, nor have I read the book, but as a movie on its own, I consider to be a solid sci-fi action flick. Not being a period piece doesn't mean it can't be good, even though some may consider it to be a bit lazy as it's obviously easier to set a film in modern day due to the filmmakers not having to worry about being accurate to the time.
As far as my opinion on the 99 film goes, I thought it was a lot of genuine fun with fast paced action scenes, pretty awesome effects (the majority of which still hold up today), solid performances, and a healthy balance of horror and humor, all of which culminated in a great time which is still enjoyable to come back to. For the record, I also enjoyed "The Mummy Returns". While it put more of a focus on the comedy rather than horror, it still managed to provide a lot of fun action sequences with consistently good performances and (barring the CGI Scorpion King who looked like something out of a PS2 cut scene) some very cool effects. The third movie, however, yeah, that was just big joke. There were a few fun scenes, but overall that one's better left forgotten. I won't even get into the Scorpion King spinoff series.
Reply
:iconniennasurion:
NiennaSurion Featured By Owner Dec 7, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
The 1999 Mummy in my Childhood love classic... stull use quote from it... very pretty made, funny, fun to watch... a good movie!!! ><
Reply
:icondinnelstudioart:
DinnelStudioART Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016  Hobbyist Filmographer
Agreed. Just agreed.
Reply
:icondarkecofreak23:
darkecofreak23 Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016  Student Writer
Yeah, I'm thinking I'll wait til it's on Redbox to see if it's any good. 

Also, "The Mummy Returns" wasn't a bad flick. Now, the third movie? That was a load of shit, despite Fraser and John Hannah's involvement.
Reply
:iconimpulseai:
ImpulseAi Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016
"Do you swear?"
"Every damn day"
"That's not what I meant-"
"I know what you meant."

Best. Line. Ever.

There is a fine line between balancing taking yourself seriously and making fun of yourself. '99 Mummy straddled that line like a Texas bar bronco bull. Yes the threat was real, but the film knew exactly what it was and made sure you could feel the threat.

This new trailer... running Cruise, unnecessary splitting eyes (really, what is that supposed to do for her, other than show the audience "ooooh, she's otherworldly") and just... it looks like any Mission Impossible movie. That's what makes me more pissed off about this, is that it looks generic to it's star rather than something that sets it apart for the sequel/interconnected movies. This is not a "Mummy" film. This is wholly a Tom Cruise film. And that's why it'll be just average, at best. 
Reply
:iconchromadrake:
ChromaDrake Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016
A period correct movie of War of the Worlds.  *That* would have been something to see. 
Reply
:iconveryzenn:
VeryZenn Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016
I would almost be down with this if Cruise's character was supposed to be Rick and Evelyn's descendant (and it wasn't stupid). 

Of course, I would be even more down with it if it was supposed to be their kids and it was still a period piece.  Just rolled down the line a little bit.  
Reply
:iconslyfxz:
SlyFXZ Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Do you want fries with that?
Reply
:iconsexual-yeti:
Sexual-Yeti Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016  Professional Digital Artist
God forbid we have an action movie without modern day marines in it!
Reply
:iconk4nk4n:
K4nK4n Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016
My 1st reaction was "Since when was Amemait a villain??" And she looks nothing like the image of an Egyptian mummy should look like! Ugh. The versions starring Brendan Fraser seem better.
Reply
:iconboolean22:
boolean22 Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016  Professional Interface Designer
Princess Omelette is not amused.
Reply
:iconthelastoutlaw:
TheLastOutlaw Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
I loved the 99 film and I can remember saying as I left the theater, "I would love to see these characters in another movie but I think going back to the Mummy well would be a mistake."  It was an excellent cast and a lot of fun, and it would have been great to see them go on a series of other adventures.  But instead, we got successively worse Mummy flicks.  
Reply
:iconmrdomano:
MrDomano Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016
I'm a huge fan of the original '32 film, personally. It's been ages since I last saw the '99 one. Which only makes this more disappointing, as I think going back to the time when the Mummy was, you know, a legitimate character, who you rarely even saw in the bandages, would be the best way to do it. It's been a long enough time to warrant an update of that story. And....We get a standard Tom Cruise action movie. I have nothing against that, but, that's not really The Mummy. And definitely not the one I wanted. If this is where they go with this, I'm not sure how to feel about the other things they have planned, which include the Bride of Frankenstein and the Wolf Man, two other classic monsters I've loved since I was a kid. 
Reply
:iconbinary-beetle:
binary-beetle Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016
The only thing I like Tom Cruise in is Tropic Thunder.
Reply
:icontarmaque:
tarmaque Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016
He's actually pretty good in Magnolia too.  Generally speaking, he's okay when he's playing a complete jackass.  
Reply
:iconstereoscopecomics:
StereoscopeComics Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
We need more pulp adventure films.  The Mummy was soooooo good!  Do you have any other favorite pulp inspired films?
Reply
:iconjollyjack:
jollyjack Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016
Rocketeer. Skycaptain. Dark City.
Reply
:icontigerfangart:
tigerfangart Featured By Owner Dec 7, 2016
Sky Captain did not get the love it deserved.  
Reply
:iconstereoscopecomics:
StereoscopeComics Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Excellent choices! :) Dark city remains one of my all time fav sci-fi films!
Reply
:icontarmaque:
tarmaque Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016
Did you know that Dark City was shot almost simultaneously with The Matrix in the same city and used some of the same sets?  It's arguably a much better movie, but the connection is interesting to me.
Reply
:iconstereoscopecomics:
StereoscopeComics Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2016  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
That I did not. Very interesting. I enjoyed both movies, but Dark City was soooooo good!
Reply
:icontarmaque:
tarmaque Featured By Owner Dec 7, 2016
Indeed.  And what a great cast!  Not just Rufus Sewell and Jennifer Connolly, but William Hurt, Kiefer Sutherland, Bruce Spence, Richard O'Brien(!) and the legendary Ian Richardson.
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×

:iconjollyjack: More from jollyjack


Featured in Collections

Internet related. by luismigueln64

Journals by luismigueln64


More from DeviantArt



Details

Submitted on
December 5, 2016
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
35,408 (7 today)
Favourites
36 (who?)
Comments
217
×