8mm Forum


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile | my password | register | search | faq | register | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» 8mm Forum   » General Yak   » The Mummy - 2017 Version (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!  
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
Author Topic: The Mummy - 2017 Version
Brad Kimball
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1158
From: Highland Mills, NY USA
Registered: Jun 2003


 - posted May 22, 2017 08:39 PM      Profile for Brad Kimball   Email Brad Kimball   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Why, O'h why do they even bother? Just re-release the originals back into the theatres. Hell, colorize them if you must. Seriously, this new version looks like a big bag of poo. Tom Cruise - seriously? The guy who mows my lawn could act better than him. The mummy being a woman could be an interesting switch, but I won't pay $15 US to see anything with Cruise in it. He's so talentless and, as a person, I understand he's not very nice. How do people like him get to be such big stars? E'h, I'll stick with my Karloff and Chaney originals.

 |  IP: Logged

Mark Todd
Film God

Posts: 3704
From: UK
Registered: Aug 2003


 - posted May 23, 2017 03:00 AM      Profile for Mark Todd   Email Mark Todd   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The trailer looks very poor.

Makes the 1999 one look like a good proper classic itself.

Bit like the new Kong makes the 2005 look a really good proper film wise.

Best Mark.

 |  IP: Logged

Tom Photiou
Film God

Posts: 4729
From: Plymouth U.K
Registered: Dec 2003


 - posted May 23, 2017 06:39 AM      Profile for Tom Photiou   Email Tom Photiou   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The mummy being a woman. So this once again is the PC version. No doubt there will be a James Bond film where a female MUST play 007. Thats the day i stop going to see them!
Utter nonsense.

 |  IP: Logged

Paul Browning
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 990
From: West Midlands United Kingdom
Registered: Aug 2011


 - posted May 23, 2017 06:47 AM      Profile for Paul Browning   Email Paul Browning   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
It will be Eddie Izzard more like Tom, that'll confuse the enemy, could play "M " too , save them some money ......

 |  IP: Logged

Mark Mander
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1195
From: Dunstable ,Bedfordshire.
Registered: Jan 2005


 - posted May 23, 2017 07:28 AM      Profile for Mark Mander   Email Mark Mander   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I don't get making remake after remake of the same films, with all the technology these days you'd think they would do something new, even the Disney Pixars are the same thing but with different characters.

--------------------
Elmo GS1200 1.0 lens
Elmo ST1200HD 1.1 lens
Sankyo 800 1.0 lens
Elmo 16CL
Elf NT1

 |  IP: Logged

Mark L Barton
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 614
From: Bristol, South Glos, England
Registered: Mar 2009


 - posted May 23, 2017 09:12 AM      Profile for Mark L Barton   Email Mark L Barton   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Films are remade to cater for new audiences. Each with a slightly different approach to changes in cultural and social tastes. Look at Batman and Spiderman, both historically and culturally, its the same theme, Dark Knight, Lonely Neighnourhood hero, but each time in the story telling there are changes.
My favourite film, The Poseidon Adventure was remade as Poseidon. In the original a sub sea earhquake causes the wave, in the remake a vew member states 'something is not quite right' boom the wave appears, so its been simplified (I mean does anyone know what a subsea earthquake is anyway??)
, well we did in teh 70's but not in the noughties) Remakes are either dumbed down or CGI'ed up, but its done to for new audiences to buy cinema tickets and blu rays etc.

 |  IP: Logged

Carter Bradley
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 146
From: Greensboro, NC, USA
Registered: Dec 2007


 - posted May 23, 2017 12:35 PM      Profile for Carter Bradley   Email Carter Bradley   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I read an article where it was stated that a rogue wave (explanation in "Poseidon") is much more common than the subsea earthquake ("Poseidon Adventure"'s explanation). Of course global warming could have something to do with this!!!

 |  IP: Logged

David Hardy
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 925
From: Johnshaven Village , Montrose, Scotland
Registered: Jan 2015


 - posted May 25, 2017 09:01 AM      Profile for David Hardy   Email David Hardy   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I saw the trailer to this one.
I will be giving this one a wide berth that's for sure.
YUK ! What the hell do they think they are doing ?

--------------------
" My equipment's more important than your rats. "

 |  IP: Logged

Osi Osgood
Film God

Posts: 9948
From: #399R K.O.A. Mountian Home, ID. 83647
Registered: Jul 2005


 - posted May 25, 2017 11:43 AM      Profile for Osi Osgood   Author's Homepage   Email Osi Osgood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Yeah, at least the 1999 version had the good sense to know it was just having fun ... with at least decent effects.

The posters for this film say it all, "Tom Cruise does the Mummy"

... Hey! he's getting up there in years! How about ...

Tom Cruise IS the mummy!! (haha)

(and I don't apologize to any Tom Cruise fans!! hah!)

... and now he's just announced "Top Gun 2: The search for geritol"!

--------------------
"All these moments will be lost in time, just like ... tears, in the rain. "

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Newell
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 810
From: United Kingdom
Registered: Jun 2003


 - posted May 25, 2017 04:09 PM      Profile for Mike Newell   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Could I suggest Priscilla Presley as The Mummy she can't act which will make Cruise look talented and she doesn't need any make up as she already looks like she has been stuffed or recently undead. Poor Tom Jones must be getting a treat every night. What new pussycat 🙀🙀. I see wee Tom is going to give the world Top Gun 2 as if the first movie wasn't bad enough. I think his last two movies tanked so he must be on the last round up for cash before he goes back on the mothership to meet Ron Hubbard. 👽👽👽👽

 |  IP: Logged

Gary Crawford
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 977
From: Manassas, VA. USA
Registered: Jun 2003


 - posted May 30, 2017 11:45 AM      Profile for Gary Crawford   Email Gary Crawford   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
My, my. I've never seen a film panned so severely by people who haven't even seen it yet. oh well. I question the need to remake the remake of the remake, but it might be fun.

 |  IP: Logged

Osi Osgood
Film God

Posts: 9948
From: #399R K.O.A. Mountian Home, ID. 83647
Registered: Jul 2005


 - posted May 30, 2017 12:09 PM      Profile for Osi Osgood   Author's Homepage   Email Osi Osgood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Yeah, you might be right about that (being hard) ...

but I'm just wincing at the thought of Tom Cruise doing what he always does, you know, doing more than enuf money shots where he looks almost directly at the screen as if to allow his teeth to "gleem" and sub-consciencly saying,

" Hi it's me, Tom Cruise ... in a mummy film!"

Ohhhhhh, Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing, where are you when we so desperately need you? (sigh ... time to top in a DVD of the classics!) [Smile]

--------------------
"All these moments will be lost in time, just like ... tears, in the rain. "

 |  IP: Logged

Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1583
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003


 - posted May 30, 2017 02:45 PM      Profile for Rob Young.     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Tom Cruise is an incredibly hard working professional actor and producer.

Of course, each movie must be judged upon it's own merits, but at least give it the dignity to watch the finished movie prior to judgement.

I thought that MIP "Rogue Nation" was a triumph of witty scripting, action, direction, production and cinematography.

A very professional gentleman.

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Newell
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 810
From: United Kingdom
Registered: Jun 2003


 - posted May 30, 2017 02:46 PM      Profile for Mike Newell   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Tom was actually quite good in Interview with a Vampire. Fact is his best three film were The Firm Interview and Mission Impossible which he is still milking dear knows how many sequels later. After those three films he became a bit of a knob. Whether overexposure to Kubrick and Spielberg had the blood running to his head who knows. Anyway let's hope he brings his shoe box.

 |  IP: Logged

Jean-Marc Toussaint
Film God

Posts: 2386
From: France
Registered: Oct 2004


 - posted May 30, 2017 05:23 PM      Profile for Jean-Marc Toussaint   Author's Homepage   Email Jean-Marc Toussaint   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I really like some of Cruise's recent films such as Edge of Tomorrow and Jack Reacher. But this one, which I saw a few days ago at an advance screening, is not enjoyable at all.
There's one good idea, though, that I won't spoil, involving another classic character, that is supposedly laying down the track for future films of the Dark Universe (UP's label for their new monster franchise).
Invisible Man and Bride of Frankenstein are already in prep (the later being helmed by Bill Condon - that at least being a good move) and Kurtzman (the producer) is craving to bring back the Gill Man.
If Mummy is a success, you better get used to the fact that our beloved classic monsters might be mistreated in future films.

--------------------
The Grindcave Cinema Website

 |  IP: Logged

Osi Osgood
Film God

Posts: 9948
From: #399R K.O.A. Mountian Home, ID. 83647
Registered: Jul 2005


 - posted June 01, 2017 11:45 AM      Profile for Osi Osgood   Author's Homepage   Email Osi Osgood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
OK, I'll give credit where credit is due. I did like "Minority Report" and the fact that Tom Cruise was in it, didn't distract from how good the film was. [Smile]

--------------------
"All these moments will be lost in time, just like ... tears, in the rain. "

 |  IP: Logged

Tom Photiou
Film God

Posts: 4729
From: Plymouth U.K
Registered: Dec 2003


 - posted June 04, 2017 03:56 PM      Profile for Tom Photiou   Email Tom Photiou   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
mind you, there not remakes any more, they are "re launches" [Big Grin]

 |  IP: Logged

Bradford A Moore
Master Film Handler

Posts: 272
From: Provincetown, Ma
Registered: Jul 2005


 - posted June 08, 2017 09:19 AM      Profile for Bradford A Moore   Email Bradford A Moore   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Hollywood has no original ideas anymore! I'm all for bringing back the originals to the big screen in there original Black and White glory! Two things I hate most are colorized films, and dubbed films! Me TV is showing the first season of Gilligan's Island colorized, which should be Black and White, and it looks horrible. The second season was shot originally in color and looks great. We have a Drive In near us, how great it would look to show any of those original Univeral horror movies, or even the color Hammer films! Surely better than any of this garbage!

 |  IP: Logged

Mitchell Dvoskin
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 128
From: West Milford, NJ
Registered: Jun 2008


 - posted June 08, 2017 10:14 AM      Profile for Mitchell Dvoskin   Email Mitchell Dvoskin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Hollywood has been remaking their films almost as long as there have been movies. Each remake needs to stand (or fall) on it's own merits.

For example:

Look at the 1960 Psycho, and then the 1998 remake. Although almost identical, shot for shot, the 1960 is a great film and the remake sucks.

Look at the 1931 Maltese Falcon and then the 1941 remake. They are almost word for word the same script, but the 1931 version moves about as fast as paint drying, and the 1941 version is a great film.

Look at "Chicago", first made in 1927 and remade in 1942 (as Roxy Hart), and again in 2002. All were pretty good films with very different interpretations of the same story.

Remakes are nothing new.

 |  IP: Logged

Joe Caruso
Film God

Posts: 4020
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2003


 - posted June 09, 2017 05:20 PM      Profile for Joe Caruso   Email Joe Caruso   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
As an actor, these "remakes" are to showcase these "stars" (more like asteroids), so the audiences of today will see them in the same light as audiences saw the original actors - Of course, there were few remakes back then - No need - Seriously, I wouldn't bother with rehashings of the old films - Half the time it is a waste of film (rare these days), talent (what there is of it) and time (oh, so precious) - No doubt there will be a franchise continuation of GODZILLA, KONG, ALIEN and DC/MARVEL, and others - I wouldn't turn down a part in anything, but there is part of me that would much rather see an original concept (or close to one), and approach theatre for what it is - I'll admit some effects and "moments" in these kind of films have intrigued me for the last decade or so, but I could put all those moments and effects onto one 1600' reel and be done with a quick wrap-around story - One man's take on it, Shorty

 |  IP: Logged

Guy Taylor, Jr.
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 606
From: Galveston, Texas, U.S.A.
Registered: Mar 2007


 - posted June 09, 2017 07:26 PM      Profile for Guy Taylor, Jr.   Email Guy Taylor, Jr.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Do you think when they finished shooting THE MUMMY the director said, "that's a wrap"?

--------------------
Guy Taylor

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Klare
Film Guy

Posts: 6794
From: Long Island, NY, USA
Registered: Jun 2003


 - posted June 09, 2017 07:49 PM      Profile for Steve Klare   Email Steve Klare   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I heard it embalmed at the box office!

--------------------
All I ask is a wide screen and a projector to light her by...

 |  IP: Logged

Graham Ritchie
Film God

Posts: 3935
From: New Zealand
Registered: Feb 2006


 - posted June 09, 2017 09:28 PM      Profile for Graham Ritchie   Email Graham Ritchie   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The trailer looks ok [Cool] ...good music from the 60s in the trl that is, plus its even got Gladiator himself.. Russell Crowe in it...looks like a fun film [Smile]

Oh! just remembered just last week watched Tom Cruise in Valkyrie...good movie.

Regarding remakes a few years back I ran "Flight of the Phoenix" 2004 with Dennis Quaid and company. I thought it was pretty good in its own right. I would really like to find a 35mm print of it. :cool

Just remembered again.. some Mummy films I ran at the cinema...The Mummy 1999...The Mummy Returns in 2001 and then there was The Mummy "Tomb of the Dragon Emperor" in 2008 I think "The Rock" was in the second one cant remember for sure...still got the trls somewhere [Roll Eyes]

[ June 09, 2017, 11:43 PM: Message edited by: Graham Ritchie ]

 |  IP: Logged

Michael O'Regan
Film God

Posts: 3083
From: Essex, UK
Registered: Oct 2007


 - posted June 10, 2017 08:57 AM      Profile for Michael O'Regan   Email Michael O'Regan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
How about just looking at this as a film in its own right and not as a remake. I don't see why it has to be compared to anything else.
Such knee-jerk reactions are puzzling to me. I'm sure most on here would class both Dracula (57) and Dracula (31) as "classics". Yet, wasn't the 57 version a 'remake'? Indeed, wasn't the 31 version a 'remake' of Murnau's Nosferatu?

 |  IP: Logged

Osi Osgood
Film God

Posts: 9948
From: #399R K.O.A. Mountian Home, ID. 83647
Registered: Jul 2005


 - posted June 10, 2017 12:41 PM      Profile for Osi Osgood   Author's Homepage   Email Osi Osgood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Guy, funny stuff!

Micheal has a point. I wonder if our reactions are more because we HAVE seen the original FIRST. If we hadn't seen the original film first, would we have such a low opinion of the "remake".

I believe old school special effects films are a case of this in reverse order. We see the new KING KONG (Peter jackson) and it looks absolutely fabulous ... but I then watch the 1933 "King Kong" and I am completely bored stiff, as well as not taken in any any way, shape or form by what obviously appears to me as terrible stop motion animation.

I know, I'll probably get some people going [Eek!] at that last comparison, but i think it's valid.

--------------------
"All these moments will be lost in time, just like ... tears, in the rain. "

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Visit www.film-tech.com for free equipment manual downloads. Copyright 2003-2019 Film-Tech Cinema Systems LLC

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2