[ss397]

OK, I checked this out over the weekend. This is a legit flop. The plot and the screenplay are so bad, all the big stars and special effects cant fix it. The 3D effects are minimal and not worth the premium to view them. I am surprised Tom Cruise  took on this film, it is one of his worst. I liked the original 3 silly, campy Mummy films and was looking forward to this one. It was quite a let down. They are set up for sequels, I hope they can get better material for them.

[Rob Babcock]

Yeah, it sucked. I just saw it tonite.  Really wanted to like it.  The cast was good but wasted.  There was probably a good popcorn-movie in there somewhere but they screwed it up.  Cruise seemed bored and didn't really fit the role.  Wallis had no purpose beyond being eye candy and her role was ridiculous.  Crowe chewed the scenery in another role that felt perfunctorily tacked on.  The biggest waste of all was the luminous Sofia Boutella.  She spent the whole film half covered in gauze and the other half covered in CGI.  Universal owns a whole bunch of IP that your grandparents parents really enjoyed and seem to have decided to dust it off for another generation, to little effect.  If they're just gonna phone it in like this I'm not looking forward to the rest of the reboots.

[wushuliu]

Kind of liked it. Yes, it's objectively awful but my and my gf are hardcore Cruise fans so even his worst films get a pass. I mean, this movie had a scene of Tom Cruise being chased underwater by undead First Crusade knights! This movie was insane! So much *weird* going on.

I bet it suffered the fate of all recent blockbusters: a bunch of footage is shot and reshot, the director takes a hike, and the movie is cobbled together in the edit - just like the new Star Wars, Marvels, etc.

[Rob Babcock]

Yet the weakest Marvel film is still like Citizen Kane compared toThe Mummy!