# The Mummy (reboot)



## Yahiko (Dec 3, 2016)

> _*The Mummy*_ is an upcoming American -  directed by  and written by . It is a reboot of  and the first installment in the .The film stars , , , ,  and . The film is scheduled to be released on June 9, 2017.



Teaser Trailer

Edit:
New Trailer


----------



## Brolypotence (Dec 3, 2016)

I'm getting a lot if X men Apocalypse Vibes here


----------



## Deleted member 73050 (Dec 3, 2016)



Reactions: Funny 6 | Winner 2


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Dec 3, 2016)




----------



## Detective (Dec 3, 2016)

I will likely watch it, but nothing can top Rachel Weisz in her prime during the original set of films. God damn, she was glorious

Reactions: Agree 3


----------



## Shiba D. Inu (Dec 3, 2016)

this looks nice

Reactions: Optimistic 2


----------



## Pocalypse (Dec 3, 2016)

They got the wrong type of hero for this film imo

Tom Cruise doesn't strike me as someone who's adventurous and of the swashbucking nature which is what the 1999+ Mummy films was about, if this in fact is a reboot of that series. Going by that little teaser the tone is different, this looks way more serious.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Detective (Dec 3, 2016)

The Mummy films have been around since at least 1922, iirc. This is just another set of films relating to the monster's origins, and part of the extended Universal Pictures Monsters Filmverse. 

BTW just in case anyone hasn't figured it out yet, but Russell Crowe's character is called Dr. Jekyll


----------



## Pocalypse (Dec 3, 2016)

Detective said:


> I will likely watch it, but nothing can top Rachel Weisz in her prime during the original set of films. God damn, she was glorious


----------



## Skaddix (Dec 3, 2016)

Pocalypse said:


> They got the wrong type of hero for this film imo
> 
> Tom Cruise doesn't strike me as someone who's adventurous and of the swashbucking nature which is what the 1999+ Mummy films was about, if this in fact is a reboot of that series. Going by that little teaser the tone is different, this looks way more serious.



Yeah Plus you know its Tom Cruise.


----------



## Pocalypse (Dec 3, 2016)

Skaddix said:


> Yeah Plus you know its Tom Cruise.



Has he quit doing MI?

I didn't even know he'd be doing this, I thought he'd be doing MI and Jack Reacher till the day he dies.


----------



## Skaddix (Dec 3, 2016)

Still doing MI. Jack Reacher probably not last one didnt do great.


----------



## Jake CENA (Dec 3, 2016)

this could be better than The Mummy trilogy


----------



## Gabe (Dec 4, 2016)

I liked the first mummy as a kid so I'll give this a try. I am a fan of monster movies


----------



## Huey Freeman (Dec 4, 2016)

Tom Cruise low key just teased us Mission Impossible 6


----------



## Yahiko (Dec 5, 2016)

New Trailer

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Yahiko (Dec 5, 2016)

I'll admit i am gonna miss


Too bad the courts cucked him hard.
Divorce ruins many great men

Thanks to this gutter slut c*nt


----------



## Shiba D. Inu (Dec 5, 2016)




----------



## Huey Freeman (Dec 5, 2016)

Fucking hell what the hell happen to Fraser!


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Dec 5, 2016)

succubus shaved off at least 15 years off his lifespan...

White people are known to age badly, but I don't think that's in anyway  what age 48 should look like ...


----------



## Skaddix (Dec 5, 2016)

He is 48? That is shit even for a white person especially a rich white person.


----------



## Rai (Dec 6, 2016)




----------



## Pocalypse (Dec 6, 2016)

Mr. Nice Guy said:


> I'll admit i am gonna miss
> 
> 
> Too bad the courts cucked him hard.
> ...



That's a massive drop from his prime days for sure...ouch.


----------



## Jake CENA (Dec 6, 2016)

leeches. succubus. its all their fault


----------



## Yahiko (Dec 6, 2016)




----------



## White Wolf (Dec 6, 2016)

I really do not like Tom Cruise for this.  I sure as hell hope it isn't an attempt at a legit comedy reboot, if they make it pure action I might be able to tolerate it when I'm tired late in the morning and really dumbed down.


----------



## Swarmy (Dec 6, 2016)

They really are rebooting everything, aren't they


----------



## Yahiko (Dec 7, 2016)

Skaddix said:


> He is 48? That is shit even for a white person especially a rich white person.


Yeah brendan is 48 but looks 60 on the other hand tom cruise is 54 and looks 30.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Dec 7, 2016)

I may be jumping the gun, but you know, I think this attempt at an expanded universe is going to fail like the ASM one did and the DCEU one is faltering, they are going to make this movie more as a setup for other movies than focus on trying to make it a good movie. I could be wrong, but this extended cinematic universe shit is obviously an attempt to cash in on Marvel's idea, or at least, it's piggybacking on Marvel's success with the idea.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Freechoice (Dec 7, 2016)

Pocalypse said:


> That's a massive drop from his prime days for sure...ouch.



@Vino was being kind by picking one of his more flattering photos as of late

this is what he looks like 2016


----------



## Pocalypse (Dec 7, 2016)

Freechoice said:


> @Vino was being kind by picking one of his more flattering photos as of late
> 
> this is what he looks like 2016



Damn son his eyebrows are gone!

I did google to see wtf happened to him and his ex wanted 900k a year from him...

@Skaddix 

I don't think this is a case of white men aging badly, it's just the stress which fucked him up.


----------



## Deleted member 73050 (Dec 7, 2016)

Pocalypse said:


> Damn son his eyebrows are gone!
> 
> I did google to see wtf happened to him and his ex wanted 900k a year from him...
> 
> ...


His ex's a total bitch tbh

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## Stunna (Dec 7, 2016)

Seto Kaiba said:


> I may be jumping the gun, but you know, I think this attempt at an expanded universe is going to fail like the ASM one did and the DCEU one is faltering, they are going to make this movie more as a setup for other movies than focus on trying to make it a good movie. I could be wrong, but this extended cinematic universe shit is obviously an attempt to cash in on Marvel's idea, or at least, it's piggybacking on Marvel's success with the idea.


Seeing as how _Dracula Untold _was supposed to be the first installment in this "cinematic universe" until it was recently deemed non-canon for being a critical and financial flop, I think it's safe to say that you're not jumping the gun.


----------



## Skaddix (Dec 7, 2016)

That is all stress damage? Holy Shit. He didnt have cancer or something.


----------



## White Wolf (Dec 7, 2016)

Stunna said:


> Seeing as how _Dracula Untold _was supposed to be the first installment in this "cinematic universe" until it was recently deemed non-canon for being a critical and financial flop, I think it's safe to say that you're not jumping the gun.



Personally I really liked Dracula Untold... /shrug 
I thought it was a fun movie to watch and some scenes were really fucking epic, like near ending when he turns his people and they storm the enemy base. That shit was tight. Was looking forward even to a sequel then it all crashed and burned. 

If the Mummy flops which it probably will can kiss monster mayhem night goodbye


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Dec 7, 2016)

See I think a shared universe can work, but they have to stop trying to go the Marvel route with it all the time. I was brainstorming some ideas with my friends that came to mind when I discussed it with them. So Dracula Untold was supposed to be the start of this...interesting. Well, if they are going to go over Dracula again, maybe they should focus on adapting the novel, and setting it in the same time period it took place in. I see the issue with Dracula Untold is that they tried to make him seem too 'noble' and the romance angle (along with CGI oversaturation). Well, a tragic backstory for Dracula isn't always bad (Alucard from Hellsing), but you can't overdo it. Since Vlad the Impaler is pretty much considered to be Dracula in most works, you have to emphasize his previous nature. Hell, why not make him the villain in his own backstory? Reflect a little from Phantom Blood from JJBA and have him reject his humanity in the end when he's against the ropes. Maybe subtly imply that one or more protags that originally took him down when he was human is distantly related to one of the central characters in the novel, it doesn't have to be Abraham.

What I'd be opposed to most is crossovers, to be honest. I honestly feel each movie should be placed in their own time periods, once again. The thing I would not at all be opposed to in connecting the movies is to have one or more central characters in each movie the descendant of a previous, or some kind of other close relation. Think the Belmont Clan in Castlevania, or the Joestars, the Hellsing Foundation, etc. There is absolutely no need to set all the movies in the modern day after all. Maybe this family or clan is cursed, maybe it can be their destiny to have to face these supernatural threats, I dunno...I would not be opposed to recurring monsters either. Most notably Dracula, The Wolfman, and The Mummy. Additionally, dropping of easter eggs or hard references that make it clear "x" movie took place in the same universe as "y" movie at an earlier point in time. Or drop some easter eggs or hard references of characters or monsters that have yet to appear, but doing so in a way that doesn't spend so much time trying to set it up.

Also, play Frankenstein true to the novel please. The doctor must die with his monster on the mountain. Make it a tragedy thriller than traditional horror. 

ONE MORE THING...Camilla. The vampire story that actually predates Dracula...


----------



## Skaddix (Dec 7, 2016)

Does he die on a mountain? I seem to remember him dying in some frigid Northern Area close to some water. Not technically a mountain but it has been ......10 years or since I read it.


----------



## Jake CENA (Dec 7, 2016)

900k a year?? someone shoot that bitch. i hate dumbass lazy women. cant even feed themselves without them breaking a sweat


----------



## Lucaniel (Dec 10, 2016)

nobody asked for this


----------



## Arcana (Dec 10, 2016)

Mission impossible meets the villain in suicide squad 
looks like it's going to be on some global scale shit 



Skaddix said:


> Does he die on a mountain? I seem to remember him dying in some frigid Northern Area close to some water. Not technically a mountain but it has been ......10 years or since I read it.


 that's how I remember it 
 dying in the village windmill because it was collapsing or something


----------



## Akatora (Dec 11, 2016)

Doesn't look as interesting as the first mummy movie of the 90's
though does still look somewhat interesting.


----------



## EVERY SINGLE DAY!!! (Dec 14, 2016)

Watching that trailer, 
And remembering Fraser's performance,
And thinking about RDJ's role in catapulting the Cinematic Universe craze,

Made me think: 

It feels like forever since we've seen super charming/charismatic Tom Cruise
Forever. Like since the Oprah Incident forever


----------



## Yahiko (Mar 31, 2017)




----------



## The World (Mar 31, 2017)

drop them hot bars
drop em
drop it like it's hawt

Reactions: Like 1 | Dislike 1


----------



## Yahiko (Apr 2, 2017)




----------



## Rai (Apr 2, 2017)

Prefer the 1999 version.


----------



## Mider T (Apr 2, 2017)

If Brendan Frasier was going to look like this and be this broke by middle age, he should have just a ton of coke.  Same results but at least it would have been alot more fun.


----------



## MartialHorror (Apr 3, 2017)

DemonDragonJ said:


> I have no interest in this film, at all, especially since it shall apparently be part of a massive shared universe, but a friend of mine wishes to see it (the same friend who convinced me to see the recent _Deadpool_ film against my will), so I hope that I can somehow subtly and politely convince him that I do not wish to see it and avoid spending my money on it.
> 
> However, I do very much like the fact that the titular mummy shall be a woman, which has never been done before (Anak-Sun-Amun from the 1999 film does not count because she was not the titular character); how did it take so long for studio to decide to have a female mummy?



Because if you watch the majority of the old Mummy movies, the titular Mummies were usually large, lumbering hulks who relied on strangling their victims to death. They didn't start giving them these elaborate powers until the 1999 film, so it wouldn't have looked very convincing to use a female Mummy. 

Anyway, the second trailer was alright, but still kind of underwhelming. Considering the cast involved- Cruise and Crowe rarely make bad movies- I have to believe the film will at least be OK. Hopefully they're just restraining themselves for the trailers, wanting to reserve their best content for the film, although if nothing grabs the audience, then how many people will see it? If it bombs, then it kills a franchise that nearly perished with "Dracula Untold".


----------



## Skaddix (Apr 3, 2017)

these ancients egyptians looking pretty light skinned to me....

Never Change Hollywood.


----------



## DemonDragonJ (Apr 4, 2017)

Skaddix said:


> these ancients egyptians looking pretty light skinned to me....



I am no expert, but people in the middle east can actually have a variety of skin tones, and I imagine that being dead (or undead, more accurately) would cause a person's physiology to change (it is not an accident that most vampires have deathly pale skin, presuming that they already had fair skin when they were alive).


----------



## Skaddix (Apr 5, 2017)

Not talking about Butella. Talking about the extras.


----------



## Jake CENA (Apr 5, 2017)

Tom Cruise doesn't seem to age as well like Keanu


----------



## Pocalypse (Apr 5, 2017)

Tom Cruise started filming MI6. He gonna carry this franchise to its 3rd decade 

That has to be a record I think for an action hero to play the same role for so long


----------



## MartialHorror (Apr 5, 2017)

Tom Cruise is beginning to show signs of aging...so apparently he's not the vampire I always thought him to be...although he still looks really good. I mean, jesus, I am 31 and he looks younger than me!...and that makes me sad.

So part of me suspects that he's going to be the Mummy whom will become the franchise player, although this would arguably be disastrous as he would...or at least should...be required to wear makeup, undermining his Tom Cruisey features. I really think it was a mistake to begin with franchise (since "Dracula Untold" has been wiped out of the continuity) with "The Mummy" though. Then again, The Wolf-Man had a bomb less than 10 years ago and we've been overexposed to Frankenstein and Dracula (who have both been the monsters of other bombs lately). While I'm more curious about the Creature from the Black Lagoon, it's contribution to a franchise would probably be limited, as it's too water based. 

"The Invisible Man" was a great movie, but is there much of a demand to see a new one? Back then, the invisibility was a novelty and horror films were more gothic than scary. These days, it just doesn't seem that marketable. Russell Crowe is apparently playing a 'Hyde', so presumably will be Dr. Jekyll...unless he turns into an actual monster, I'm not sure how marketable he will be as well. That's sort of the problem with this franchise idea...Most of these characters are somewhat archaic. We've seen them done so often and their primary appeal these days tend to be rooted in the fact that they're period pieces. It's interesting seeing these characters prowl around old london. 

So in hindsight, the Mummy does make the most sense, especially thanks to the 1999 updated version where the character can use all sorts of sorcery. But the marketing for this one is focusing on Tom Cruise, so if he isn't the new Mummy, that can diminish interest in the actual Mummy for the Universal Monster equivalent of "The Avengers". "Kong: Skull Island" had human characters, but the focus was always on building Kong.

Reactions: Dislike 1


----------



## Ishmael (Apr 18, 2017)

Just watched trailer 2 I'm extremely hyped to see this movie.


----------



## Yahiko (Apr 21, 2017)




----------



## Suigetsu (May 15, 2017)

Poor Brandon Fraser.

I dont wanna watch no mummie without Fraser.
Also that stupid ex-wife of his, she is evil.

Reactions: Agree 1 | Disagree 1


----------



## Yahiko (May 18, 2017)




----------



## Swarmy (Jun 9, 2017)

This movie was such a mess


----------



## Detective (Jun 9, 2017)

Swarmy said:


> This movie was such a mess


----------



## Suigetsu (Jun 9, 2017)

Swarmy said:


> This movie was such a mess


You actually went to see it? why would you do such thing?!


----------



## Demetrius (Jun 9, 2017)

Swarmy said:


> This movie was such a mess


Thoughts overall?


----------



## Suigetsu (Jun 9, 2017)

So apparently @The World seems to not like the idea of me having pity on Fraser, why is that?
You honestly like This horrible woman? This behaviour of yours it's disgusting.


----------



## Swarmy (Jun 9, 2017)

Suigetsu said:


> You actually went to see it? why would you do such thing?!



I like monsters 



Trinity said:


> Thoughts overall?



Although the movie tries so hard to distance itself from the older one it still has many scenes taken directly from it  The thing is this movie is boring and slow as hell, it never really builds up and most of the cool moments are in the trailers


----------



## Suigetsu (Jun 9, 2017)

Swarmy said:


> I like monsters



but the ones in the trailer look awful, just people with bad cosmetics, that's no monster... unless ofc you are into terrible people.


----------



## Swarmy (Jun 9, 2017)

Suigetsu said:


> but the ones in the trailer look awful, just people with bad cosmetics, that's no monster... unless ofc you are into terrible people.


Actually all of the other mummies in the movie are cgi 

Another thing that disappoint me was that the entire movie was so dark that you can barely see anything

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Suigetsu (Jun 9, 2017)

Swarmy said:


> Actually all of the other mummies in the movie are cgi
> 
> Another thing that disappoint me was that the entire movie was so dark that you can barely see anything


That's a cheap trick to exploit bad textures but an interesting one never the less. Ever since stan winston passed away we will never get the chance to see amazing animatronics, on that I have made up my mind already. Sadly :/

oh well was tom cruise performance at least fun? or was it his typical one?


----------



## Swarmy (Jun 9, 2017)

Suigetsu said:


> oh well was tom cruise performance at least fun? or was it his typical one?



The usual hyped charming nearly insane action guy

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Suigetsu (Jun 9, 2017)

Swarmy said:


> The usual hyped charming nearly insane action guy


I like when he is doing characters that happen to be "out of that stereotype" that he plays. Basically Tom cruise playing Tom Cruise. hmm.

Do you think Fraser would had fitted there?

Reactions: Disagree 1


----------



## Swarmy (Jun 9, 2017)

Suigetsu said:


> I like when he is doing characters that happen to be "out of that stereotype" that he plays. Basically Tom cruise playing Tom Cruise. hmm.
> 
> Do you think Fraser would had fitted there?


Although I'm a big fan of Fraser he is not in shape for such a movie, but if we're talking about young Fraser then hell yes! Even though this movie tries to be darker he would have been a nice touch


----------



## Suigetsu (Jun 9, 2017)

Swarmy said:


> Although I'm a big fan of Fraser he is not in shape for such a movie, but if we're talking about young Fraser then hell yes! Even though this movie tries to be darker he would have been a nice touch


I think he just doesnt have it in him anymore you know, the thing with his ex-wife completely destroyed him. He looks like an empty husk, and I think seeing the mummie without him now kind of affected him too. Oh well well.

from a 1/10 how much would you have rated this movie?


----------



## Mider T (Jun 9, 2017)

Swarmy said:


> Another thing that disappoint me was that the entire movie was so dark that you can barely see anything


It's the Underworld series all over again.


----------



## Swarmy (Jun 9, 2017)

Suigetsu said:


> from a 1/10 how much would you have rated this movie?



I give it a 5/10 though it would have been lower if it wasn't for some easter eggs connected to the Dark Universe project the studio is attempting to develop.



Mider T said:


> It's the Underworld series all over again.



Yeah kind of, you can barely see anything at times

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Yahiko (Jun 9, 2017)

17% on rotten tomatoes 
wow wasn't expecting it to be this bad


Swarmy said:


> The usual hyped charming nearly insane action guy


what about the performance of russell crowe,sofia boutella and annabelle wallis?


Suigetsu said:


> I think he just doesnt have it in him anymore you know, the thing with his ex-wife completely destroyed him. He looks like an empty husk, and I think seeing the mummie without him now kind of affected him too. Oh well well.
> 
> from a 1/10 how much would you have rated this movie?


i think hes in  perfect shape to play a mummy

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Suigetsu (Jun 9, 2017)

Mr. Nice Guy said:


> 17% on rotten tomatoes
> wow wasn't expecting it to be this bad


But it looked really bad desu





> i think hes in  perfect shape to play a mummy


You think so? poor lad has had a rough time. Seriously the Alimony system in the U.S. it's fucked up. Also in what was he thinking, not getting a pre-nub when he got married?

Reactions: Agree 1 | Disagree 1


----------



## Linkdarkside (Jun 9, 2017)




----------



## Shiba D. Inu (Jun 9, 2017)

Underworld at least has Kate (aka the_ most perfect goddess to ever walk this sinful eart_h) in latex

and some nice vamp & wolf gore



tbh I was 100% sure this would suck, never was a doubt in my mind

question is the "Monster Universe" dead ?


----------



## Swarmy (Jun 10, 2017)

Weiss said:


> question is the "Monster Universe" dead ?



They were going to start with Dracula Untold but since it sucked they moved it to this movie which now failed so yeah... not looking good for the Dark Universe concept.


----------



## Rukia (Jun 10, 2017)

The Mummy: C+

Perfectly adequate.

Somehow the female Mummy was a sympathetic character.  I was rooting for her to win.  (I probably also supported her because she is fine asf.)


----------



## MartialHorror (Jun 11, 2017)

I like how it it ends with 
*Spoiler*: __ 



Tom Cruise killing the Mummy by forcefully kissing her.


----------



## Mider T (Jun 11, 2017)

MartialHorror said:


> I like how it it ends with
> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> ...


At least he didn't have to go down on her.  I probably would have let the world perish if the only alternative was to feast on 3,000 year old cooch.


----------



## Magnum Miracles (Jun 11, 2017)

Goddam all these interconnected movies.


----------



## Rukia (Jun 11, 2017)

The movie was sort of like Amazing Spider-man 2.  It was too focused on building threads to future movies.  These studios need to stop doing that.  It doesn't work.  Make a good movie first.  And then let it come about naturally.

Reactions: Agree 4


----------



## Sennin of Hardwork (Jun 14, 2017)

Saw it last weekend, Sofia Boutella carried this movie and yep, I found myself half rooting for Ahmanet. It's weird, it hardly happens where I root for the villain.

I liked Russell Crowe's Jekyll/Hyde and there's potential with Prodigium. Cool easter eggs and I totally recognized the wink to the previous Mummy franchise when it happened.

I agree that there were too many scenes that lacked lightning and color like Swarmy said, too dark to see at times. On one hand I can get why they did this, they're aiming for a touch of horror but they could've found a balance. The only part that had brightness was in the beginning.

I read somewhere that the movie "deconstructed Tom Cruise" or something like that and while that hurt the movie I can also understand it since for the most part he's a bit of the "damsel in distress" and powerless against Ahmanet. That is not what he usually plays.

But the ending was interesting and sets up things enough for me to give it another go with whatever Dark Universe entry is next. But they gotta improve what failed here in their upcoming films to succeed better.

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## Gabe (Jun 16, 2017)

Saw it, not the best movie. Okay start I liked jekil and Hyde for the minimal time he was on screen. Hope the rest are good. I want to see good Dracula, wolf man and Frankenstein movied. But who knows


----------



## Rukia (Jun 16, 2017)

Ahmanet was a sympathetic figure.  Crowe and company were depicted as assholes for being so callous about disposing of her.


----------



## Sennin of Hardwork (Jun 18, 2017)



Reactions: Funny 4


----------



## reaperunique (Jun 19, 2017)

Sennin of Hardwork said:


> Saw it last weekend, Sofia Boutella carried this movie and yep, I found myself half rooting for Ahmanet. It's weird, it hardly happens where I root for the villain.
> 
> I liked Russell Crowe's Jekyll/Hyde and there's potential with Prodigium. Cool easter eggs and I totally recognized the wink to the previous Mummy franchise when it happened.
> 
> ...



Sums it up pretty well for me. It was a fun watch on a way too hot Sunday where I didn't feel like doing a lot. I don't consider it 8 EUR wasted.


----------



## Suigetsu (Jun 19, 2017)

#fraserheads #notmymummy


----------



## Mider T (Apr 26, 2019)

Also add this to the directory.


----------



## Glued (Apr 27, 2019)

Mider T said:


> Also add this to the directory.



You are guilty of thread necromancy. You should have let it rest in peace, but you have forced it to rise again. Now it lives again, an unholy abomination.


----------



## Rukia (Apr 28, 2019)

If you do the studio tour at Universal Studios.  They have a poster of this movie up with all of their legendary movies like Scarface.


----------

