Though safely entombed in a crypt deep beneath the unforgiving desert, an ancient princess, whose destiny was unjustly taken from her, is awakened in our current day bringing with her malevolence grown over millennia, and terrors that defy human comprehension.Written by
When Ahmanet is mummified and is put the sarcophagus, the lid was too close to Sofia Boutella's face. And it hit her right in the nose, and all the bandages around her head were soaked with blood. After the bloody bandages were removed, a second take was done, only this time, the lid was further away from her face. See more »
The movie states that Ahmanet was mummified alive. The mummification process involves removal of the internal organs & the brain. The body is then covered in natron and after a period it is removed, stuffed with a naturally occurring salt called natron, and then wrapped in linen strips. The person would definitely be dead at this point. The movie clearly showed Ahmanet struggling to get free of the wrappings as she was being enclosed in the sarcophagus. So she was not mummified alive but entombed / buried alive.
However, the movie states that Ahmanet was mummified 5000 years ago (circa 3000 B.C.). While it is not known precisely when the Egyptians first began to develop "true mummification" which included evisceration it is usually considered to have begun around 2600 BC, roughly 400 years after the mummification of Ahmanet. See more »
Cross Rail Worker:
[having just broken through with their drill]
What the hell is this?
I don't know.
Cross Rail Worker:
Whoa! Bloody hell!
The Crossrail is the biggest construction project in Europe, carving 26 miles of new commuter train tunnels beneath the surface of London. But today, an ancient tomb filled with the coffins of Crusader knights...
People don't realize that London is a giant graveland. A modern city built on centuries of death.
Because of the proximity to the Thames, half the space is ...
See more »
Despite being filmed in Panavision, the "Filmed with Panavision Cameras & Lenses" credit was used instead. See more »
Far from being a bad film, "The Mummy" provides some thrills and spectacular visuals
The Mummy franchise has been struggling lately. Ever since the original 1999 movie was released, the movies have gradually gotten worse. The first "Mummy" was slick, well made and entertaining; the second was your typical B/C movie, not the worst but far from the best, and then with the third installment it was clear that Hollywood had given up on the franchise and wanted one more pay-cheque.
Skip forward to 2017 and we appear to have something just as good as the original. Sure, for some, the flashy visuals may seem like a cover-up for the (occasional) uninspired dialogue, however, there is no doubt that a lot of money was invested in making this film look good, and it sure delivers on that aspect (even with The Scorpion King setting the bar very low, "The Mummy" (2017) still looks pretty amazing).
Tom Cruise stars, which to some may be a turn-off, but I think some credit is due here. Tom has made a name for himself in the M:I film's, and with his performance in "The Mummy", he shows audiences that perhaps it's not too late to make a name for yourself in a different franchise. He's not the best actor in the world by any means, but he does the job and he does it well enough for the film to be taken reasonably seriously.
I think that it's important to remember that you're not seeing anything ground- breaking with this film; it's not going to have the same impact as the original Mummy title and it certainly isn't going to steal the show at the Oscars, but it has its moments of adrenaline-pumping action, well-crafted visuals and smart dialogue.
Some of this 1hr 47min Egyptian-fetish flick feels a bit clunky, and the story is all too familiar sounding (disturbing an ancient evil which comes back to wreak havoc on everyone), but when you consider that there have been worse Mummy films, 2 to be exact and that Alien Covenant hasn't exactly set the bar for reboots particularly high, The Mummy has its entertainment value, it has its action and suspense, but it also has some cracks in its sarcophagi which will, hopefully, be ironed out when they inevitably make another of these in 2 or so years time.
Not the worst, not the best, but definitely worth watching for a few thrills.
Parental Guidance: Some scary scenes, moments of moderate fantasy horror and bloody violence, language (15+)
89 of 185 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this