The Mummy Starring Tom Cruise

[Calighoula]

Dracula, Frankenstein, Mummy, Wolfman. Rinse and repeat. How many freakin' regurgitations must we wade through to get back to the Black Lagoon?

I like Sofia Boutella, but this movie doesn't interest me.

[Vanguard-01]

Dracula, Frankenstein, Mummy, Wolfman. Rinse and repeat. How many freakin' regurgitations must we wade through to get back to the Black Lagoon?

I like Sofia Boutella, but this movie doesn't interest me.

To be fair? Dracula, Frankenstein, The Mummy, and the Wolfman are probably a lot more iconic and well-known that the Creature from the Black Lagoon.

Dracula is based on a classic novel, not to mention the plethora of vampire lore that has captured human imagination for centuries. Frankenstein is also based on a classic novel and also speaks to a primal human fear. The Mummy is rooted in classical mythology. The Wolfman? Also rooted in legends humanity has been telling and re-telling for centuries.

The Creature is a relative newcomer to the horror world, so it stands to reason that it might have to take a back seat to these other films that are much more of a "sure thing" when attempting to build a shared universe. Dracula has been selling movies for decades. So has the Wolfman. So has the Mummy (though admittedly, it's a newer development.) So has Frankenstein. The Creature hasn't really sold a movie in quite some time. From a business perspective, it makes sense to go with the proven earners first.

[Daryl]

I'd watch this at home on TV, probably.

[Elmo]

Creature from the Black Lagoon is getting a movie in this universe.

[TheInvisibleMan]

why the Lagoon gotta be BLACK???

[Midvillian1322]

Dracula, Frankenstein, Mummy, Wolfman. Rinse and repeat. How many freakin' regurgitations must we wade through to get back to the Black Lagoon?

I like Sofia Boutella, but this movie doesn't interest me.

Isnt there also a invisible man starring Depp?

[AdamFTF]

I'm keeping my fingers crossed here but I'm not all that confident.

If they're going to do this, then they're going to have to understand character and they're going to have to understand tragedy. And they're going to have to understand that one of the things that sells the Universal Monsters as a concept is the fact that you kind of sympathize with the monster.

They can't just slap the names on some movies when it's not even close to the same thing. I still feel kind of burned by Van Helsing. I went in wanting to see how they handled my favorite classic horror character, poor Lawrence Talbot aka the Wolf Man and they gave me . . . Velkan Valerios, the gypsy prince. He may have been a werewolf, but that doesn't mean he's the Wolf Man. I'm not too stressed about the Mummy because there are already two different mummies in those movies: Imhotep and Kharis. But the thing that is important is the motivation. With the Mummy, it was always about someone who couldn't give up on love until it turned obsessive and toxic after a few thousand years.

I'm wishing them luck with this whole endeavor, but I am being very cautious.

[Da Boat]

Please be good, Please be good. I want a good Universal Monsters franchise Goddamit! We have Russel Crowe, possibly Johnny Depp, don't screw this up. (btw, as anybody noticed that in a lot of recent Cruise movies, he always has an action female version of himself with him, is it a message? lol)

So does tom cruise have abilities of some kind or did Dr jackyl just bring him back from the dead im so confused. Looked good but not sure why yom cruise is alive in the morgue. Maybe he was brough back by some egyptian god who wants the princess stopped. Iono just wondering if im missing something.

That's a good question. They want to mimick Marvel, super-heroing it, so he will probably get powers from it? Maybe they will do the reverse Mummy concept whereas usually it's a male Mummy that wakes up and realise that a present day female is his true love, here we could have female Mummy looking for her true love with Cruise being a reincarnation of him and getting similar powers to her.

Universal officially announced yesterday that Dracula Untold is no longer a part of the universe.

Good. That means we could get a terrifying new Dracula in the future, no goody goody. They should get Mark Strong.

[batnbreakfast]

I don't know if it can get more formulaic than The Mummy. No, just no. I'd rather rewatch other movies. A new Transformers style universe is (still)born.

[Calighoula]

To be fair? Dracula, Frankenstein, The Mummy, and the Wolfman are probably a lot more iconic and well-known that the Creature from the Black Lagoon.

Tell that to fans of the entire UM clan. The Creature IS one of the most iconic film monsters ever.

Dracula is based on a classic novel, not to mention the plethora of vampire lore that has captured human imagination for centuries. Frankenstein is also based on a classic novel and also speaks to a primal human fear. The Mummy is rooted in classical mythology. The Wolfman? Also rooted in legends humanity has been telling and re-telling for centuries.

That these characters have their origins in mythology and literature is not the problem. The problem remains all the crappy movies that continue to roll down the conveyor. It's called overkill.

The Creature is a relative newcomer to the horror world, so it stands to reason that it might have to take a back seat to these other films that are much more of a "sure thing" when attempting to build a shared universe. Dracula has been selling movies for decades. So has the Wolfman. So has the Mummy (though admittedly, it's a newer development.) So has Frankenstein. The Creature hasn't really sold a movie in quite some time. From a business perspective, it makes sense to go with the proven earners first.

Disagree. The Creature/Gill-Man is way, way overdue for a legit return. We have been getting movies about vampires and lycanthropes and Frankenstein's monster for years. Not all of them do well, and some don't deserve to exist. Dracula Untold flopped stateside but made back some money (and a little profit) overseas. Dracula 2000 (which starred pre-popularity Gerard Butler as Drac) spawned a couple sequels—not Dracula 3000...that's a separate production! Multiple shows based on the Count have been attempted, along with a made-for-cable movie ten years ago. Even Dario Argento made a Dracula movie a couple years back! I, Frankenstein? Sucked (there was potential). Van Helsing? Sucked. Sommers' & Cohen's Mummy movies? Sucked. That Underworld crap? Don't get me started.

Enough. Give those characters a break, and bring back the Creature. Believe me, his return is both anticipated and expected.

[GreenLanternRanger]

I may give it a chance, not a tom cruise fan, but I enjoyed the late 90's Mummy movie as a kid, so even though this is a lot different i'll give it a shot, though might wait till its on Netflix or HBO or what not.

[The Cool Thatguy]

So what's the point of a shared monster-verse canon?

I mean, we all knew the solo Avenger movies would lead to a team up. But the mummy, dracula et all are bad guys, so...they team up to what end?

[Darth Godzilla]

Tell that to fans of the entire UM clan. The Creature IS one of the most iconic film monsters ever.



That these characters have their origins in mythology and literature is not the problem. The problem remains all the crappy movies that continue to roll down the conveyor. It's called overkill.



Disagree. The Creature/Gill-Man is way, way overdue for a legit return. We have been getting movies about vampires and lycanthropes and Frankenstein's monster for years. Not all of them do well, and some don't deserve to exist. Dracula Untold flopped stateside but made back some money (and a little profit) overseas. Dracula 2000 (which starred pre-popularity Gerard Butler as Drac) spawned a couple sequels—not Dracula 3000...that's a separate production! Multiple shows based on the Count have been attempted, along with a made-for-cable movie ten years ago. Even Dario Argento made a Dracula movie a couple years back! I, Frankenstein? Sucked (there was potential). Van Helsing? Sucked. Sommers' & Cohen's Mummy movies? Sucked. That Underworld crap? Don't get me started.

Enough. Give those characters a break, and bring back the Creature. Believe me, his return is both anticipated and expected.

They'll do a Creature, he's one of the iconic Universal Monsters, and unlikel a good deal of the others they created him.

[Darth Godzilla]

So what's the point of a shared monster-verse canon?

I mean, we all knew the solo Avenger movies would lead to a team up. But the mummy, dracula et all are bad guys, so...they team up to what end?

You know Universal had their Monsters crossing each other back in the '40s?

[Vanguard-01]

You know Universal had their Monsters crossing each other back in the '40s?

Yep. In all technicality, Universal was the first movie studio to ever introduce the idea of a shared universe.

As for whether we'll se a teamup? Who knows? Maybe they'll just oppose each other. Maybe some larger threat forces them to band together. Maybe humanity becomes aware of them and tries to destroy all monsters and the story begs the question of "With whom do we side?" Notice that the Mummy is set in modern times and she's not exactly trying to keep a low profile? There's no way the world won't know about what is about to happen in London.