Skip to main content

Right, she's a reincarnated princess and I'm a warrior for God?


The Mummy Returns
(2001)

And this time they’ve brought their kid! Somehow, my previous encounter with this movie (at the cinema) did not leave an indelible memory of the smart-talking, trash-mouth brat in Stephen Sommers atrocious sequel. That might be because the main impact was borne by the deluge of hyperactive CGI, often of indefensibly poor quality.

The first film is passable in an empty-headed, frenetic way. But the sequel takes everything about it that was borderline annoying and ups it to relentlessly abusive levels. It’s a wearisome, tension-free experience, in which the residing ethos is “the more special effects there are, the better the resulting film must be”. Of which, they start off looking crudely “epic” (computer-generated vistas set in pharoaic times) but by the third act nothing passes muster. It’s a wonder that they considered of release standard, but anyone who has seen a Stephen Sommers film knows that he has inverse quality control.

The plot this time, dreamed up yet again by the creatively-challenged auteur, finds Rick (Brendan Fraser) and Evelyn (Rachel Weisz) with an eight-year-old genius son (Freddie Boath, who plays Alex, is miraculously still working) who irritates from his first scene. Few directors have a good understanding of how to portray kids in adventure movies (Spielberg is a notable exception), and this is just further confirmation. Think Last Action Hero levels of smug preciousness and you’ll be close. Directors seem to be under the illusion that kids like to see kids on screen. They don’t. They want to see Indiana Jones, and failing that Rick O’Connell. But definitely not their children.

Sommers was open about Universal demanding a sequel the day after the 1999 film opened to unexpectedly vast returns, but he clearly didn’t have a clue about what to do with it. Imhotep is unearthed, so is his bint. But this time he is required to defeat the fearsome Scorpion King and assume control of his army. Otherwise the Scorpion King will take over the Earth much as Arnold Vosloo threatened to do first time out.

The Scorpion King is introduced in the prologue played by a wrestler taking his first tentative steps into the acting arena. He’ll do pretty well for himself, all told, but this is a stinky introduction (the prequel film is a better prospect). When he returns in the climax, as one of the crummiest CGI creations you’ve seen in a blockbuster movie, you’ll have given up all hope for his career.

Borrowing one of the worst tricks in George Lucas’ storybook-for-beginners, Sommers retcons his main characters as possessing manifest destinies intertwined with Egypt. So Rick suddenly has a scorpion tattoo on his arm while Evelyn has become clairvoyant and aware of a past life in the time of Imhotep. Oh, and the boy is of crucial importance. This is desperately feeble stuff, with Sommers even resort to a girl-on-girl catfight at the climax.

There is no weight to the CGI, or the drama. Where there were torrents of scuttling beetles, now there are waves of scorpions (must be the same computer programme). And waves with faces. And pigmies and airships. It’s all quite exhaustingly poor. Alan Silvestri furnishes the film with a truly lousy score, the sort of blandly generic fare you’d find in a ‘70s family adventure movie. If there were any thrills or tensions to be found in the movie, the composer studiously avoids them. 

None of the actors come out of this with honours. Hannah and Fraser manage to keep their heads above water while spouting Sommers’ tiresomely anachronistic gags. Weisz is stranded with some frightful action chick posturing. Lost’s Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje is at least allowed to show an active distaste for young Alex, so I guess he’s something of an audience surrogate.

*1/2

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

How would Horatio Alger have handled this situation?

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) (SPOILERS) Gilliam’s last great movie – The Zero Theorem (2013) is definitely underrated, but I don’t think it’s that underrated – Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas could easily have been too much. At times it is, but in such instances, intentionally so. The combination of a visual stylist and Hunter S Thompson’s embellished, propulsive turn of phrase turns out, for the most part, to be a cosmically aligned affair, embracing the anarchic abandon of Raoul Duke and Doctor Gonzo’s Las Vegas debauch while contriving to pull back at crucial junctures in order to engender a perspective on all this hedonism. Would Alex Cox, who exited stage left, making way for the Python, have produced something interesting? I suspect, ironically, he would have diluted Thompson in favour of whatever commentary preoccupied him at the time (indeed, Johnny Depp said as much: “ Cox had this great material to work with and he took it and he added his own stuff to it ”). Plus

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.

He is a brigand and a lout. Pay him no serious mention.

The Wind and the Lion (1975) (SPOILERS) John Milius called his second feature a boy’s-own adventure, on the basis of the not-so-terrified responses of one of those kidnapped by Sean Connery’s Arab Raisuli. Really, he could have been referring to himself, in all his cigar-chomping, gun-toting reactionary glory, dreaming of the days of real heroes. The Wind and the Lion rather had its thunder stolen by Jaws on release, and it’s easy to see why. As polished as the picture is, and simultaneously broad-stroke and self-aware in its politics, it’s very definitely a throwback to the pictures of yesteryear. Only without the finger-on-the-pulse contemporaneity of execution that would make Spielberg and Lucas’ genre dives so memorable in a few short years’ time.

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

Another case of the screaming oopizootics.

Doctor Who Season 14 – Worst to Best The best Doctor Who season? In terms of general recognition and unadulterated celebration, there’s certainly a strong case to be made for Fourteen. The zenith of Robert Holmes and Philip Hinchcliffe’s plans for the series finds it relinquishing the cosy rapport of the Doctor and Sarah in favour of the less-trodden terrain of a solo adventure and underlying conflict with new companion Leela. More especially, it finds the production team finally stretching themselves conceptually after thoroughly exploring their “gothic horror” template over the course of the previous two seasons (well, mostly the previous one).

You were a few blocks away? What’d you see it with, a telescope?

The Eyes of Laura Mars (1978) (SPOILERS) John Carpenter’s first serial-killer screenplay to get made, The Eyes of Laura Mars came out nearly three months before Halloween. You know, the movie that made the director’s name. And then some. He wasn’t best pleased with the results of The Eyes of Laura Mars, which ended up co-credited to David Zelag Goodman ( Straw Dogs , Logan’s Run ) as part of an attempt by producer Jon Peters to manufacture a star vehicle for then-belle Barbra Streisand: “ The original script was very good, I thought. But it got shat upon ”. Which isn’t sour grapes on Carpenter’s part. The finished movie bears ready evidence of such tampering, not least in the reveal of the killer (different in Carpenter’s conception). Its best features are the so-uncleanly-you-can-taste-it 70s New York milieu and the guest cast, but even as an early example of the sub-genre, it’s burdened by all the failings inherit with this kind of fare.

One final thing I have to do, and then I’ll be free of the past.

Vertigo (1958) (SPOILERS) I’ll readily admit my Hitchcock tastes broadly tend to reflect the “consensus”, but Vertigo is one where I break ranks. To a degree. Not that I think it’s in any way a bad film, but I respect it rather than truly rate it. Certainly, I can’t get on board with Sight & Sound enthroning it as the best film ever made (in its 2012’s critics poll). That said, from a technical point of view, it is probably Hitch’s peak moment. And in that regard, certainly counts as one of his few colour pictures that can be placed alongside his black and white ones. It’s also clearly a personal undertaking, a medley of his voyeuristic obsessions (based on D’entre les morts by Pierre Boileau and Thomas Narcejac).