Skip to main content

You guys are like mummy magnets!


The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor
(2008)

What’s worse, a terrible film or a dull film? There’s always the possibility that a terrible film will end up in the “so bad, it’s entertaining” category. But a dull film is generally a chore to sit through. You become distracted, listless, or nod off. I could barely remember anything about this, apart from the Yetis. The third Mummy film isn’t a horrendous mess in the same way as the second, but it is really boring. On the balances side, so much of Mummy Returns is painfully bad that if came down to a choice of which to suffer again, Dragon Emperor might be the less damaging option.

Despite (or because of; people had the chance to forget how bad Returns was?) Dragon Emperor was a significant (and surprise) hit. Not in the States, where it did about half its predecessors’ business (inflation-adjusted), but worldwide where the total was four times that gross. Brendan Fraser, who has never been a major draw and receives more column inches regarding his level of baldness than his movie career, suddenly found himself with two big hits that year (the other being Journey to the Centre of the Earth). But the status of the production suggested an “anything will do” cash in. Director Stephen Sommers did not return, saying he didn’t think he’d have the energy for another installment. And then Rachel Weisz opted-out, citing her recent birth and script concerns. Nevertheless, the script had been in development since 2005, seeing John Hannah’s character added along the way.

As with Returns, the son of Rick and Evelyn was given a central role; the timeframe leaps 13 years to 1946. Now Alex (Luke Ford) is an archeologist on a dig in China and his parents have reluctantly retired to a stately pile. It isn’t long before they reunite, along with Jonathan, to face a new threat.

The switch of location to China is one of the few original aspects of the film; inspired by the Terracotta Army, the prologue sees Jet Li’s warlord (the titular character) imprisoned by Michelle Yeoh’s sorceress, due to being a nasty piece of work, along with his army (transformed in said Terracotta Army). It’s unfortunate that this sequence is quite good, as it gives a false impression of what’s in store. Jet Li’s Mummy is possibly even less inspired than Arnold Vosloo, and Li doesn’t seem remotely engaged by the material (when you can actually see him in non-CGI form, that is). Yeoh is always appealing but there’s not much here for her, even when the film takes in Shangri-La.

Evelyn has been recast in the form of Maria Bello, a decent actress who seems uneasy here; maybe it was concentrating on the (competent) English accent, but her performance is a bit off (I’m not going to make out that Weisz was some kind of irreplaceable feature of the series, as the character was terribly thin and at best you could say she dampened down the more grating aspects). One of the movie’s few witty moments has Evelyn at a book signing, asked if the novel’s female character is based on her. She replies, “No. I can honestly say she is a completely different person”.

More damaging is Luke Ford, playing Alex as an American this time (and only thirteen/fourteen years younger that Fraser and Bello) and doing it utterly charmlessly. I wouldn’t say he’s quite as annoying as the character’s earlier moptop incarnation, but you wonder if the producers didn’t deliberately intend to piss of the audience. The same year’s Indiana Jones movie at least had the excuse of an aging star who might need to pass the baton to a successor should the series continue. But Fraser hadn’t even turned 40 when the Dragon Emperor came out. And already they’re replicating Sean Connery’s death scene from Last Crusade for him.

Did I mention there are Yetis? Friendly Yetis. I quite liked the Yetis.

The big point in favour of Dragon Emperor is that its look is far superior to Sommers’ movies. The colour palette lacks a post-production sheen, the physical locations are more tangible, there’s a sense of scale; this feels like an adventure movie that actually visited exotic climes, rather than one that spent an extended period on a soundstage (Crystal Skull).

The downside is that Rob Cohen, Sommers’ replacement, is such a disengaged filmmaker. It’s not just a case of director-for-hire; he imbues no energy or vitality into his material. No matter Sommers’ numerous faults, that’s something you could never accuse him of. Cohen’s soulless spectacles (not that kind) are not only personality-free, they are mechanical to the point of actively discouraging involvement with the material. He has the dubious claim to fame of introducing the most unlikely of mega-franchises with The Fast and the Furious but his CV consists mostly of the forgettable (Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story, Dragonheart) or tedious (Daylight, XXX, Stealth). He did much more interesting work as a producer during the ‘80s, truth be told.

Unlike Indy, which staggered on to a fourth installment, this looks like the final ending for Universal’s cheerful knock-off series. There was talk of a further adventure, but the property has now progressed to reboot territory; Jon Spaits (Prometheus) is attached to script it and (a warning sign) Len Wiseman to direct. If not for the latter’s action-orientated involvement, I might have held out hope for something hewing closer to the spirit of Universal’s classic horror roots.

** 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Damn prairie dog burrow!

Tremors (1990) (SPOILERS) I suspect the reason the horror comedy – or the sci-fi comedy, come to that – doesn’t tend to be the slam-dunk goldmine many assume it must be, is because it takes a certain sensibility to do it right. Everyone isn’t a Joe Dante or Sam Raimi, or a John Landis, John Carpenter, Edgar Wright, Christopher Landon or even a Peter Jackson or Tim Burton, and the genre is littered with financial failures, some of them very good failures (and a good number of them from the names mentioned). Tremors was one, only proving a hit on video (hence six sequels at last count). It also failed to make Ron Underwood a directing legend.

Here’s Bloody Justice for you.

Laughter in Paradise (1951) (SPOILERS) The beginning of a comedic run for director-producer Mario Zampa that spanned much of the 1950s, invariably aided by writers Michael Pertwee and Jack Davies (the latter went on to pen a spate of Norman Wisdom pictures including The Early Bird , and also comedy rally classic Monte Carlo or Bust! ) As usual with these Pertwee jaunts, Laughter in Paradise boasts a sparky premise – renowned practical joker bequeaths a fortune to four relatives, on condition they complete selected tasks that tickle him – and more than enough resultant situational humour.

I hate natural causes!

Body Bags (1993) (SPOILERS) I’m not surprised Showtime didn’t pick this up for an anthology series. Perhaps, if John Carpenter had made Coming Home in a Body Bag (the popular Nam movie series referenced in the same year’s True Romance ), we’d have something to talk about. Tho’ probably not, if Carpenter had retained his by this point firmly glued to his side DP Gary Kibbe, ensuring the proceedings are as flat, lifeless and unatmospheric as possible. Carpenter directed two of the segments here, Tobe Hooper the other one. It may sound absurd, given the quality of Hooper’s career, but by this point, even he was calling the shots better than Carpenter.

I'm offering you a half-share in the universe.

Doctor Who Season 8 – Worst to Best I’m not sure I’d watched Season Eight chronologically before. While I have no hesitation in placing it as the second-best Pertwee season, based on its stories, I’m not sure it pays the same dividends watched as a unit. Simply, there’s too much Master, even as Roger Delgado never gets boring to watch and the stories themselves offer sufficient variety. His presence, turning up like clockwork, is inevitably repetitive. There were no particular revelatory reassessments resulting from this visit, then, except that, taken together – and as The Directing Route extra on the Blu-ray set highlights – it’s often much more visually inventive than what would follow. And that Michael Ferguson should probably have been on permanent attachment throughout this era.

Who’s got the Figgy Port?

Loki (2021) (SPOILERS) Can something be of redeemable value and shot through with woke? The two attributes certainly sound essentially irreconcilable, and Loki ’s tendencies – obviously, with new improved super-progressive Kevin Feige touting Disney’s uber-agenda – undeniably get in the way of what might have been a top-tier MCU entry from realising its full potential. But there are nevertheless solid bursts of highly engaging storytelling in the mix here, for all its less cherishable motivations. It also boasts an effortlessly commanding lead performance from Tom Hiddleston; that alone puts Loki head and shoulders above the other limited series thus far.

I’m just glad Will Smith isn’t alive to see this.

The Tomorrow War (2021) (SPOILERS). Not so much tomorrow as yesterday. There’s a strong sense of déjà vu watching The Tomorrow War , so doggedly derivative is it of every time-travel/alien war/apocalyptic sci-fi movie of the past forty years. Not helping it stand out from the pack are doughy lead Chris Pratt, damned to look forever on the beefy side no matter how ripped he is and lacking the chops or gravitas for straight roles, and debut live-action director Chris McKay, who manages to deliver the goods in a serviceably anonymous fashion.

Why don't we go on a picnic, up the hill?

Invaders from Mars (1986) (SPOILERS) One can wax thematical over the number of remakes of ’50s movies in the ’80s – and ’50s SF movies in particular – and of how they represent ever-present Cold War and nuclear threats, and steadily increasing social and familial paranoias and disintegrating values. Really, though, it’s mostly down to the nostalgia of filmmakers for whom such pictures were formative influences (and studios hoping to make an easy buck on a library property). Tobe Hooper’s version of nostalgia, however, is not so readily discernible as a John Carpenter or a David Cronenberg (not that Cronenberg could foment such vibes, any more than a trip to the dental hygienist). Because his directorial qualities are not so readily discernible. Tobe Hooper movies tend to be a bit shit. Which makes it unsurprising that Invaders from Mars is a bit shit.

What's a movie star need a rocket for anyway?

The Rocketeer (1991) (SPOILERS) The Rocketeer has a fantastic poster. One of the best of the last thirty years (and while that may seem like faint praise, what with poster design being a dying art – I’m looking at you Marvel, or Amazon and the recent The Tomorrow War – it isn’t meant to be). The movie itself, however, tends towards stodge. Unremarkable pictures with a wide/cult fanbase, conditioned by childhood nostalgia, are ten-a-penny – Willow for example – and in this case, there was also a reasonably warm critical reception. But such an embrace can’t alter that Joe Johnston makes an inveterately bland, tepid movie director. His “feel” for period here got him The First Avenger: Captain America gig, a bland, tepid movie tending towards stodge. So at least he’s consistent.

Hey, my friend smells amazing!

Luca (2021) (SPOILERS) Pixar’s first gay movie ? Not according to director Enrico Cassarosa (“ This was really never in our plans. This was really about their friendship in that kind of pre-puberty world ”). Perhaps it should have been, as that might have been an excuse – any excuse is worth a shot at this point – for Luca being so insipid and bereft of spark. You know, the way Soul could at least claim it was about something deep and meaningful as a defence for being entirely lacking as a distinctive and creatively engaging story in its own right.

As in the hokey kids’ show guy?

A Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood (2019) (SPOILERS) I don’t think Mr Rogers could have been any creepier had Kevin Spacey played him. It isn’t just the baggage Tom Hanks brings, and whether or not he’s the adrenochrome lord to the stars and/or in Guantanamo and/or dead and/or going to make a perfectly dreadful Colonel Tom Parker and an equally awful Geppetto; it’s that his performance is so constipated and mannered an imitation of Mr Rogers’ genuineness that this “biopic” takes on a fundamentally sinister turn. His every scene with a youngster isn’t so much exuding benevolent empathy as suggestive of Chitty Chitty Bang Bang ’s Child Catcher let loose in a TV studio (and again, this bodes well for Geppetto). Extend that to A Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood ’s conceit, that Mr Rogers’ life is one of a sociopathic shrink milking angst from his victims/patients in order to get some kind of satiating high – a bit like a rejuvenating drug, on that score – and you have a deeply unsettli