"you really are Rick O’Connells son"

Follow @empiremagazine

Forum Home

Register for Free!

Log In

Moderator Tickets

FAQ

Users Online

"you really are Rick O’Connells son"

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> "you really are Rick O’Connells son"

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

"you really are Rick O’Connells son" - 6/8/2008 4:39:41 PM

Jamie1980

Posts: 20
Joined: 20/1/2007
From: London

Oh right he's his son....*noted* This film had some of the worst exposition I've ever heard!

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 31

Disappointing. Dull action sequences. - 6/8/2008 7:03:25 PM

Makman

Posts: 128
Joined: 17/1/2008

I am a big fan of Jet Li, Michelle Yeoh and the first 2 Mummy films. The film's biggest mistake was thinking Rachel Weisz could simply be "replaced" (which works in Batman but NOT here). Another mistake is that Brendan Fraser simply becomes a supporting character (doh!) and all the interesting stunts are given to his charmless son (at least Indy 4 recognised Harrison Ford was the star). The third mistake is not using Jet Li (he was a better villan in Lethal Weapon 4) and the fights with Yeoh and Fraser were badly staged.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 32

Indiana Jones lite. - 6/8/2008 10:11:51 PM

SHARKY123

Posts: 2
Joined: 6/8/2008

I would tend to agree with Empire that The Mummy 3 is certainly not the most original film of the summer. Heck, its note even the best Mummy film ("shock"). However i think the two star rating is a bit silly. If we are to compare The Mummy with that other big adventure film that kicked of the summer, it should be remembered that these are escapist fantasies and should not be taken seriously. The effects were great, the cinematography more so and despite Empire's warnings i enjoyed the father/son relationship between the O'connel's. Much more inticing than the strange pairing of Indy and Shia la la Boef.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 33

- 6/8/2008 10:50:46 PM

umer_ejaz

Posts: 1265
Joined: 9/12/2005

dire in every way possible

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 34

- 6/8/2008 10:51:16 PM

umer_ejaz

Posts: 1265
Joined: 9/12/2005

dire in every way possible

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 35

A Fun Summer Blockbuster - 7/8/2008 11:41:41 AM

Jayofeen

Posts: 13
Joined: 13/3/2007

It's at times like these when I'm glad I go to see movies that reviewers warn us to avoid. I really enjoyed this movie and thought it improved immensely on the "carbon copy of The Mummy" The Mummy Returns. The father-son age difference is a bit laughable, however!

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 36

- 7/8/2008 1:27:25 PM

timbailey60

Posts: 33
Joined: 30/1/2006

I think the reviewer gets it spot on. You can't fault this film for action but is has few of the comic moments from the first 2 Mummy films and ultimately you don't really care. As a sideline, I saw this in a cinema at 7.00pm where there were at least a dozen children aged 4 or under (one was a baby). The problem with the people who certify these fims is that they take no account of the chav mentality of too many parents in this country today.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 37

RE: - 7/8/2008 6:58:07 PM

captainrentboy

Posts: 679
Joined: 16/3/2008
From: South Wales

Went in dreading this movie and expecting the very worst, came out feeling strangely entertained

Just shows you can't always trust reviews, even when there's THIS many out there slandering a particular film.
No it wasn't particularly original, and some of the acting was facking awful, but it still managed to keep my interest . I wasn't yawning or clock watching, and that's normally a good sign.
The effects were largely impressive (Bar the Emporer's initial imprisonment, terrible mud/clay effects), the action scenes were pretty groovy especially the lengthy chariot section, and Fraser was just being Fraser but I didn't find him that annoying, unlike bloody Bello.
A 3/5 from me, and if I'm to be honest with myself I found this just as watchable as Indy's latest adventure.

But wait, there was one HUUUUGE crime, the fight scenes were absolute shite, I've never been so underwhelmed watching two highly acclaimed martial arts stars duking it out as I was watching Li and Yeoh in this film.
And to think, I bloody love the fights in Dragon: Bruce Lee Story.

(in reply to timbailey60)

Post #: 38

RE: RE: - 7/8/2008 10:28:00 PM

mike2005

Posts: 126
Joined: 2/10/2005
From: The Phantom Zone

You know if you go out, get really drunk, can't remember what happened and then several days later you start getting flashbacks?

The Mummy 3 was a similar experience, without the flashbacks.

_____________________________

I go to pieces so fast that people get hit by the shrapnel.

(in reply to captainrentboy)

Post #: 39

So dire it's unbelievable - 7/8/2008 11:23:00 PM

Mistoxx

Posts: 1
Joined: 7/8/2008

This film didn't deserve the second star Empire gave it, for such a well cast film it's absolutely abysmal.
Among the huge number of things that made this film so bad, the script was definitely the worst for me; Jonathon, who in the previous films had been so funny has now resorted to swearing and most of his gags consisted of "son of a bitch". Maria Bello, who I normally rate as an actress was absolutely awful and every attempt at being funny failed miserably, she played an entirely different character to what Evie was before, in fact all except Jonathon did the same.
There is so much more, including the predictable and boring storyline, which made this film so awful and I was hugely disappointed as I loved the first two, I can't believe they've done this to the Mummy franchise and it was more of a waste of my time than Peter Jackson's King Kong.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 40

Very Poor... - 7/8/2008 11:57:58 PM

DancesWithWolves12

Posts: 17
Joined: 3/11/2005

The fact that I started the evening wanting to watch TDK on the imax rather than watch this drivel displayes my contempt for this sequel. ( Can't believe that TDK is still selling out on Imax ) The biggest mistake is pushing the lead to a supporting role. The first Mummy excelled due to Brendan Fraser, quips and charm carrying the movie. The second was good apart from the ending, I mean commmmmmmmon, the mummy's love interest sacrifices herself in the first so she can be with him yet runs to save herself in the second....yeh rite! Mario Bello should have tried her own take on the role rather than imitate Rachel Weize and the son was plain annoying!! Anyone else notice the name of the Casino Johnathan owned...Imhotep..

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 41

RE: Very Poor... - 8/8/2008 11:05:26 PM

Starscream

Posts: 5222
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Cats Lair

It's on a par with the other two in the series but one of its main problems is Maria Bello who isn't a patch on Rachel Weisz and uses one of the most irriating English accent i've seen in film. Also Brendan Frasier son in the movie looks more like his younger brother. Overall a decent popcorn movie that is cheesy and loaded with plotholes. Turn brain off and enjoy

_____________________________

The allspark will be mine!

(in reply to DancesWithWolves12)

Post #: 42

A bit - 9/8/2008 6:43:05 PM

mickey820

Posts: 40
Joined: 8/10/2007

shit to be honest......the first two were much better

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 43

A bit - 9/8/2008 6:43:20 PM

mickey820

Posts: 40
Joined: 8/10/2007

shit to be honest......the first two were much better

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 44

interviews - 10/8/2008 10:34:16 AM

BigBad

Posts: 6
Joined: 2/6/2006

Just watched the interviews and some of the scenes of the film look better than what we get to see in the trailers. But the Interviewer is completely out of his league - no charisma. Sorry C Hewitt.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 45

- 10/8/2008 11:33:58 AM

dicky chip

Posts: 13
Joined: 28/4/2006

number threes in films are always pretty bad (with the exception of Alien 3 which i liked as a stand alone film..sorry guys !), with that in my mind i thought i should check it out anyways... ignore the bad reviews ,keep an open mind ,but i found it hard to engage in the characters , there was no chemistry between Brenden Fraser and Maria Bello ,the script was dreadful and the action sequences were confusing and hard to watch (wobbly cameras sometimes missing the action shots completely)..going back to Brendon there were a few moments when i thought he was SO bored that he would just run off the set..(only to be stopped by security at the exit of the sound stage holding and pointing to his contract), the special effects were at times pretty cool ..but i just kept thinking how such a great idea for a sequel was totally wasted and mishandled ,it reminded me of the Time Machine remake a few years back ..so spectacularly bad it should win some kind of an award.I think Empire was very generous to give it 2 stars, .I'm going to watch it again when it comes out on DVD because I'm still in denial oh well another great franchise goes into the dumper...sniff! still got Hellboy 2 to look forward to. ;-)

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 46

RE: The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor - 10/8/2008 12:53:46 PM

jabbathehutt

Posts: 52
Joined: 25/5/2008

"But most of the film�s problems stem from its clunker of a script, by Alfred Gough and Miles Millar, riddled with clunky exposition, wafer-thin characters and plot developments that should be a giddy, pulpy delight, but which instead feel cold and devoid of real inspiration."

Really Empire, that quote belongs in the review of "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull"
The film isn't haf as bad as everyone says it is. It goes along at a nice pace and the father-son relationship was much better handled than that in Indy 4. Like the whole film anyway.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 47

RE: typical british - 10/8/2008 12:56:56 PM

jabbathehutt

Posts: 52
Joined: 25/5/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: Guchmeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: HarryHavoc

slagging it off before we've even seen or done something.
Oh this is just another reveiw which people will relate to indiana jones. BOOOORIIIINNNNGG.

I agree. How come Indy seems to be dragged into the discussion of every new action movie that comes out at the moment (usually in a negative context)?

I think comparisions with Indy are right on the spot here. The Mummy series was always acused of ripping off Indy. Now, that they manged to come out in the same summer, it's pretty obvious people are going to compare them.

(in reply to Guchmeister)

Post #: 48

RE: The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor - 10/8/2008 2:48:00 PM

ED-209

Posts: 239
Joined: 3/10/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: jabbathehutt

"But most of the film's problems stem from its clunker of a script, by Alfred Gough and Miles Millar, riddled with clunky exposition, wafer-thin characters and plot developments that should be a giddy, pulpy delight, but which instead feel cold and devoid of real inspiration."

Really Empire, that quote belongs in the review of "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull"
The film isn't haf as bad as everyone says it is. It goes along at a nice pace and the father-son relationship was much better handled than that in Indy 4. Like the whole film anyway.

I enjoyed both Indy IV AND The Mummy 3 so I'm happy. For me, they were both great examples of pure, nonsensical, escapist fun! The amount of negativity surrounding them (especially Indy IV) is quite disheartening.

< Message edited by ED-209 -- 10/8/2008 2:49:08 PM >

(in reply to jabbathehutt)

Post #: 49

The mummy what happens - 10/8/2008 9:15:52 PM

miksvids

Posts: 3
Joined: 14/9/2006

I was not sure about this but thought i would give it a go. On tv the night i went to see this they happened to show the first mummy film at tea time. So i thought i'd watch it just to remind me and yes it's still a good adventure. I then went to watch this. Well, it starts off not to bad. But after the part with the plane on the edge of the cliff and then the snow creatures (don't want to spoil the what the **** moment) when you see it in the cinema. This film is a let down and i will not be watching it again.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 50

Fun But Missing Charm. - 11/8/2008 2:18:36 PM

joanna likes films

Posts: 987
Joined: 27/10/2007
From: Bexhill

I liked The Mummy and The Mummy Returns so when I found there will be a third one, I was a little worried that not only Stephan Sommers wasn't directing to be replaced with someone else but Rachel Weisz was not coming back. I saw it today and it was ok but missing a hell load of charm that the first two had. Maria Bello has a really annoying British accent and she wasn't on the screen yet, Jet Li isn't frightening and had a stupid ponytail and John Hannah was majorly pushed at the back. But Brendan Fraser still has the charm, though he looked a little too old for a short haircut. Luke Ford is a hit for young female teens, they will love him! The special effects and the fight scenes are jaw-dropping but the plot was a little loose and the jokes werrn't laugh-out loud funny. In all, a great film to go and see other than the Dark Knight.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 51

RE: Fun But Missing Charm. - 12/8/2008 12:15:28 AM

darth silas

Posts: 4949
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: My living room

Empire,you have some cheek to give this film only two stars and Kingdom of the crystal bolloks four.This was TEN times more entertaining than Indy 4.Terrific non stop action adventure from start to finish.Sure,its a little cheesy at times,Mario bello isnt as good as Rachel weisz but is still likeable and like many others have said,the father/son relatioship was better handled than the Indy/Mutt one.

The action in this movie leaves Indy 4 standing(not hard i know),and all in all,the film was a great ride.It was every bit as entertaining as the first two flicks.

Messers Speilberg,Ford,and Lucas,hang your head in shame.The pretenders have nicked the throne out from under you.

4/5.

< Message edited by darth silas -- 12/8/2008 12:16:38 AM >

_____________________________

Star Wars:Episodes 1,2,3,4,5,6.Taken together they are one giant movie and it is the greatest movie EVER.

(in reply to joanna likes films)

Post #: 52

RE: Fun But Missing Charm. - 12/8/2008 2:13:07 PM

krudler

Posts: 7018
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: joanna likes films

I liked The Mummy and The Mummy Returns so when I found there will be a third one, I was a little worried that not only Stephan Sommers wasn't directing to be replaced with someone else but Rachel Weisz was not coming back. I saw it today and it was ok but missing a hell load of charm that the first two had. Maria Bello has a really annoying British accent and she wasn't on the screen yet, Jet Li isn't frightening and had a stupid ponytail and John Hannah was majorly pushed at the back. But Brendan Fraser still has the charm, though he looked a little too old for a short haircut. Luke Ford is a hit for young female teens, they will love him! The special effects and the fight scenes are jaw-dropping but the plot was a little loose and the jokes werrn't laugh-out loud funny. In all, a great film to go and see other than the Dark Knight.

thats what made me immediately interested in seeing this, Sommers is the worst hack in hollywood

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Squidward Hark Bugle

3D moving images are not films, they're holograms, and should be treated as a separate medium of storytelling, or artform.

(in reply to joanna likes films)

Post #: 53

- 12/8/2008 6:47:19 PM

Dr Lenera

Posts: 3471
Joined: 19/10/2005

More satisfying then Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull [probably because expectations are a lot lower] and more fun then The Dark Knight, this is an entertainingly stupid adventure that throws in everything from Yetis to Lost Horizon's Shangri-La. Maria Bello is a poor replacement for Rachel Weisz, there's too much exposition, little makes sense-- in fact portions appear to have been made up as they went along-and the Jet Li/Michelle Yeoh fight is over almost immediately, but it still succeeds as great fun escapism with two great action scenes- a car/chariot chase and a battle betwen two undead armies, CG that, gasp, is generally pretty good, and father/son stuff that easily beats Indys. Maybe more fun than it is good, but that's almost enough. here.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 54

- 12/8/2008 6:47:23 PM

Dr Lenera

Posts: 3471
Joined: 19/10/2005

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 55

Mummy 3 - 13/8/2008 10:30:41 AM

D.J.Facey

Posts: 2
Joined: 12/8/2008
From: England

Well i saw this with a very open mind, it got really bad reviews but i thought i might as well see it because i love the other mummy films so much... But sadly its lost its touch, i mean everything is different, the cast the director, the writers, i know they say change is a good thing but not in this case.
Okay there are some funny bits and good action scenes but over all not excellent, the mummy 3 has definatly lost its touch, but i still did enjoy watching it (as i do with all films) and i would see this film again, because i love its humour,and adventures but its definatly not as good as the other mummys, but overall not a bad attempt to bring the past back alive again.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 56

RE: Mummy 3 - 13/8/2008 6:39:09 PM

DJ Rob C: Mark II!

Posts: 34811
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Christmas town

Decent fun, pretty forgettable and the plot seems rushed, but Fraser and Hannah are great fun and it's an enjoyable ride

3/5

_____________________________

When Gotham is ashes, you have my permission to die

Third Highest Post Count on the Forum, sad but proud!

(in reply to D.J.Facey)

Post #: 57

RE: Mummy 3 - 14/8/2008 9:36:34 PM

mafyou

Posts: 2565
Joined: 23/11/2005

If Hannah wasn't in this i wouldn't even have bothered to go. But as it is, the time passed quickly and although there was a lot of things that were pretty obvious it was light entertainment. Not as good as the other two but still fun.

_____________________________

Et In Arcadia Ego

(in reply to DJ Rob C: Mark II!)

Post #: 58

simply boring - 15/8/2008 10:05:23 AM

relinquo

Posts: 2
Joined: 15/8/2008

fails to be entertaining in the slightest. not tongue-in-cheak enough to be funny and not novel in any way.
simply not fun

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 59

simply boring - 15/8/2008 10:05:25 AM

relinquo

Posts: 2
Joined: 15/8/2008

fails to be entertaining in the slightest. not tongue-in-cheak enough to be funny and not novel in any way.
simply not fun