I heard they're going to remake The Mummy for 2014. All we know is the director and the writer. They're so-so.
Do you guys think it should be like the action movie from 1999, or should it be more like a horror movie like in 1932?
Printable View
I heard they're going to remake The Mummy for 2014. All we know is the director and the writer. They're so-so.
Do you guys think it should be like the action movie from 1999, or should it be more like a horror movie like in 1932?
Quote:
Originally Posted by I, Da ??$h???
I personally like the one from 1932 more so i kind of want it to be more like that.
I would want it to be Action/Horror film
I don't think it's time to remake Mummy considering 1999 was kinda recent, not to mention all the sequels (The latest sequel was out in 2008). So I believe it's too new to remake. Plus just the thought of remaking a remake makes me sick.
Once a remake/reboot comes around, it should be a combination of horror and action. The Mummy as just a horror, I think won't work. It would take A LOT for it to be a GOOD horror. I personally love "the Mummy" from 1999. I thought it was well done. The Mummy taking an active role against the protagonist was really really great.
http://content8.flixster.com/movie/1...167406_det.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by BobbyBobber
I agree, but I am saying, it's been done before.
The only reason why that Spiderman movie is acceptable is because of how badly #3 was.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Godfather
[quote=Dead.Pool.Castiel]The only reason why that Spiderman movie is acceptable is because of how badly #3 was.[/quote:jnymkjn4]Quote:
Originally Posted by "The Godfather":jnymkjn4
In my opinion, the Mummy sequels are equally as shitty.
I don't think I saw the 2008 one, but The first and 2nd I enjoyed.
The 3rd one is set in China. Think about it. Mummies. In China. I saw it and walked out a disappointed man. I agree, the second is ok. IMO, the second one is mediocre. I enjoyed it, got my money's worth, but the 3rd, :brick:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead.Pool.Castiel
Sounds like they Spidermanned it.
No, Castiel. They Superman'ed itQuote:
Originally Posted by Dead.Pool.Castiel
(I think Superman 3/4 are worse than Spiderman 3)
[quote=The Godfather]No, Castiel. They Superman'ed itQuote:
Originally Posted by "Dead.Pool.Castiel":1ofrxwqj
(I think Superman 3/4 are worse than Spiderman 3)[/quote:1ofrxwqj]
Anything Superman is fucking terrible(to me, cause I think Superman is the dumbest Super Hero ever).
[quote=Dead.Pool.Castiel][quote="The Godfather":30q2sxq7]No, Castiel. They Superman'ed itQuote:
Originally Posted by "Dead.Pool.Castiel":30q2sxq7
(I think Superman 3/4 are worse than Spiderman 3)[/quote:30q2sxq7]
Anything Superman is fucking terrible(to me, cause I think Superman is the dumbest Super Hero ever).[/quote:30q2sxq7]
I agree with that, but I think the first two Superman movies were good, because of the villains and the supporting characters. Not for titular character.
[quote=The Godfather][quote="Dead.Pool.Castiel":ps2e5ioq][quote="The Godfather":ps2e5ioq]No, Castiel. They Superman'ed itQuote:
Originally Posted by "Dead.Pool.Castiel":ps2e5ioq
(I think Superman 3/4 are worse than Spiderman 3)[/quote:ps2e5ioq]
Anything Superman is fucking terrible(to me, cause I think Superman is the dumbest Super Hero ever).[/quote:ps2e5ioq]
I agree with that, but I think the first two Superman movies were good, because of the villains and the supporting characters. Not for titular character.[/quote:ps2e5ioq]
Ive NEVER heard of a good Superman movie. Sad since Superman is such a good hero.
[quote=BobbyBobber][quote=The Godfather][quote="Dead.Pool.Castiel":22lzx93x]Anything Superman is fucking terrible(to me, cause I think Superman is the dumbest Super Hero ever).[/quote:22lzx93x]Quote:
Originally Posted by "The Godfather":22lzx93x
I agree with that, but I think the first two Superman movies were good, because of the villains and the supporting characters. Not for titular character.[/quote:22lzx93x]
Ive NEVER heard of a good Superman movie. Sad since Superman is such a good hero.[/quote:22lzx93x]
The first two by Richard Donner are pretty good. Back then, they were like the Christopher Nolan Batman movies, till the first Batman movie came out.
Superman is not a good hero. Nearly invincible except for a couple of weaknesses? If he were a villain sure, but as a Hero not a good idea.
Spider-Man 1 and 2 were awesome, same with Superman 1 and 2, Superman 3 was okay if you're drunk, 4 was just awful, Spider-Man 3 was a huge disappointment (where the Hell is Enter Sandman by Metallica?), the idea of a mash-genre is really good since just a straight up horror or action wouldn't be taken very seriously, Superman is a shit hero who can be done well, I absolutely love the 1932 movie and I even have a soft spot for The Mummy's Tomb from 1942, I hate all the new Mummy movies except Mummy Returns (that one was fun) but I respect people who like the series because they are so popular, but yeah most people hate Tomb of the Dragon Emperor and rightfully so.
^run on sentence FTW.