Skip to main content

What was Roger Ebert smoking?

I love The Mummy. I love Jet Li. I was sorry to miss The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor when it was in the theater. So I bought it on DVD.

On the front it says, "The BEST in the SERIES!" - Roger Ebert.

Cool beans, says I.

But now I have to ask, what was the man smoking?

It was horrible!

Firstly, and I apologize to Maria Bello, but Evie was badly cast, badly written, and pathetically directed. Gone, gone, gone was the combination of vulnerability and stubbornness that made Evie so wonderful. The only thing Evie did well in this movie was the fight scenes.

The Evie who gloriously proclaimed "I am a librarian!" was replaced by a woman who wrote sexy stories about their mummy adventures and wanted to write another one to read to adoring fans. It was so wrong. Evie was into serious inquiry. She'd be writing esoteric, fabulously intricate, scholarly works while not fitting into society much better than her husband Rick. She might have written the romance, but she'd be shy and embarrassed about it. (One wonders, did Rachel Weisz read the script and bail?)

Now, this wrongness about Evie was likely made worse by the fact that some bright-bulb decided that the "human interest" element and arc was to be Rick's estrangement from his son, Alexander. Oh, please! Rick's character is simply not, at all, the sort of aloof male that can't unbend around children. Let Alexander attempt to make his own name as any young man with a famous father might do, no matter how close their relationship, but please let us not take out this old saw and substitute it for plot!

Now, the action plot wasn't bad. It had it's moments but all in all it was a fun action plot.

What made the movie hard to watch was how any glimmer of human interaction was destroyed by the dialog. I can think of only a handful of moments that were "real"... the looks between the witch and general... Alexander wanting to go back after Chinese members of his archaeology crew that had been killed... Alexander's first eye contact with Lin (but nothing after that)... the smile of understanding after the witch asked her daughter to sacrifice her immortality... the thoughts that crossed the witch's face when she saw a way to recover the special dagger...

And I am deliberately excluding the horrible father-son touchy-feelie moment. (Although Brenden Fraser shirtless is hard to beat.)

Too much of the dialog was artificial bob-talk. "As you know Bob, or as you can't possibly know, but in any case we must inform the audience... I have the dagger which is the only possible way to kill the Emperor." The dialog over personal matters seemed just as contrived.

While double checking character names and spellings I came across this review that suggests it would have been better to have had Evie die than to replace her with a different actor. I concur. It would also have given father and son a personal story more compelling than trying to pass Rick O'Connell off as an uninvolved father. It *also* would have resonated tremendously with the witch's thousands of years of mourning her dead lover and her daughter's reluctance to let herself love Alexander because she'd have to watch him die and couldn't bear it.

Comments

Big Mike said…
Good Golly, Synova, we're soul-mates.

Popular posts from this blog

Some times some people.

 

It's Not Projection

Take the case of "fascism". When you can see clear as day that the person who is accusing you of fascism is a fascist, they aren't projecting. They're talking about something ELSE. Basically, in the case of fascism, the basic set of fascist government controls are the default assumption of reality for a whole lot of people. The government is supposed to control every part of your life. The government is supposed to make you moral and good and reflect "justice". The government is supposed to do this by picking winners from the good people and losers from the bad people. The government is supposed to control the way people do business, how businesses (and farmers) function and what they produce. And people should be made to cooperate with this control because they are part of society and society is dependent on everyone being in compliance. This is simply the Truth. It's how the world works and how the world is supposed to work. The Socialist Nationalism, ...

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it.  This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action   that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice.  If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...