lighten up!!!

Rating: 8/10 (5 May 2001)

I have been reading the abysmal reviews this movie is getting with amazement. Since when did swashbuckling fun have to be high art? I am convinced that Stephen Somers did something evil in a past life to deserve such a poor reception. The original received a similar critical response which is what kept me from it. Then when I viewed it recentley, I wondered if I had seen the same movie these critics had thrashed. Luckily the public didn't buy it, and it doesn't look like they're scared away this time. I thought for the moviegoer that might be a bit scared, I would like do address some of the critics complaints
1. The plot is too convoluted: This is not a particularly hard plot to follow, though it has many twists. while it is not a masterful work of logic that keeps you guessing, it gives the movie many venues for it's great action sequences. The back story of the Mummy is actually quite sad and touching, and if you are willing to just let it wash over you and not over-analyze, then you will find it quite enjoyable.
2. It rips off from nearly every movie ever made: This has a bit more merit, but still is misunderstood. The movie makes many homages to adventure movies including Braveheart, The Lost World, Gladiator, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, and all of the Indiana Jones movies. The large battle sequences echo Braveheart when two charging armies collide in a crunching of steel, wood, and flesh. But come on Mel, what did you expect? That shot is waaaay too cool to be in just one movie. The Crouching Tiger references are the new pet Falcon of Oded Fehr's character, and the multi-weapon girlfights between Rachel Weisz and Patricia Velasquez. These are subtle at best. There is one scene which almost criminally rips off the tall grass raptor scene in the Lost World. however it improves upon it. Unlike the lost world, there are two opposing groups walking through the tall grass with the hidden nasties in it, trying to find each other, one character is trying to find another that has been taken captive, two adversaries are sword deuling, and two snipers are trying to help their friends.... you get the idea. it improves upon the scene by adding elements and handling it well.
3. it is mindless: it is not. it is actually quite intelligent as is the original. it takes time to poke fun at itself. it never loses the sense that the audience KNOWS that none of this could happen and is able to appeal to that sense.
4. Brendan Fraser is not an action hero - I couldn't disagree more. Action hero's don't have to look like Arnold Schwarzenegger or Sylvester Stallone to be believable. Fraser channels a mix between two of the best action heroes around; Harrison Ford and Bruce Willis. He has Ford's sense of dignity and believable heroism mixed with Willis's dry sense of humor. Also I guarantee you that Brendan Fraser is in much better physical shape than either of the two ever were.
so there it is. It's a great popcorn popper, and no matter what the critics say, I can almost guarantee you will leave the theatre with a smile on your face.