Amusing Desert Confection

Rating: Null/10 (11 May 2001)

To all the critics out there who tirelessly condemn everything to prove their own frightfully sophisticated sensibilities, I offer this:
"You, LIGHTEN UP!"
I saw this movie this evening. I laughed. I was amused by the bright, shiny, golden images of an idealized ancient Egypt. I marveled at the speed and ballet-like precision of the battles between our yin/yang princesses. Vosloo is a kick. Oden is an honor-driven delight to watch. (Sure, the annoying parasite brother really should be fed to scarabs, but we can always hold out hope for the inevitable sequel, yes?) Weiss has crafted a character that is actually interesting (something which eluded her in the Mummy.) Fraser is a joy to watch (I still can't decide which is my favorite Fraser performance: Gods and Monsters or George of the Junglehmmm.)
I enjoyed the over-the-top camp style, and yes, I found many of the CGI effects to be amusingwhich does not mean that I did not find many of the CGI effects gratuitous, overblown and unbelievable. Plot? Something about a second apocalypse and scorpions. Who cares? The movie is gorgeous, its stars engaging, the tone light, the action dazzling and the obvious purpose is to entertain.
I had a great time at this film. Why? Because I allowed myself to sit back and take the daring mental stand to enjoy itfor what it is. It ain't high art, folks. Don't condemn it for not being something it isn't. It never presumes to be, yet reading through the undeservedly scathing reviews I'm reading online, so many are disappointed that it has not reinvented filmmaking. It is a big, blowsy, overblown summer action flick. Is it perfect, the best movie I've ever seen? No, by no means. Did I get my $8 out of it? Absolutely. Is there too much reliance on CGI? You betcha. Should we, the audience, DEMAND substance to go with our high-tech advances? Absolutely. All the bells and whistles are no substitute for a great script. The Mummy Returns was an amusing summer confection, something you enjoy and then you move on to more substantial fare. I certainly cannot deny that this could have been a great movie had they paid equal attention to story that they did to CGI...
The fact that the studio powers-that-be see fit to bestow a star-vehicle on Johnson for the next is a sad testament to the power of the studios to mindlessly whore themselves to the celebrity-du-jour. It sickens me the amount of press our pal the Rock has received for his 8.2 second, pecs-a-ripplin' appearance. Sure, the man is charismatic, he looks buff and manly in a leopard loincloth, but blink and you miss him. And frankly, the minions of Anubis were more realistic CGI characters than our bad guy in the end. Please. A giant badly animated demonic lobster. Ooooh, SCARY! From what I've read, Johnson is an intelligent, savvy, hard-working, well-spoken man. I've no real complaint with him as a person, a celebrity or even, as an emerging action star. For what it is worth, I enjoyed his brief (non-CGI) contribution to the film. But give credit where credit is due.

My biggest gripe has more to do with marketing that with the film itself: Brendan Fraser has been robbed.
This is unquestionably, HIS movie, and yet, he is forced to share his well-earned spotlight with a bit player. Fraser is a gifted, talented and charismatic working actor whose contributions to his projects are consistently rich. He and the other members of the cast deserve a great deal of credit for bringing us such a fun summer diversion. His ability to graciously accept second banana status to the Rock speaks volumes of his character.
So, I suppose that what this all boils down to is this: ramp down your cynicism, and go see this movie. See it for what it is, and you'll probably enjoy the ride. I did.