HEY O CONNELL
LOOKS LIKE I'VE GOT ALL THE KIDS
Probably the first "villain" that I genuinely hated
Seriously, fuck that guy
LOOKS LIKE I'M ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE ALIMONY
LOOKS LIKE I'VE GOT ALL OF THE COURSES
>forget about this character
>rewatch the movie for the first time in 15 years
>that scene where he runs from the battle
Holy shit what a fucking self-serving coward. At least die with your platoon.
>>66869858
cringe
>>66869813
Why is he wearing an apple?
WHY IS THIS ONLY A 55% ON ROTTEN TOMATOES?
Even the consensus makes NO SENSE.
Everyone was talking about how groundbreaking the CGI was at the time. A lot of it still holds up. Plus the desert cinematography is gorgeous. On top of that, it's a fun, traditional action-adventure flick with funny and likeable characters.
If this shit was made by Marvel in 2016, it would be 96%.
>>66869858
My literal sides bruu
>>66870248
rotten tomatoes is garbage
>>66870248
It almost Indiana Jones level imo
>>66870248
>brings up Marvel for no reason as a false equivalancy
LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE ON THE JUST FUCK MY SHIT UP TAKE MY KIDS AND KEK ME OUT OF MY OWN FRANCHISE SIDE OF THE RIVER
>>66870326
I bring it up because it shows exactly how RT (and critics in general) have changed.
There are plenty of fun, action adventure films that had good production values, solid actors, a decent story, good music, effects, the whole shebang, but in the 90s that wasn't enough. Now you can hit all the same marks, even miss a few, and you're guaranteed a "Fresh" rating.
Hook (1991) is a good example. And it's not just nostalgia, since plenty of "classic" films (particularly those made before 1990) get re-evaluated later. 2001: A Space Odyssey got mixed reviews at the time, it's at 96% because of every review since. Meanwhile, something like The Mummy goes mostly off contemporary reviews.
Show The Mummy to the average person who enjoys the 80%+ superhero movies and I guarantee they'll enjoy it just as much. Just look at the disparity between the critics score and the audience score.
>>66870248
>46
>37
There'd be well over 200 now
>>66870514
The problem with RT is that if it isn't new...it generally gets odd marks.
Most old things are either super low or super high because the only people who care to review them by now are mad at it or love it.
Also RT is basically just "is the movie 6/10" for it to be fresh right now.
Fuck theres people who give movies 2.5/5 and its counted as a 'fresh'
>>66869813
BENAYY LMAO
>>66870057
Because hes a fruit
>>66869856
>hated
benny was fucking hilarious though
>>66871376
he really didn't deserve to go the way he did
he was an asshole, but that was DARK
>>66870057
he made an enemy of William Tell, it's to distract him
>>66870248
I used to have some modicum of respect for that site. Any remnants, even in memory, have been purged.
The fuck man. The Mummy 56%? -___-
>>66873219
>that site
But it just collects reviews, anon. It doesn't determine the pecentage itself.
>>66873249
>no way would there be shills on there
>>66869813
LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE GIZZARD
>>66873838
Or maybe in 1999, a lot of critics gave it average reviews.
>>66869813
>Luke's like "You're on Theron's side of the river"
What did he mean by this?
>>66873901
Maybe his wife did it.
>>66874007
Charlize lives nearby, he is suggesting he go ask her for help. With the millions she's made from acting, she could spare him the money to buy some horses.
Beni is being very considerate, especially given he was rudely thrown off the boat by O Connell.
>>66874081
The Mummy really has deepest lore
>>66871748
he became the dark servant of a evil lord bent on the world domination
>>66870248
the cgi looked a bit overdone and cartoony, but fit the adventurous and over the top style of the movie
>>66874789
i could never hate a man that wears a fez and is called Benny
you shouldn't be here
