The Mummy Returns, and egyptologists nightmare...

[mato]

Ack! That was a totally silly movie! And not one Isis any were! Let alone any mention of the other gods. A passing reference to Huros as a messenger hawk (a bad one at that... unless they were thinking of the first Horus, then they made an easy mistake...) and some drivle over the scorpion king... No Goddesses any were! hmph! The temple itself was a joke, I mean come on didnt they do any research before doing this movie? Oh yes they did and it was probably put in here as a joke, but the septor of Osiris (:lol: ) that defeated the scorpion king by being thrust through his chest (:rotfl: ). Also the cults that were involved in the battle with the sand dog things :rolleyes:, were a complete joke, I mean come on lets face it if they had an army that size, and that well trained egypt wouldnt be a musslim country. Oh and the lack of casualties was a nice touch... Out numbered five to one by a demon army that took over the known world some time ago and no one got killed this round... It would have been nice if they would have gotten a few things right, like the use of Set instead of Anubis and the altars and all that atleast decent I dont expect them to know exactly what to do but that movie looked like it was hastily thrown together to follow in the Mummy's popularity (which it was...:() I would like to see some of the myths put on screen or something fun like that, instead of this bs...

Your thoughts on the movie? Or on possible mythical recreations on the 'big screen'.

[Theres]

i have to ask... did you really expect more?
"The Mummy" (the recent remake) was horrible, a rehashed vehicle for all the latest special effects. nothing more than a cheap plot with mediocre acting.
so why would the sequel be any better. historically, the number of good sequels can be counted on one mutilated hand.
i'm sorry, but from the beginning this seemed like little more than Hollywood 'product'.

[mato]

Originally posted by Greenman
i have to ask... did you really expect more?
"The Mummy" (the recent remake) was horrible, a rehashed vehicle for all the latest special effects. nothing more than a cheap plot with mediocre acting.
so why would the sequel be any better. historically, the number of good sequels can be counted on one mutilated hand.
i'm sorry, but from the beginning this seemed like little more than Hollywood 'product'.

Na the first one sucked in all the aspects I pointed too as well but I hoped (call me a hopeless optimistic fool) for a better second. I have studdied some egptian theology and phillosophy then looked into the culture and it doesnt take much to do a five minute research job and get the right gods in the right place's. I was hoping for a better movie, but I just this week watched it and it wasnt exactly a choice (needy emotional brother wanted to... I couldnt play on the computer while he watched it alone cause he would have been hurt... damn me and my empathic nature!) so I rambled on about myth while we watched the movie... and laughed hastiriclly at the septor of osiris... so I am immature, sue me!

What do you think of myths being put on screen?

[willowfairy]

I liked both. I thought they were awesome. :D But, duh, it's not like the movie is going to be exactly how it's supposed to. That would be boring!

[Myst]

It's called entertainment. Lighten up.

[lieve heks]

its annoying how things are portryed in hollywood, just look at the endless argument about 'the craft/blairwitch/BOS'. If i were you i'd just sit back and enjoy the action or don't watch it,you know its going to annoy you.Remember, the majority of people know nothing of egyptoligy and wicca.
And remember what an arse Kevin Carlyon made of himself when he went public with the "Harry Potter rides broom wrong"nonsense.

[MistOfTheSea86]

Originally posted by Myst
It's called entertainment. Lighten up.

WORD, I loved the movies! They were fun:D:D:D They were not made to be historically accurate.

[Yvonne Belisle]

It's entertainment not a historical documentary. For the record I love them I think they are fun as they were ment to be plus there is the added bonus for me in that my husband is a Rick and my family called me Evie growing up. For me that adds a bonus to the entertainment factor. I may hate being called Evie but it's the thought that makes it funny to me. If I want historic fact I watch a documentary not a hollywood production. It is ment to be fantasy and I think that anyone who expects historical accuracy is just setting themselves up for dissapointment and will never like the film because it is not what they expected.

[Naillosotarrain]

You actually watched a movie made in Hollywood and expected realism? ROTFLMFAO!!! No movie ever made in Hollywood is realistic. The only one that has ever come close to being realistic was Saving Private Ryan and even that was not that realistic, because Spielburg admitted that he could have added more realism to it but held back.



"Here's your sign."

[MammaStar]

Originally posted by Naillosotarrain
"Here's your sign."



:rotfl: :rolleyes:

[mato]

I thought I explained this, I just would have enjoyed it alot more if they had done five minutes of research. I am not sorry for wanting more from my entertainment than big explosions and bad special effects (or even heavens forbid a plot!).

Again I ask, what do you think of putting myth on screen? Although this has nothing to do with the mummy returns it gave me the idea of putting mythology on film marketed to the masses to have an alternative to movies like The Mummy and The Mummy Returns (later The Scorpion King... earlier the first Mummy house on haunted hill the blair witch projects...) I know this is done to some extent in some movie productions yet I am asking would their be a base of interest if they were to be made on a more frequent basis, in other words would mythology be a hit in modern hollywood or do you think it would flop? Big picture production with all sorts of cash or small time artsy flicks filled with nudity just to break even on production costs?

[Yvonne Belisle]

Been done for example Clash of the Titans and all of the Jason and the Argonaught movies and don't for get Sinbad they didn't do so hot way back when and still wouldn't do so hot. The only time they really get good ratings is when some Bible Thumper makes a big deal out of boycotting the theaters.

[flar7]

Clash of the Titans
Hercules (swarzenegger(sp?))
Sinbad

the mummy is not really a tale about myths. It is a modern remake of the horror genre, that strayed way off. The Gods were
only there to fill in the blanks. considering some of the movies
I've seen with mythic gods involved, Mummy wasnt nearly that bad.

[LadyV]

I am heavily into Egyptology and I loved both movies! They are not to be taken seriously, they are intertainment! An escape from reality, as are most movies...for fun! If you are looking for seriouness and/or study, there are lots of good documentories at the video rental shops....

[WetPaperWings]

I realize that Hollywood can't be expected to come out with totally accurate films, but it would be nice to see a bit more accuracy. If showing the truth rather than a made-up story would not be detrimental to the movie, then I'd choose the truth any day. There's nothing wrong with sticking in a bit of educational value.

Still, it's fun to laugh at some of the dumb things they can come up with. :T

For the record, I hated The Mummy, accuracy or no accuracy. :razz: :D

*Pops Clash of the Titans into the VCR*

[LadyV]

I don't think anyone looks to this type of film for accuracy...just fun!

[Illuminatus]

Mato,

You are talking just like the the geek at a star trek convention who asks the stars of the show how they justified using the reverse tachyon pull when on stardate 4352.3 it was prooven by westley to be unable to establish a warp bubble large enough to teleport a being the size of a humanoid... etc etc.. ad nauseum. It's just a TV show man!!!