|
|
Post by moviemouth on Sept 13, 2021 14:02:12 GMT
Yeah, I love this movie and it's kind of ruined the 1932 movie for me. It's a big, dumb B movie with a great cast and scary villain. It's hard for me to believe there are any late Gen-Xers or Millennials that don't immediately associate Arnold Vosloo as Inhotep. He brings energy to the role the same way Bela Legosi and Boris Karloff brought to Dracula and Frankenstein's monster. I have a hard time believing most people don't think of The Mummy when they think of Arnold Voslo. I knew him from Hard Target and the Darkman sequels before The Mummy, but The Mummy is easily the most famous movie he is in and most famous character he has played, so it is reasonable to think that most people will think of Imhotep when they think of Arnold Voslo.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Sept 13, 2021 14:17:46 GMT
Yeah, I love this movie and it's kind of ruined the 1932 movie for me. It's a big, dumb B movie with a great cast and scary villain. It's hard for me to believe there are any late Gen-Xers or Millennials that don't immediately associate Arnold Vosloo as Inhotep. He brings energy to the role the same way Bela Legosi and Boris Karloff brought to Dracula and Frankenstein's monster. I don't dislike the '32 movie but it is probably my least favorite out of the Universal Monsters original lineup.
|
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Sept 13, 2021 14:20:26 GMT
Not the best Mummy film, but it's pitted against the best of the horror movie franchises. Most Mummy movies are very good, and this one is good.
Mummy films already have more going for them than most horror movies, because the plots are based on a better sci fi concept. The Frankenstein movies are one of the few to rival it from the early days. The early days of werewolves and vampires are inadequate, and needed fixing.
But there's nothing wrong with the Mummy 1999. It's fun, it does what it sets out to do, but it isn't nearly as fascinating or exciting as THE CURSE OF THE MUMMY'S TOMB 1964. And it pales in comparison to the more interesting mummies of 1932 and 1959. But that's because those were so good, not because the newer one is bad. It's sort of like hitting .260 and being compared to a .275 hitter.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonesjxd on Sept 14, 2021 10:25:31 GMT
Yeah, I love this movie and it's kind of ruined the 1932 movie for me. It's a big, dumb B movie with a great cast and scary villain. It's hard for me to believe there are any late Gen-Xers or Millennials that don't immediately associate Arnold Vosloo as Inhotep. He brings energy to the role the same way Bela Legosi and Boris Karloff brought to Dracula and Frankenstein's monster. I have a hard time believing most people don't think of The Mummy when they think of Arnold Voslo. I knew him from Hard Target and the Darkman sequels before The Mummy, but The Mummy is easily the most famous movie he is in and most famous character he has played, so it is reasonable to think that most people will think of Imhotep when they think of Arnold Voslo. I'm also meaning when people of those age group think The Mummy, they picture Arnold Vosloo's Imhotep, not Boris Karloff.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Sept 14, 2021 16:48:51 GMT
I have a hard time believing most people don't think of The Mummy when they think of Arnold Voslo. I knew him from Hard Target and the Darkman sequels before The Mummy, but The Mummy is easily the most famous movie he is in and most famous character he has played, so it is reasonable to think that most people will think of Imhotep when they think of Arnold Voslo. I'm also meaning when people of those age group think The Mummy, they picture Arnold Vosloo's Imhotep, not Boris Karloff. I think of both. I am 38, but I am a big fan of Boris Karloff. I do prefer the 1999 version of The Mummy though.
|
|
|
|
Post by judgejosephdredd on Sept 15, 2021 0:16:30 GMT
Unfortunately, Arnold Vosloo is not a bigger star. He's criminally underrated.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mulder and Scully on Sept 15, 2021 3:38:54 GMT
The Mummy ride at Universal Studios is awesome.
|
|
