I recently saw ‘Don’t Look Now’ (1973). Good picture, a little slow perhaps by today’s standards but worthy of any movie enjoyer’s time! So this movie was shot in Venice. Venice itself being an already beautiful spot to film even today. The way we get to look in a time capsule of Venice in the 70s makes the movie that much better!
People in the 70s could not in fact appreciate it the same way we do now. Concurrently we also can’t do it for today’s movies. Some movies can only be truly appreciated over time is what I believe. This matter can be expressed in both the movie’s message or, as I did, its cinematography. Hence my question now to you.
If he was talking about the original then yes. I suppose in comparison the 1999 one was worse.
Sir, you have taken my words and misconstrued them to make me appear foolish. To that I say… Touché.
So let’s get extremely technical and a little petty.
…
If we only count movies with the title “The Mummy” then we have:
The Mummy (1911) The Mummy (1932) The Mummy (1959) The Mummy (1999) The Mummy (2017)
I propose that because you immediately suggested that the “remake” I was referring to was the 1999 film and was immediately precided by the “original” then you are MISTAKEN!!!
That would mean that you believed the 3rd movie in this list was actually the “original”. How utterly foolish of you. I laugh at your expense. Ha ha ha.
…
But seriously, I grew up loving the 1999 Mummy movie and I refuse to see the newest one.
I saw it. You’re not missing anything.
It wasn’t the worst movie and some of the effects were quite good but aside from my one watch through I’ll probably never intentionally decide to watch it again.