Universal Monsters shared universe films

A subforum for discussions about Film, TV, and Videos.

Moderators: New Moderators, Board Staff

Gendo'sPapa
First Ancestor
First Ancestor
User avatar
Posts: 4301
Joined: Oct 24, 2006
Location: At the Movies
Gender: Male

Re: Universal Monsters shared universe films

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Gendo'sPapa » Thu Jun 08, 2017 9:43 pm

This film was doomed because A) Alex Kurtzman is not a well-versed enough filmmaker to make a movie of this budget yet. B) He's also not a good storyteller in general. C) This might be Tom Cruise's first blockbuster gig where he wasn't really pulling the shots behind the scenes. Knock the guy for his believes & personal life all you want but when it comes to the film work he usually gives his all. My understanding is a lot of his involvement in The Mummy 2017 was as a favor to people around.
Either way the movie will make a mint overseas. Tom Cruise is still very much one of the few real movie stars on the planet.

Haven't seen the movie yet - I'm gonna give it a shot, why not? - but I hope this "Dark Universe" (not a fan of the moniker) is allowed to exist because the Universal Monsters where the first Cinematic Universe AND they said their plan is not all the films in the universe will be blockbuster scale. Some might be smaller affair classic monster movies & we need more of those. I've been saying Marvel & Star Wars need to do smaller films for ages now - I.E. something with a budget far south of $100 million & doesn't need to gross over half a billion just to turn a profit - & if Universal is willing to do that then I'm game.

Plus maybe in a few years we can have a comedy film in the Dark Universe. A modern day version of Abbot & Costello Meet The (Whatever Movie Monster You'd Like).

Chuckman
Chuckman
Chuckman
User avatar
Age: 34
Posts: 8146
Joined: Nov 11, 2011
Location: Chuckman
Gender: Male

Re: Universal Monsters shared universe films

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Chuckman » Fri Jun 09, 2017 8:29 am

I'm going to give it a chance too and not write it off if this one is subpar.

I'm just intrigued by the idea of a cinematic universe where I can't instantly tell what the story of the movie is going to be based on the announced cast. I really don't know what this mummy movie is actually about beyond broad strokes so it'll be fun to see it.

Gendo'sPapa
First Ancestor
First Ancestor
User avatar
Posts: 4301
Joined: Oct 24, 2006
Location: At the Movies
Gender: Male

Re: Universal Monsters shared universe films

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby Gendo'sPapa » Sat Jun 10, 2017 6:37 pm

Tonally deaf film - it is a horror movie? An actioner? A buddy comedy? A Mission: Impossible sequel? A superhero origin film? An American Werewolf in London knock-off? - that is almost saved by the ridiculous over-the-top thing Russell Crowe thing is doing.

A bad start for a super franchise - as an actor who cares very much about his professional image I don't believe we'll be seeing Tom Cruise back for any future entries in the franchise should it continue - but it should be saved by the international market who eats this stuff up. I expect we'll see a major tonal turn around for the next couple entries in this (ugh) "Dark Universe" which should see Universal turn away from $125 million + costing actioners and more a return to smaller budgeted horror. On the plus side the next entry is BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN from director Bill Condon who is a man with a true love for the genre & has already directed a great Frankenstein movie about the original film's director, James Whale, ingeniously titled "Gods & Monsters". Not the best start for the Dark Universe but I can see them turning things around with the next film or two as long as they retreat from the idea of this being essentially "Monster Avengers".

FreakyFilmFan4ever
(In)Sufficient Director
(In)Sufficient Director
User avatar
Age: 29
Posts: 7394
Joined: Jun 09, 2009
Location: Playing amongst the stars
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: Universal Monsters shared universe films

  •      
  •      
  • Quote

Postby FreakyFilmFan4ever » Sun Jun 11, 2017 12:59 pm

The Invisible Man was the 1933 version of 2008's The Dark Knight. That antagonist was just insanely good at escalation. The invisibility power wasn't so much the focus of the film as it was the a commentary on anonymity and the potential for actions without punishment. It's not so much that I hope that they don't ruin this movie; I hope they never remake this movie. I am more against anyone directing a mold-bearing remake of The Invisible Man for a shared universe than I am a live-action Eva movie directed by Micheal Bay. (Or Uwe Boll. Or, heck, even Tommy Wiseau.)
The Sequels to Emmanuel God With Us
I AM
Part 1 | Part 2
Coming 2016
Watch Announcement Here


Return to “Film and Video”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests