Is it an all-original movie, or a reboot of the Brendan Frasier series beloved by many and which spawned a series of B-movies about the Scorpion King? That’s the question I asked walking into the theater, and afterward the question I was still asking. And while the movie stars A-list actor Tom Cruz, is action packed and full of spectacular imagery and special effects, that wasn’t the only point of confusion I walked away with. I’ve watched a lot of supernatural thrillers and horror movies, none have ever left me feeling conflicted at the end. In that regard, this movie is a first.

It should be noted that Universal Pictures is trying to create a monster-movie franchise like the superhero series by Marvel and DC Comics. A world where the classic monsters from the 1930’s and 40’s have their own movie but are tied together with common characters culminating in an epic story that combines all their monster might. This is the first in that series, and it cost an amazing $125 million dollars to make.

The movie introduces us to Nick Morton (Tom Cruz) and his side-kick Nick Vail (Jake Johnson) attempting to surreptitiously “liberate” ancient artifacts in modern day Iraq to sell on the black market. Soldiers, the pair have the training they need to slip in and out even when the “out” phase of the operation is compromised. If this were Mission Impossible the opening scenes would be a promising lead in, but a supernatural thriller needs something more from the heroes. Instead of “Ethan” from Mission Impossible this picture needs the roguish charm of Indiana Jones. A little chemistry between the hero and sidekick never hurts either, yet here it seems forced and, well, flat. That word seems to describe most everything about this film.

SPOILER ALERT – If you want to see the movie unfold without knowing specifics you should stop reading here and skip down to the Conclusion.

I’d like to say this was a momentary disappointment, unfortunately the flatness of the characters -- with the notable exceptions of Ahmanet (the Mummy, played by Sofia Boutella) – populated every character. To be fair, Russel Crowe was better than most, though his role was limited. Even though his character was solid, it was also solidly mismanaged. Crowe plays Doctor Jekyll\Mister Hyde, which could have been a magnificent surprise that thrilled audiences and instead was thrown into the mix as if it were completely natural – of course he’s Dr. Jekyll, who else would he be? This needed the kind of buildup that Samuel L received when being introduced as Nick Fury in The Avengers.

This is Think-Biblically.com, after all, so I have to comment on one particularly contradictory scene. At some point in history the Knights of the Crusade had discovered Ahmanet’s plan to bring the Egyptian god Set into our world, and with that plan also the tools needed to make that happen. Wisely, the knights separated those implements and hid them in different places across the globe. In an effort to reclaim the pieces, Ahmanet finds her way to the ancient crypt of the knights and raises an undead army to help her get one of those pieces. The raising also works on the bones of the old knights who join her army. And that’s what confused me; why would the motives of the Crusaders be different in death than in life? It would have been better to have them fight against her army and simply be overwhelmed than have this incongruous change of heart. This reveals a lack of understanding on behalf of the writers. In a supernatural thriller one must account for the spirit of a man. Instead, they treat people as a biological machine, with no soul to guide them in this life or the next.

There were other gaffes as well: what is supposed to be playful banter between Cruz and the main squeeze Annabelle Wallis are painful, the humor intended to lighten the darker moments fail, and scenes intended to be charming are creepily self-absorbed. I’ve seen these actors in other films and know they can do better. So what happened? I blame the director (David Kurtzman) for not getting things right and the writers David Koepp, Christopher McQuarrie, and Dylan Kussman for injecting too many contradictory elements into the storyline. Story problems like mummy’s that sink in one scene and swim like Olympians in the next simply cannot be forgiven.

Finally, the plot needed better explanation. So what if the mummy raised the Egyptian god Set in modern times? We need to understand the kind of bloodshed and world domination that would result. Why not make the spirit of Set a character, dialogue with the mummy of his plans for humanity. Maybe show a vision of a future under his rule. Make him the anti-Christ, ruling by the sword and feeding mankind’s self-destructive side, chaos and death reigning across the globe. Let us understand the stakes! And while we’re at it, add some spark between Cruz and Wallis. As campy as the previous Mummy movies are, one never doubted the love between the hero and heroine.

Conclusion – I’m still a little confused if this is a reboot or a new movie, but the passing view of the famous Book of the Dead from the previous films would indicate the former. If more care had been taken in constructing the story, and if the directing had been able to evoke a more effervescent style, and if the storyline were less contradictory, this movie could have been brilliant. As it stands, it is this incarnation of The Mummy that needs a remake.