Mummy Dearest

Cidu Bill on Aug 3rd 2017


Filed in Argyle Sweater, Bill Bickel, CIDU, Katie Holmes, Scott Hilburn, Tom Cruise, comic strips, comics, humor | 25 responses so far

25 Responses to “Mummy Dearest”

  1. Arthur Aug 3rd 2017 at 12:12 am 1

    All of this is based on web research for this comic. This went
    over my head when I saw it originally. If it didn’t show up
    here, I’d have left it that way.

    Apparently Katie Holmes is Tom Cruise’s ex. Hilburn may be
    trying to suggest that she doesn’t want to see him even in a

    Rotten Tomatoes suggests that this version of The Mummy is not
    very good. So it might pain Tom Cruise to see himself in a bad

  2. James Pollock Aug 3rd 2017 at 12:22 am 2

    “Apparently Katie Holmes is Tom Cruise’s ex.”
    Specifically, she’s the mother of his child, Suri.

    “Rotten Tomatoes suggests that this version of The Mummy is not
    very good.”
    The reason Mr. Cruise would be horrified is not that the movie is bad. He’s been in lots of bad movies. The problem is that it did abysmally in the box office.

  3. Mona Aug 3rd 2017 at 12:26 am 3

    Thanks for doing the research, Arthur. I had no idea who Katie Holmes was. Don’t know why she would go to see a movie starring her ex if she didn’t want to see it.
    Also did not know there was a new version of The Mummy starring Tom Cruise.
    Yep, I’m just a geezer living under a rock.

  4. Cidu Bill Aug 3rd 2017 at 12:51 am 4

    I actually still knew all that, and was still wondering what the joke was.

  5. John Small Berries Aug 3rd 2017 at 01:05 am 5

    Mona: perhaps she’s there to see a different movie, and is reacting to a trailer for her ex’s movie.

  6. Kilby Aug 3rd 2017 at 02:19 am 6

    Personally, I would say that the majority of movies in which Cruise has appeared are “bad”, but that’s a subjective opinion, and in any case, “bad” is a relative term. Rotten Tomatoes currently lists “The Mummy” at 16%, whereas the “Emoji Movie” is so breathtakingly awful (just 6%) that even XKCD decided to take a potshot at it.

  7. fleabane Aug 3rd 2017 at 02:20 am 7

    I knew all that. And I figured it was a dig at how terrible The Mummy is. But I didn’t get why a painful moment for Katy Holmes would be seeing the movie. other than it being bad. in which case why would the joke be in different for Tom Cruise seeing it?

  8. James Pollock Aug 3rd 2017 at 03:33 am 8

    “I didn’t get why a painful moment for Katy Holmes would be seeing the movie.”

    I haven’t undergone the process, but 100% of the people I surveyed found that the process of becoming someone’s mummy was quite painful. Poor Katie isn’t suffering because the movie is bad, she’s suffering because she suddenly is reminded of the process of becoming “the Mummy” with Tom Cruise.
    Yes, he pun is very weak.

  9. narmitaj Aug 3rd 2017 at 05:27 am 9

    It is possible it is purely a sexual joke (an Arlo?), asserting that the bad memories for both are triggered by being reminded of the slobbery acts of congress required to produce a child. Tom Cruise being “in” “the mummy” is a viscerally disgusting memory for both, perhaps. The fact The Mummy movie appears to be appalling could be irrelevant.

    It is possible the sexual element is only a bad memory for Ms Holmes, and Mr Cruise is only alarmed at being reminded he is in The Mummy - but then why go to a screening of the film? He knows he acted in the film - but the phrase “TOM CRUISE IN THE MUMMY” spells out an intimate biological truth of his past life he had otherwise perhaps blocked.

  10. Terrence Feenstra Aug 3rd 2017 at 07:01 am 10

    I’ve thought this over for all of ten seconds, and my conclusion is the narmitaj (9) NAILED IT! No pun intended.

  11. Terrence Feenstra Aug 3rd 2017 at 07:02 am 11

    Darn it! “that” not “the.” Unless, of course, you would like to be know as “the narmitaj.” Sort of a “The Rock” thing.

  12. Daniel J. Drazen Aug 3rd 2017 at 07:44 am 12

    Four words I never wanted to see in the same sentence: Tom Cruise and mummy movie.

  13. Andréa Aug 3rd 2017 at 07:55 am 13

    I was trying to connect this somehow to the Scientology cult, but failed . . . oh wait, do Scientologists believe in an ‘afterlife’ of walking dead wound up in wrappings of some kind? (Sorry - living next door to Clearwater, FL makes ANYthing about Tom Cruise related to Scientology.)

  14. ja Aug 3rd 2017 at 09:42 am 14

    I think the joke is simply this: both Ms. Holmes and Mr. Cruise would find watching “The Mummy” to be horrific, but not because it is a horror movie. Ms. Holmes would find it horrific because it stars her [allegedly] manipulative, controlling and Scientology-obsessed ex-husband, causing her to relive her marriage to him and her fears over their daughter being raised and forced into Scientology. Mr. Cruise would find watching the movie horrific because it is was poorly reviewed and deemed a flop, and viewed by some as an indication that Mr. Cruise can no longer be considered to be a bankable leading man. Furthermore, in both the marriage and the movie, failure was widely attributed to Mr. Cruise’s controlling personality.

    And while, at least by Rotten Tomato ratings, “The Mummy” may not be the worst movie that Cruise has ever made (1988’s “Cocktail” scored a dismal 5%), it does rank as his second-worst, and the worst in the last 30 years (i.e., the worst since a Katie Holmes was in elementary school). And yes, he has made some duds, he also has made 31 movies that received a 60% or better score: 31 “fresh” ratings to 21 “splats”. In comparison, Nicolas Cage has 35 fresh ratings to a whopping 45 splats.

    Where this joke spats, is in its weak (well, non-existing) setup– how is it that either of these people would be subjected to a surprise screening of “The Mummy”? I suppose, the trailer idea (on a movie shown in their home theaters) is the most plausible. If I allow myself to believe such an unexpected screening is possible, the idea that both Mr. Cruise and Ms. Holmes would find it horrifying for radically different reasons is mildly amusing to me.

  15. Brian Aug 3rd 2017 at 10:27 am 15

    I guess I’m weird - I actually laughed out loud when Cruise’s reaction to the movie was the same as his ex-wife’s.

  16. Pinny Aug 3rd 2017 at 04:37 pm 16

    RE: ja[13]

    Although “Cocktail” received bad reviews, it did very well at the box office. Wikipedia bears this out ( ).

    FYI, “Top Gun” did not get that good of a reception either. For one example, Roger Ebert gave it only 2 1/2 stars. ( ). In comparison, he gave “Cocktail” 2 stars. ( ). Today, “Top Gun” is considered one of Tom Cruise’s best films (!9/top-gun-4/ ).

  17. Andréa Aug 3rd 2017 at 05:49 pm 17

    “Minority Report” is the only Cruise movie I care for.

  18. Lord Jubjub Aug 4th 2017 at 04:46 pm 18

    Brian @15. Cruise’s reaction is even stronger than Katie’s.

  19. James Pollock Aug 4th 2017 at 05:13 pm 19

    An actor who is in a string of bad films that make money will be asked to be in more movies. An actor who has been in a string of good movies, that didn’t make money, may be asked to be in more vovies. An actor who has been in a string of bad movies that lost money is working their “second job” already.

    But scariest of all is the actor who’s been in a string of movies that made money, who suddenly is in one very big, very expensive movie that lost a LOT of money. Johnny Depp had to go back to making pirate movies after “Lone Ranger”. Do you think he was sitting in his (very expensive) home, thinking “Man, I wish I could be in more pirate movies!”? Because I do think he was sitting at home wishing another pirate movie would get made. Sean Connery was in “League of Extraordinary Gentlemen”, and then couldn’t even get a gig in the new Indiana Jones movie. Speaking of, Shia LeBeuof was in that Indiana Jones movie. What’s he up to these days? There seems to be an exception for superhero movies… Ryan Reynolds was a dud as Deadpool, then a dud again as Green Lantern, before finding success as Deadpool (again). Chris Evans was in Fantastic Four, which did just well enough to get a sequel, which didn’t make money, but then he got to be Captain America in a LOT more voeies than he got to be Johnny Storm in..

  20. B.A. Aug 4th 2017 at 05:40 pm 20

    The sad part about Johnny Depp is that he’s a good actor: he could be taking parts where he isn’t playing a pirate, a cartoon Indian, or ANY character who wears more make-up than Tammy Faye Bakker.

    Maybe he wouldn’t be offered as many millions of dollars, but should that really be his priority at this point?

  21. Kilby Aug 4th 2017 at 06:35 pm 21

    I’ve only seen one of Cruise’s movies that I’ve ever liked (and I had to hunt for the name) - it was “A Few Good Men”, which is also notable because it is just about the only Nicholson movie that I have ever liked.

    P.S. @20 - For a long time Depp had worked on a reputation for taking only those roles in which he could do something out of the ordinary (his “Rolling Stone” interpretation of Captain Jack Sparrow nearly got him dismissed). The problem with immensely profitable hits is that they inflate the paychecks for the sequels to the point of idiocy, it would seem that the money was just too enticing to refuse, even though the role was reduced to a rehash.

  22. James Pollock Aug 4th 2017 at 07:22 pm 22

    TV actors play the same roles for years (if they land on a successful show). Stage actors generally only commit to a season at a time, and movie actors do return for sequels but sequels are spaced far enough apart that they get to do other things in between, and even then there’s a tendency to walk away. Harrison Ford was asking Lucas to kill off Han Solo by the third Star Wars film, and finally got his wish with the next one he was in. Sean Connery famously said he’d never play Bond again, and then he did. Most superhero movies last only 3 films and then they get recast. Look at Batman… Adam West was in one movie, then Michael Keaton was in 2, then Val Kilmer was in 1, then George Clooney, then there was a break in live-action Batman, and then 3, count ‘em, 3 with Christian Bale, and now Ben Affleck is taking a turn. The guy who’s played Batman in the most movies is… Kevin Conroy. Spider-Man has been played by 3 actors in across 7 movies. OK, sure, there are exceptions… The same guy has played Wolverine for like 12 movies, and the current-generation MCU main guys have been locked in, except for the Hulk, but there’s been some background changes. Don Cheadle became War machine, and Gwynneth Paltrow disappeared, and Paul Bettany is playing his second character. The days when Basil Rathbone could play Sherlock Holmes in like 25 movies are gone.
    I’m thinking back over the last couple of decades. What I get for the actors who played hte same roles the most are the main cast of the Harry Potter films, at 8; Anthony Daniels, who was in 8 of the 9 Star Wars films (so far…), and the original Star Trek cast in 7 (of course, the odd-numbered Trek films shouldn’t count…) There are now 9 Star Wars movies, but I don’t think any actor has been in more than 4 of them, except for Kenny Baker and Anthony Daniels. Anakin Skywalker has been played by 4 different actors, Obi-Wan by 2, Princess Leia by 2, and Palpatine by 2 And that’s not counting the actors who were replaced by digital “actors”.

  23. Mona Aug 4th 2017 at 08:07 pm 23

    I remember that I liked “Risky Business” when we rented it on VHS a few decades ago.

  24. James Pollock Aug 4th 2017 at 11:15 pm 24

    What I remember liking about “Risky Business” was Bob Seger, and Rebecca De Mornay’s naughty bits.

  25. Meryl A Aug 9th 2017 at 01:26 am 25

    I’m with Bill - knew both of them and their stories but did not get it.

    There is supposedly a sequel of “Top Gun” coming out. I presume that Anthony Edwards will not be in it as his character was killed off. (did that need a spoiler alert, sorry)

    Off topic - did anyone know that Johnny Depp’s daughter is acting in Kevin Smith movies that I had never heard of? She is friends with Smith’s daughter and they have played “clerks” in two newer movies.

Comments RSS

Leave a Reply