Mummy 3 Plot Revealed
Posted by John Campeaon 22. 01. 2007in News Chat
I really like Brendan Fraser, and the guy gets to star across from some of the hottest women in Hollywood, but not before staring with Pauly Shore, so he has earned it. Now, the Mummy films are among my favourite of his, so I was excited about a third movie, but now I am not so sure.
Movie Web scoops:
Gough is co-writing the third installment in the Mummy film franchise with partner Miles Millar; he mentioned the sequel will unwrap a new mummy and feature a character who is the grown son of Rick and Evie (played in the previous films by Brendan Fraser and Rachel Weisz). Also, he said the sequel will also have a new concept.Gough said that he and Millar added their own ideas to the script, including a storyline centering on the main characters of Rick and Evie – he says he’s very confident the script is strong enough for Fraser and Weisz to come back to reprise their roles in the third film.
Now its only been 6 years since the last Mummy movie, though its entirely possible to “age” Fraser and Weisz (assuming she agrees) so they look like they COULD have a grown son to carry on the family business.
But really? A grown son?
I wasn’t a big fan of the Scorpion King spinoff, so going back to the Mummy roots sounds like a logical step, but adding another family member?
I just dont like the sound of that.
This post was written by :
John Campea who has written 6783 posts on The Movie Blog
visit author's website | Contact the Author
Yeah,
It kind of sucks but the mummy movies have been fun so far…
so I’ll still give it a chance even if I dont like the sound of a grown son being thrown into the mix.
You just had to mention Pauly Shore, didn’t you Rodney? All else aside, I agree with you, I enjoyed the first Mummy movie, the second one was alright minus the horrible CGI of the Scorpion King, but I see no need to even mention, let alone star, the child (let alone a grown child) of Rick and Evie. Stick with whats proven to work instead of taking a high risk move that has the potential to make your film suck donkey balls, which potentially may cause fans to not come see your movie which in turn causes you to lose money and get a bad reputation in the industry.
Oh, and one last thing Rodney, I dont know if I mentioned it in a previous post, but it was great talking with you too at the F4FF ;)
A “grown son” could be 18-years old, though.
Likewise Jeff. I had such a great time meeting everyone at the F4FF and I really hope we do it every year.
And Jeff, the grown son, even at 18 years of age is still 3 times the distance in age between now and the last movie. They would still have to age Rick and Evie just to include him. Seems like a weak plot device to introduce something “new” into the franchise.
It coulda been worse: Rodney could have mentioned Dudley Do Right…
Anyway. Let’s look at this.
Why does it have to be a new mummy? Arnold Vasloo too busy? No Oded Fehr?
I’m not too up on having the scenerio of aging up the two main characters, it’s almost as to suggest that this is torch passing, so who needs Fraser and Weisz…for Mummy 4 and 5?
Don’t kid ourselves. That’s where it seems to be going.
And no, I’m not thrilled with this because I’m willing to bet there will be dumb, out of place one liners, and FX which don’t serve the story, making little sense, and might even be rushed. I think if they can’t do some CGI FX, scrap them if it could be done practically.
And YES, I do find it interesting that “they have a grown son”- which ups the timeline, correct? I wonder…what time period is the alleged Indy Jones IV set in with an older Indy?
Hmmmmmmmmmm….
Wait you forgot to mention the in the plot where the Kid says, “My Dad was not a watered Indiana Jones! So that means I am not the watered watered down version!” I expect that to happen in the movie.
Darren,
I don’t understand what you mean by “I’m willing to be
Darren,
I don’t understand what you mean by “I’m willing to bet there will be out of place, dumb one liners”. That’s what was so great about the original Mummy. The action and comedy … It’s what Fraser does so well.
I don’t think they will rush it because it’s a cash cow they wanna make sure they don’t fuck it up. Also the CGI will surely be a lot better this time because they might actually get to finish it (eg. The rock’s crappy Scorpian King)
Koko, I disagree. The one liners were the worst part about the Mummy films.
…and the FX they DID finish in time in the last two films were crap anyway.
… I though the effects that they had done on The Mummy Returns weren’t complete because the budget ran out and they ran out of time so they ended up just putting the rough cut out in cinemas.
Didn’t Campea bring this up about a week ago???
… I though the effects that they had done on The Mummy Returns weren’t complete because the budget ran out and they ran out of time so they ended up just putting the rough cut out in cinemas.
Didn’t Campea bring this up about a week ago???
Sorry bout the double postings, shitty old computer at my desk.
I don’t know, it could work, depending on how it’s done. Like someone said, “grown” doesn’t have to mean 30, it could mean late teens or something. Wasn’t their son like 10 in the last film? If they made him 18, they’d only have to age Rick and Evie 8 years from their ages in Mummy 2, and being that it’s been 6 years since the last film, that’s really only two years off the mark. Hope that’s coherent.
It’s not like they could just lose the kid after having him play such a major role in Mummy 2. It will probably be like last time, the kid played a major role in the action, but it was Rick and Evie as a team trying to save their son. That could definitely work again.
As for passing the torch, come on, how many more Mummy films do you think there will be? My bets are this is the last one. Even if it isn’t, at some point the torch will have to be passed. Frankly I’m surprised that Weisz has agreed to do another Mummy film. Has she actually agreed?
They should try to get Daniel Radcliffe to play their son. By the time this gets made, he’ll be 19 or 20, and the HP films will be wrapping up, this would be a nice segue way from Harry Potter and he would definitely be a box office draw for the movie.
I’m getting scared. Loved the first two Mummy films to death, but at some point enough is enough. I don’t want the third and the last (for Fraser and Weisz at least) to ruin the whole thing for me.
But yeah, I’ll still be lining up for a ticket when he comes out.
Kate: Daniel Radcliffe? Are you kidding me? That kid has no talent whatsoever. Other than that, I totally agree with your statements regarding Alex’s age and potential roles.
Arnique: I respectfully disagree with your assessment of Radcliffe’s talent. He has been steadily improving and having seen him in some more comedic/less angsty stuff (British TV) I can tell you he does quite well at that. No, he’s no Sir Laurence Olivier, but I think Brendan Fraser has amply demonstrated that you don’t need fistfuls of talent to carry a Mummy film. And like I said, talent or not, you can’t argue that he’d be a huge box office draw.
I think if rachel weisz dose not be in the part of evelin that if someone replaces her spot that would be weird to have another woman on the set haveing everyone think that rick devoriced evelin and got a new woman whith the same name. weird right?