The New Mummy Is the Unnecessary Sequel We Actually Need (Here's Why)
If you sat someone down in 2001 and told them that Brendan Fraser was about to effectively disappear for the best part of two decades before coming back with a movie directed by Stephen Soderbergh, another by Martin Scorsese, and another that wins him an Oscar, that person would have rightly laughed you all the way to Cairo. (And that’s without even mentioning what his co-star, the Scorpion King, is currently up to.)
These days, the bandages are wrapped around the other head, with Fraser so back that news of his potential casting, alongside Rachel Weisz, in a planned sequel to The Mummy Returns feels like low-key trolling.
Disregarding all of the above, if another Mummy movie is to happen, and is done with some degree of TLC, I will actually be first in line.
Why We Actually Need This Unnecessary Mummy Sequel
Just two weeks ago, I felt a strange but powerful urge to revisit Ron Howard’s trilogy of Dan Brown adaptations—The Da Vinci Code (not bad), Angels & Demons (better than you remember, and possibly deserving of a credit on Edward Berger’s Conclave) and Inferno (regrettably, not the best)—and that urge came before two wiley men in high-vis jackets decided to skip the lines at the Louvre and go through the front window. Was it the draw of watching a bumbling history teacher whose ability to solve medium-difficulty anagrams proves enough to charm the likes of Felicity Jones and Audrey Tautou, or was I just craving a kind of movie that Hollywood doesn’t seem to know how to make anymore?
Last year, Steven Spielberg passed the reins of the Indiana Jones franchise to James Mangold, who owns two of the safest hands in the business, but as much as I enjoyed watching The Dial of Destiny, not a sliver of that film’s plot has stayed with me. This year, the biggest globe-trotting adventure on offer, Guy Ritchie’s Fountain of Youth, was a $180 million turkey. Is there any reason to believe that a Mummy threequel will be any better?
It’s foolish to bet on anything even resembling a Hollywood cash grab, but there are reasons for optimism. For one, The Mummy is being reincarnated by Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett—the filmmaking team behind the excellent nuptial hunt movie Ready or Not and for making two additions to the Scream franchise (numbers 5 and 6) that even the late Wes Craven might have been proud of.
What Needs To Happen For A New Mummy Film To Work
News of this reboot comes eight years after Universal‘s last attempt to breathe life into the franchise. That movie, which starred Tom Cruise, was a rather mercenary attempt to connect the IP to their wider Dark Universe gamble—and no, I haven’t seen it either. If Bettinelli-Olpin and Gillett are going to avoid the same pitfalls, a few things will have to be carved, hieroglyph-style, into the walls of the studio’s storied backlot.
The baseline demand should be that The Mummy 3, like its predecessors, is shot on location, which was basically the only saving grace of Ritchie’s Fountain. The second is locking down not only Weisz and Fraser, but some of the supporting players as well—just imagine how great it would be to see John Hannah dust off that white linen suit for one last adventure? Lastly, and this might be the biggest ask, but they’re going to need the script (which is being written by David Coggeshall) to actually deliver some semblance of wonder.
Why We Should Be Optimistic After Failed Mummy Sequels
For all the flak that Howard’s Dan Brown movies took upon release, even Inferno, the least effective of the trilogy, still delivers the pulpy, page-turning narrative propulsion of its source material. You can say the same for the hugely enjoyable National Treasure movies, which were just as trashed by critics upon release but are now widely considered to be perfectly endearing entertainments.
To put it briefly, what we don’t need is lore and Dark Universes; what we need are reliable MacGuffins that get our heroes from A to B, some tricky dramatic obstacles along the way, and some nicely choreographed action sprinkled on top. Is that so much to ask?
The chemistry between Weisz and Frasier (both of whom Universal can and should announce with big, decadent lettering that says “Academy Award Winner”) will look after itself; just don’t forget to give them a reason to be where they need to be. If that’s in place, audiences will stop wondering whether or not this movie is necessary and simply be happy to come along for the ride.
