When "The Mummy" was released two years ago, I was expecting an action/adventure/horror film filled with special effects. Since I walked in expecting some horror (after all it WAS a remake of the classic Universal Horror film starring Boris Karloff, right?), I was disappointed when there was no horror to be found. I still kinda enjoyed the movie, though. With "The Mummy Returns," since I knew exactly what to expect, I figured I'd like it a little bit more than I liked the first one. But no. I got exactly what was expected, but I still left feeling unsatisfied. There was plenty of action, and lotsa cool special effects, but that was it. The story didn't do anything for me.
Most of the cast has returned for the second go-round. Brendan Fraser is back, and like in the first one, I think he's very good here. He has a certain "flawed superhero" charm that I like. I've yet to see work outta him that I can call outstanding, but I honestly think that I will soon. Also returning is Rachel Weisz (she was most recently in "Enemy at the Gates"), and she's very good. I really like the chemistry that Brendan Fraser and Rachel Weisz have. As a couple, they're completely believable, and I liked watching them together. John Hannah is back as Rachel Weisz's annoying brother, and he's no less annoying than before. He's supposed to be funny, I guess, but he just irritated me. I don't blame the actor, though. He simply did what his character was supposed to do. I actually remember liking him as Gwyneth Paltrow's love interest in "Sliding Doors." One of the new faces in the movie belongs to Freddie Boath, and this is his feature film debut. He plays the kid. Thankfully, he's not as irksome as he could be. Oded Fehr is back as the ominous guy who reminded me a lot of "The Sphynx" in the underrated movie, "Mystery Men." The thing is, in "Mystery Men," "The Sphynx" was a parody of the kind of character that Oded Fehr played. Still, he was pretty good. Fans of "Deuce Bigelow: Male Gigolo" will remember him as the actual gigolo of the movie. Arnold Vosloo, who plays the title character (also called "Imhotep") is back, and he's got more to do in this movie. The thing is, it's still little more than grunting and making weird faces. Did you know that he was "Darkman"/"Peyton Westlake" in the two direct-to-video sequels to "Darkman"? Yep, he was. Anyway, Patricia Velazquez is back, as well. She's very good, and very hot.
Oh, ya know what? Patricia Velazquez is gonna be in an upcoming TV mini-series called "Fidel." It's about Fidel Castro's rise to power in Cuba. Not good. I live in Miami, Cuban central, so I'm sure there's gonna be an uproar about this mini-series if Castro is shown in even a slightly positive light. My mother, a Cuban, would NOT be pleased. She actually wrote a nasty letter to Janet Reno during that whole Elian Gonzalez thing when the government took away the little brat in the middle of the night.
This could get ugly.
Oh, if you plan on seeing the movie just because WWF superstar The Rock is in it, save your money. The Rock (his real name is Dwayne Johnson) is in the movie for the first five minutes, but that's it. Some may argue that he's also in the last ten minutes, but... well.... oh, let's just drop it. I don't wanna risk spoiling it for you. Anyway, "The Mummy Returns" is the feature film debut for The Rock, but don't worry, he's gonna star in the spin-off of this movie, "The Scorpion King." That movie is being directed by a different person, Chuck Russell. He's the guy who directed "Bless the Child," "Eraser," "The Mask," the remake of "The Blob," and "A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors." But yeah, The Rock's role in this movie is small, almost more of a cameo than anything else.
As for this movie, it was written and directed by Stephen Sommers (he also wrote and directed "The Mummy," "Deep Rising," "The Jungle Book," and "The Adventures of Huck Finn"). I think he's a decent director, and he knows how to work with special effects, but I'm not sure I like his writing. Of course, I can only go by "The Mummy" and "The Mummy Returns," because these are the only movies of his I've seen. Maybe he's got a fantastic movie in him, but I haven't seen it yet. He DOES have it in him, though.
Although I'm not a big fan of these two movies, it's cool that it's one person who wrote and directed them, which is VERY rare for big Hollywood flicks. See, I'd allow the "A Film By" credit for that situation, when it's written and directed by the same person, but other than that... ugh, forget it. You don't wanna get me started on that issue. All I have to say is that writers, considering how much they put into a movie, are the least respected people in the movie business.
I
know that lotsa people out there are gonna love this movie, and that's fine.
I can see that it's got an appeal, but it's simply not my thing. The thing
is, I don't know why. The two "Mummy" movies can easily be compared
to the "Indiana Jones" movies, but I LOVE the "Indiana Jones"
movies. You would think that I would love the two "Mummy" movies,
right? Nope. Maybe I'm just a bitter film geek waiting around for the fourth
"Indiana Jones" movie. That's a long wait, though. There'll be
a fourth "Mummy" movie before there's a fourth "Indiana Jones"
movie.
Scale of 1-10: 6