The idea is great, in theory. Turn the main character into an explorer who goes to different countries to fight mummies (like Indiana Jones, if his enemies were living dead). The problem was that producers recast characters, forgot about others, and made Brendan Fraser’s son an adult. Fraser was not old enough at the time for that to be acceptable. It looked weird. And they did that because they were too greedy, hoping to turn the son into the star of another trilogy. Marvel before Marvel.
The only good part in the series is part 1 because it balanced the horror and action tone. Part 2 was more of the same but dumber, and this one just fully embraces the dumb blockbuster vibe the series was embracing more with part 2.
@@6HauntedDaysdon’t gatekeep. I’m 34. 2008 was CRUCIAL for multiple franchises. Indiana Jones, Iron Man, Hulk, Mummy, Hellboy 2, and Batman ALL had active movies racking up cash from little Edgelords like you. Mummy 3 WAS an attempt to stay afloat as the “failed” Spider Man 3 of 2007 showed that even superheroes can overstay and must evolve. 2009 was even the year many action franchises failed to become the next Pirates of the Caribbean.
Very hard to top the charm of the original. The Tom Cruise one wasn't terrible but doesn't have the goofy humor of Rick O'Connell and I think it needs that.
Having no Rachel Weisz was already a major blow to the movie's marketing and story, her chemistry with Brendan Fraser was one of the major reasons the original Mummy worked so well - but another reason I don't see talked about enough is the titular mummy himself. Imhotep had such presence, urgency in his actions, and an understandable motivation in resurrecting his lover, plus Arnold Vosloo seemed to revel in every moment playing the character. The Emperor was just...well, plain evil.
Yes.. Imhotep was almost a tragic character. You kind of almost felt bad for him after Anck-Su-Namun abandoned him after all he did for her. Yes he was evil in his approach, but you could at least see why he did what he did
The problem for me was the fact that they recasted Rachel and COMPLETELY rewrote who her character was. Like that was sooo unnecessary. It made me feel like i was being gaslighted or something. It made the casting even more worse and I'm sorry but the new actress had terrible chemistry with Frasier. Also the "romance" thing going on between his son and that girl felt very very FORCED. Like they dedicated no time to let it grow but they still forced an unnecessary subplot into an already "okay" movie.
The 1999 and 2001 Mummies are comfort movies for me. Don’t know what to watch? The Mummy and The Mummy Returns. I’ve lost track of how many times I’ve seen them. Dragon Emperor, though, I’ve not seen since the cinema.
At the time, another Mummy movie just felt unnecessary or unwanted, and losing Rachel Weisz and casting an actor for Alex that looks more like Brendan Fraser's younger brother than his son didn't help either.
The director should have had Brendan Fraser grow a beard or something, he was suffering from success of looking way too young to play a father of an adult.
Yeah but even with Rachel it wouldn't have helped the box office much. They waited too long for a sequel and should have added more humor. The charm of the original was the jokes and the chemistry between characters. The villains was also better in the first two.
I always thought they dropped the ball with the sequels fighting mummies AGAIN. Why not go up against a different Universal monster in each one? Rick O’Connell verses Creature from the Black Lagoon would’ve been awesome!
They are planning to do black lagoon but are working on a good script. They just did Nosferatu which is a critical hit but the box office isn't as strong. I just think the dark universe characters can only do about $400 box office tops just because the fan interest isn't as strong as Marvel or DC.
@ I hear ya but it’s ok to have different titles in a franchise. In the same way it’s not Raiders of the Lost Ark 2, it’s called Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Same character. Different story. Rick O’Connell Vs Creature from the Black Lagoon would’ve been awesome !
The director of the first two OG MUMMY flims Stephen sommers has shown his interest for making the part 4, with the old cast, which is great 👍👏😊. I just can't wait for that THRILL, COMEDY, HORROR, and the chemistry between Brendon and Rachel ❤️🔥
Yea don't get that excited. People change over 20yrs....& with the mostly absolute garbage that almost all big budgets are now.....I have 10% faith it'll be any kind of good.
It's unlikely they'll do another mummy but they would. This one and the Tom Cruise one both made $400+ million box office so it was profitable but the story wasn't as good though.
@@jonfreeman9682 yeah it is strange despite of that huge collection they haven't made part 4. I think they have expected 500M+ for the third movie and it didn't even made more than part 1 that's why. But they should have made MUMMY universe like tom Cruise's MISSION IMPOSSIBLE universe.
@@_rishavthakur_217 I think there's money to be made in mummy but they won't do more than $400 million. It's just not that popular. The first two mummy movies really captures the humor and action of Indiana Jones so they should recast and try to build on that.
Yep, loved the first two, hated this one. The chemistry was just not there between Rick and Evelyn in this movie. Without Weiss I just wasn't buying it.
The only good one is the first the 2nd was a dumber retread of part 1 with the same villain while 3 embraces the already inherent silly blockbuster vibe of the franchise that 2 started embracing and 3 brought full circle. The first is the only good one because it balances the horror and comedy and action well the other 2 are just more mindless action flicks.
I agree but it isn't just chemistry. The comedy was missing. The first one has great jokes and tongue in cheek humor like when the porter spouted every religious incantation to ward off the mummy was hilarious.
@@jonfreeman9682 LOL, yes that was fun. I think my moment that actually made me laugh out loud was the 'Hey, O'Connell. Looks like we have all the horses!' .. 'Hey, Benny! Looks like you're on the wrong side of the river!'
Oh, it was mostly just the recasting of Rachel Weisz that did it for me. I like Maria Bello. She's good. She's pretty and talented. She's just not Evie. The very moment Rachel Weisz turned down the script should have been the very moment they rewrote the damn thing. She wasn't an optional casting choice. Stephen Sommer was also pretty critical to the first 2 movies' success. He really wasn't replaceable. And certainly not with a freaking Fast and Furious Director. Ultimately, they should have delayed. Or just put this off until *everyone* was ready to do another one. Let Sommer do his comedy or whatever. Let Rachel spend time with her kid. Then get them back together a few years down the road. It wouldn't have been ideal, sure. They wanted to keep the train rolling. But they didn't have a choice. Doing what they ended up doing was worse and ruined any real prospect of a franchise. Just another example of out-of-touch corporatized studios thinking they know best and that the audience will just watch whatever.
even though this third one doesn't have the same energy like it's two successful predecessor, i do like the China History mix with fantasy, very adventurous indeed
The only good one is the first the 2nd was a dumber retread of part 1 with the same villain while 3 embraces the already inherent silly blockbuster vibe of the franchise that 2 started embracing and 3 brought full circle. The first is the only good one because it balances the horror and comedy and action well the other 2 are just more mindless action flicks.
Stephen Sommers talked about wanting to do a 4th film AFTER seeing the 3rd one flop… like uh you could’ve avoided that had you just done the third film like they originally asked. Smh.
The only good one is the first the 2nd was a dumber retread of part 1 with the same villain while 3 embraces the already inherent silly blockbuster vibe of the franchise that 2 started embracing and 3 brought full circle. The first is the only good one because it balances the horror and comedy and action well the other 2 are just more mindless action flicks.
The highlight of the film is Jet Li as the villain. He has the great level of powers and menace. The flaw of the film is the recasting of Rachel Weitz and completely changing her character. They just made a bad choice, as the new girl lacked the chemistry with Frasier and didn't really represent the character she was suppose to. I hated the guy they got to play their kid, found him just annoying. Glad they didn't make sequels with him, as I wouldn't have giving those a shot. I kinda liked this film, but it doesn't hold a candle to the first two, or even The Scorpion King.
7:15 to be fair, I saw this movie in theaters and I immediately went home and looked up the terracotta warriors. I know it’s the weak spot in the franchise but I enjoyed it.
Ngl even though it wasn't the best, I remember FEELING SO EXCITED! not only brandon came back but JET LI (when at his prime) was in the movie. Good or bad that's all I needed.
They really aged up Rick's son thinking that actor could be a new protagonist for the franchise, lmao. I don't think 'Tomb' is a bad movie but a 4 one with this "passing of the torch" bs would be truly horrible.
Not sure if they should even continue with the Ricky storyline. Without Brendan Fraser in the movie it doesn't have the charm. Even if you bring him and Rachel back it likely won't work. They tried that with Indiana Jones and it didn't work.
Late 90's Stephen Sommers was on a roll with incredibly fun and campy monster films. Deep Rising, The Mummy, and The Mummy Returns. I'll never understand why he didn't complete the trilogy. The Mummy films were making tons of money, and had a large fanbase (including myself). I guess he might've been offered a big deal for GI Joe, and decided that's the path he wanted to take. It's a shame, too. That's where it all went sideways. Odd Thomas is a good low budget film, but it appears he wanted to get back into the Mummy franchise after producing terrible DTV Scorpion King films. It was too late for him to make a return and save the series.
The only good one is the first the 2nd was a dumber retread of part 1 with the same villain while 3 embraces the already inherent silly blockbuster vibe of the franchise that 2 started embracing and 3 brought full circle. The first is the only good one because it balances the horror and comedy and action well the other 2 are just more mindless action flicks.
Curious fact: The Avengers was the movie that cancelled the mummy franchise, even with the struggling box office and the poor reviews, they were still going to make the Peru sequel, they did greenlit the movie, and just when pre-production was starting, Avengers came out and made a billion dollars, it showed universal how much money a blockbuster should make, they cancelled the mummy and other projects right away in a pursuit to replicate that billion dollar goalpost.
I thought Rachel said she had scheduling problems with another movie she was making, they had to go to China and wait at least a month for the production to start over there, and she didn't have the time to do that, so she passed
I actually liked the movie and found it very enjoyable, but Michelle Yeoh is somebody I like to watch anyway. What let the movie down were the continuity errors. And I think at some point it might have been more interesting to shift the focus from Mummies to other monsters. Still, I think the movie doesn't deserve the hate it gets.
Wood is earth. It makes as much sense If you need to add a fifth element why not go with lightning? "Because lightning is traditionally part of the wind element" then why do you need to include wood?
No, cause we'd all be like, "Where is she?" If she never appeared at all I'd be pissed. Maybe if she'd died off screen, and it was about Rick having to learn to live without her. Honestly though, the first two were so built around them as a couple that anything other than them together would have felt like a let down
@@tenchifan72 I honestly don't think so recasting her was completely the wrong idea I feel that having them either be divorced or separated would have been a better idea
No that would've work story wise. Then they'd have the explain the whole backstory. Recasting happens all the time like in Hannibal sequel they recast Jodie Foster with Julianne Moore which was the role that won Jodie Foster an Oscar. It wasn't the same but still worked.
The mistake imo was making the movie focused on the son character. The first two Mummy movies worked so well cause Rick O'Connell and the Mummy had almost like a 1 on 1 rivalry. The third movie did away with that and wasted Jet Li's character too cause nobody cared about the son character along with recasting Evie which pretty much everyone didnt like
The only good one is the first the 2nd was a dumber retread of part 1 with the same villain while 3 embraces the already inherent silly blockbuster vibe of the franchise that 2 started embracing and 3 brought full circle. The first is the only good one because it balances the horror and comedy and action well the other 2 are just more mindless action flicks.
I liked this movie because it something different I felt like the sequel was just a repeat of the 2nd movie Also I’m a sucker for Chinese culture and loved this movie
Mummy 3 isn’t that bad after revisiting it. Fraser is still great in them. I wish they could have crossed this series over with Van Helsing and made that the dark universe.
As a big fan of the first 2 and the Scorpion King, They left too long a gap between the 2nd and 3rd movies, so much of movie franchise success relies on momentum and that means churning out new entries at max every 3 years. (with some exceptions) the saturated movie landscape changes too drastically year to year. Audiences grow and find new things. This movie may have had a chance in 2004/2005 but by 2008 other franchises had swooped in and taken hold, Fast and furious, Batman, Harry Potter, spiderman, pirates of the carribean, transformers, etc. A 7 year gap is no man's land. At that point you should just wait 20 years and try to make it a nostalgia thing. By 2008 this movie was doomed. It came out the same year as The Dark Knight FFS. It was just out of its depth at this point and got drowned by stronger competition
The Mummy movies went the same way as Evil Dead movies. Second movie is a remake of the first one. Third movie is something else and because of that some fans hated it. Does it deserve such hate? In my opinion -> no, there are tons of worse continuations that completely destroyed the plot of a movie (I'm looking at you, Terminator 3). So no, it's still a good and fun movie, but different.
The only good one is the first the 2nd was a dumber retread of part 1 with the same villain while 3 embraces the already inherent silly blockbuster vibe of the franchise that 2 started embracing and 3 brought full circle. The first is the only good one because it balances the horror and comedy and action well the other 2 are just more mindless action flicks.
Because no one wanted a part 3. They changed the wife, made the son grow up even though we didnt really care in the first place. Even as a teen i knew it was going to be trash and of course we were right. It suffered much like rush hour 3 unneeded and unnecessary
2008, the year everyone pandered to China. Beijing Olympics, this, the dark knight with batman extraditing the accountant from hong kong, kung fu panda, IP man, like the whole year was about china, and the global economic crisis. and also Heath Ledger as the Joker. good thing Iron Man and the incredible Hulk didn't have anything about china. and Iron Man was great. is this the only year Marvel and DC released a great movie?
Won't say I hated it, but once was enough. I hate recasts. I hate ambitious writers/directors/studios slagging OG characters to build their own projects on. Teen angst in a character too old for it. The most annoying thing though, to many powers. What we got just looked like excuses to put effects on screen. Too often effects shots feel iike someone rewrote the script to wedge them in rather than natural parts of story. Like the story serves to lead to the effects. You end up feeling like the director doesn't care about the story or characters, just the flashy CGI.
For the most part, this was an ok film and I enjoyed it. It's sad about the recastings and some of the tone changes, but I would say it's still worth watching. A fourth one would have been nice as long as they stayed true to what the first two had done with the blend of action, horror, and comedy.
Too much overblown CGI and aging actors. Just do a simple explorer story where they solve puzzles, riddles and use historic knowledge to survive a death trap. 😮
If you pay close attention at the Start of the film, Evie is reading a book to a crowd, I believe the scene is meant to convey the Evie we see in the Mummy 1 and 2 is the 'Idealised Version' from the viewers imagination, Like when you imagine a character in a book but then see a illustration from the author. I may be mistaken. Also Abominable Kitty Cats!
Bro this video has major portion about the movie's storyline and less about the reason we watched it.. Next time try to trim down the storytelling portion
The idea is great, in theory. Turn the main character into an explorer who goes to different countries to fight mummies (like Indiana Jones, if his enemies were living dead). The problem was that producers recast characters, forgot about others, and made Brendan Fraser’s son an adult. Fraser was not old enough at the time for that to be acceptable. It looked weird. And they did that because they were too greedy, hoping to turn the son into the star of another trilogy. Marvel before Marvel.
As if marvel invented the sequel BS. What TF you 12?
The only good part in the series is part 1 because it balanced the horror and action tone. Part 2 was more of the same but dumber, and this one just fully embraces the dumb blockbuster vibe the series was embracing more with part 2.
This movie is like somebody played Indiana Jones And The Emperor's Tomb and thought "I can't make any indi movie but I can make a Mummy movie"
@@6HauntedDaysdon’t gatekeep. I’m 34. 2008 was CRUCIAL for multiple franchises. Indiana Jones, Iron Man, Hulk, Mummy, Hellboy 2, and Batman ALL had active movies racking up cash from little Edgelords like you. Mummy 3 WAS an attempt to stay afloat as the “failed” Spider Man 3 of 2007 showed that even superheroes can overstay and must evolve. 2009 was even the year many action franchises failed to become the next Pirates of the Caribbean.
It's not a horror film 😂
The mummy and the sequel will go down as legendary movies
Already is friendo
@@euj0 it just has the rewatchable energy you know lol
Very hard to top the charm of the original. The Tom Cruise one wasn't terrible but doesn't have the goofy humor of Rick O'Connell and I think it needs that.
@@jonfreeman9682 i might watch the first 1 again tonight
@@grantpowell4135it's the curse, beware of the CURSE!😢
Having no Rachel Weisz was already a major blow to the movie's marketing and story, her chemistry with Brendan Fraser was one of the major reasons the original Mummy worked so well - but another reason I don't see talked about enough is the titular mummy himself. Imhotep had such presence, urgency in his actions, and an understandable motivation in resurrecting his lover, plus Arnold Vosloo seemed to revel in every moment playing the character. The Emperor was just...well, plain evil.
Yes.. Imhotep was almost a tragic character. You kind of almost felt bad for him after Anck-Su-Namun abandoned him after all he did for her. Yes he was evil in his approach, but you could at least see why he did what he did
No Rachel Weitz. That's what was wrong with it.
Among other things
This movie should never have been greenlit without Weisz. She and Fraser had phenomenal chemistry in the first two.
The problem for me was the fact that they recasted Rachel and COMPLETELY rewrote who her character was. Like that was sooo unnecessary. It made me feel like i was being gaslighted or something. It made the casting even more worse and I'm sorry but the new actress had terrible chemistry with Frasier. Also the "romance" thing going on between his son and that girl felt very very FORCED. Like they dedicated no time to let it grow but they still forced an unnecessary subplot into an already "okay" movie.
That’s the real reason. It flopped because the actress sucked.
The director wanted to make the movie more grounded. Really? It’s a movie about a mummy dude.
The 1999 and 2001 Mummies are comfort movies for me. Don’t know what to watch? The Mummy and The Mummy Returns. I’ve lost track of how many times I’ve seen them. Dragon Emperor, though, I’ve not seen since the cinema.
At the time, another Mummy movie just felt unnecessary or unwanted, and losing Rachel Weisz and casting an actor for Alex that looks more like Brendan Fraser's younger brother than his son didn't help either.
The director should have had Brendan Fraser grow a beard or something, he was suffering from success of looking way too young to play a father of an adult.
k
Yeah but even with Rachel it wouldn't have helped the box office much. They waited too long for a sequel and should have added more humor. The charm of the original was the jokes and the chemistry between characters. The villains was also better in the first two.
I always thought they dropped the ball with the sequels fighting mummies AGAIN. Why not go up against a different Universal monster in each one? Rick O’Connell verses Creature from the Black Lagoon would’ve been awesome!
Because is called The Mummy. That's what Van Helsing was supposed to do. But they never made sequels.
They are planning to do black lagoon but are working on a good script. They just did Nosferatu which is a critical hit but the box office isn't as strong. I just think the dark universe characters can only do about $400 box office tops just because the fan interest isn't as strong as Marvel or DC.
@ I hear ya but it’s ok to have different titles in a franchise. In the same way it’s not Raiders of the Lost Ark 2, it’s called Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Same character. Different story. Rick O’Connell Vs Creature from the Black Lagoon would’ve been awesome !
That's so true. The Mummy is in the same universe as all the other classic monster movies
The director of the first two OG MUMMY flims Stephen sommers has shown his interest for making the part 4, with the old cast, which is great 👍👏😊. I just can't wait for that THRILL, COMEDY, HORROR, and the chemistry between Brendon and Rachel ❤️🔥
Yea don't get that excited. People change over 20yrs....& with the mostly absolute garbage that almost all big budgets are now.....I have 10% faith it'll be any kind of good.
@@6HauntedDays you are right man but lets hope for the best outcome 😃☺
It's unlikely they'll do another mummy but they would. This one and the Tom Cruise one both made $400+ million box office so it was profitable but the story wasn't as good though.
@@jonfreeman9682 yeah it is strange despite of that huge collection they haven't made part 4. I think they have expected 500M+ for the third movie and it didn't even made more than part 1 that's why.
But they should have made MUMMY universe like tom Cruise's MISSION IMPOSSIBLE universe.
@@_rishavthakur_217 I think there's money to be made in mummy but they won't do more than $400 million. It's just not that popular. The first two mummy movies really captures the humor and action of Indiana Jones so they should recast and try to build on that.
Yep, loved the first two, hated this one. The chemistry was just not there between Rick and Evelyn in this movie. Without Weiss I just wasn't buying it.
The only good one is the first the 2nd was a dumber retread of part 1 with the same villain while 3 embraces the already inherent silly blockbuster vibe of the franchise that 2 started embracing and 3 brought full circle. The first is the only good one because it balances the horror and comedy and action well the other 2 are just more mindless action flicks.
@@boomstickcritique902 Yep, I can see that. I agree :)
I agree but it isn't just chemistry. The comedy was missing. The first one has great jokes and tongue in cheek humor like when the porter spouted every religious incantation to ward off the mummy was hilarious.
@@jonfreeman9682 LOL, yes that was fun. I think my moment that actually made me laugh out loud was the 'Hey, O'Connell. Looks like we have all the horses!' .. 'Hey, Benny! Looks like you're on the wrong side of the river!'
Honestly The Mummy animated series is a better third installment than this movie.
Oh, it was mostly just the recasting of Rachel Weisz that did it for me.
I like Maria Bello. She's good. She's pretty and talented. She's just not Evie.
The very moment Rachel Weisz turned down the script should have been the very moment they rewrote the damn thing. She wasn't an optional casting choice.
Stephen Sommer was also pretty critical to the first 2 movies' success. He really wasn't replaceable. And certainly not with a freaking Fast and Furious Director.
Ultimately, they should have delayed. Or just put this off until *everyone* was ready to do another one. Let Sommer do his comedy or whatever. Let Rachel spend time with her kid. Then get them back together a few years down the road.
It wouldn't have been ideal, sure. They wanted to keep the train rolling. But they didn't have a choice. Doing what they ended up doing was worse and ruined any real prospect of a franchise.
Just another example of out-of-touch corporatized studios thinking they know best and that the audience will just watch whatever.
even though this third one doesn't have the same energy like it's two successful predecessor, i do like the China History mix with fantasy, very adventurous indeed
It sucked 😂
The only good one is the first the 2nd was a dumber retread of part 1 with the same villain while 3 embraces the already inherent silly blockbuster vibe of the franchise that 2 started embracing and 3 brought full circle. The first is the only good one because it balances the horror and comedy and action well the other 2 are just more mindless action flicks.
@@boomstickcritique902 I saw the second one first and I really loved it. Because I couldn't care less if it was similar to another movie.
Stephen Sommers talked about wanting to do a 4th film AFTER seeing the 3rd one flop… like uh you could’ve avoided that had you just done the third film like they originally asked. Smh.
The only good one is the first the 2nd was a dumber retread of part 1 with the same villain while 3 embraces the already inherent silly blockbuster vibe of the franchise that 2 started embracing and 3 brought full circle. The first is the only good one because it balances the horror and comedy and action well the other 2 are just more mindless action flicks.
He was busy with G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra.
The highlight of the film is Jet Li as the villain. He has the great level of powers and menace. The flaw of the film is the recasting of Rachel Weitz and completely changing her character. They just made a bad choice, as the new girl lacked the chemistry with Frasier and didn't really represent the character she was suppose to. I hated the guy they got to play their kid, found him just annoying. Glad they didn't make sequels with him, as I wouldn't have giving those a shot. I kinda liked this film, but it doesn't hold a candle to the first two, or even The Scorpion King.
Definitely the villain makes the movie and the first two had Imotep which was a worthy adversary for Rick. This dragon emperor is totally forgettable.
Not my Evie!
7:15 to be fair, I saw this movie in theaters and I immediately went home and looked up the terracotta warriors. I know it’s the weak spot in the franchise but I enjoyed it.
Its actually really nice to hear one of the main asian talents in the movie was so down with the usage and portrayal of the cultures history and such
All this time i thought it was just a awful attempt at setting up a spin off about the son
I don't have a problem with thus one. I don't think it deserves so much hate
Another The Mummy sequel? Take my money.
I like tomb of the dragon emperor, I'd like to see one with azteks
Love this channel.
We appreciate that!
@@JoBloHorrorOriginals When This Movie Came Out I Was Paying A Whole Lot Of Attention To The Dark Knight At The Time.
The Aztec Mummy movie this teased, should've been this movie. Just for the reason that Aztec mummies are the 2nd most well known than Chinese mummies
This was a fine entry, but "Journey to the Center of the Earth" was the more enjoyable Brendan Fraiser action movie of 2008.
Ngl even though it wasn't the best, I remember FEELING SO EXCITED! not only brandon came back but JET LI (when at his prime) was in the movie. Good or bad that's all I needed.
This movie got me really into Chinese mythology and legends at the time so I can't complain too much. I'll enjoy anything Brendan Fraser is in.
They really aged up Rick's son thinking that actor could be a new protagonist for the franchise, lmao.
I don't think 'Tomb' is a bad movie but a 4 one with this "passing of the torch" bs would be truly horrible.
Yeah, big oof. Guy's career never really took off either.
Not sure if they should even continue with the Ricky storyline. Without Brendan Fraser in the movie it doesn't have the charm. Even if you bring him and Rachel back it likely won't work. They tried that with Indiana Jones and it didn't work.
Late 90's Stephen Sommers was on a roll with incredibly fun and campy monster films. Deep Rising, The Mummy, and The Mummy Returns. I'll never understand why he didn't complete the trilogy. The Mummy films were making tons of money, and had a large fanbase (including myself). I guess he might've been offered a big deal for GI Joe, and decided that's the path he wanted to take. It's a shame, too. That's where it all went sideways. Odd Thomas is a good low budget film, but it appears he wanted to get back into the Mummy franchise after producing terrible DTV Scorpion King films. It was too late for him to make a return and save the series.
Only the first two mummy movies were good. The rest are forgettable.
The only good one is the first the 2nd was a dumber retread of part 1 with the same villain while 3 embraces the already inherent silly blockbuster vibe of the franchise that 2 started embracing and 3 brought full circle. The first is the only good one because it balances the horror and comedy and action well the other 2 are just more mindless action flicks.
Curious fact: The Avengers was the movie that cancelled the mummy franchise, even with the struggling box office and the poor reviews, they were still going to make the Peru sequel, they did greenlit the movie, and just when pre-production was starting, Avengers came out and made a billion dollars, it showed universal how much money a blockbuster should make, they cancelled the mummy and other projects right away in a pursuit to replicate that billion dollar goalpost.
I saw the movie, it's decent but doesn't come close to its predecessors.
This movie has more going on than most movies of today
Of course not as good as the first two but I really enjoyed this one. I went to see it with my dad and we just enjoyed the action and adventure.
As soon as you said he's not a fan of gooofiness or slapstick is a highly reason why .
Wait wait wait... The emperor was an avatar?
So basically, it's Battle Beasts the movie? Earth, Fire, Water!!!!
I kinda lost interest with Jet Li being plastered all over the advertising before I even saw it and then got annoyed when he was barely in the movie
I don't remember anyone using the word reboot at all when the first came out.
I'm not one for head canon but to me this movie was a nightmare Rick had after hanging over the edge of the underworld.
The Mummy III: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor Rulez✊🏻& It's Fun🤩!
😂
Right! I agree that I didn’t like the change of actors for the wife, but I honestly thought it was awesome and the best one lol
It didn't work because Rachel wasn't in it. And most importantly Imhotep.
As he said, "Death is only the beginning"
7:25 is exactly what Black Myth Wukong accomplished 😅
I thought Rachel said she had scheduling problems with another movie she was making, they had to go to China and wait at least a month for the production to start over there, and she didn't have the time to do that, so she passed
I actually liked the movie and found it very enjoyable, but Michelle Yeoh is somebody I like to watch anyway.
What let the movie down were the continuity errors. And I think at some point it might have been more interesting to shift the focus from Mummies to other monsters. Still, I think the movie doesn't deserve the hate it gets.
Still cool, glad he came back
Didn't even remember there was a third one
No were near as good as the other 2 but i didnt think it was to bad 😅
Nowhere *
Wow.. how ridiculous is it that $400million is classed as _a disappointment_ .. 😒
This was a very good movie.
Wood is earth. It makes as much sense If you need to add a fifth element why not go with lightning? "Because lightning is traditionally part of the wind element" then why do you need to include wood?
The elements in Western and Eastern philosophy are different. Wood is a traditional Chinese element, that's why they chose it.
I feel that Evie and Rick divorced would've been a better reason than recasting her
No, cause we'd all be like, "Where is she?" If she never appeared at all I'd be pissed. Maybe if she'd died off screen, and it was about Rick having to learn to live without her. Honestly though, the first two were so built around them as a couple that anything other than them together would have felt like a let down
@@tenchifan72 I honestly don't think so recasting her was completely the wrong idea I feel that having them either be divorced or separated would have been a better idea
No that would've work story wise. Then they'd have the explain the whole backstory. Recasting happens all the time like in Hannibal sequel they recast Jodie Foster with Julianne Moore which was the role that won Jodie Foster an Oscar. It wasn't the same but still worked.
@@jonfreeman9682 Foster knew a sequel was coming and was foolish not to stay available for what could have been an even huger sequel success.
If Brendan came back to the franchise I'd prefer him as wise mentor type rather than the action hero
The mistake imo was making the movie focused on the son character. The first two Mummy movies worked so well cause Rick O'Connell and the Mummy had almost like a 1 on 1 rivalry. The third movie did away with that and wasted Jet Li's character too cause nobody cared about the son character along with recasting Evie which pretty much everyone didnt like
Just who would think of China when we talk about mummies? The idea should have been scrapped from the very beginning!
It had no soul 😂
The only good one is the first the 2nd was a dumber retread of part 1 with the same villain while 3 embraces the already inherent silly blockbuster vibe of the franchise that 2 started embracing and 3 brought full circle. The first is the only good one because it balances the horror and comedy and action well the other 2 are just more mindless action flicks.
I never knew this movie exist
Bro, we could've had ANTONIO BANDERAS in a Mummy movie?
I liked this movie because it something different
I felt like the sequel was just a repeat of the 2nd movie
Also I’m a sucker for Chinese culture and loved this movie
The sinbad idea might have been good
I enjoyed the 3rd mummy film, it was watchable
Number 1: Rachel Weiz wasn’t there anymore
Mummy 3 isn’t that bad after revisiting it. Fraser is still great in them. I wish they could have crossed this series over with Van Helsing and made that the dark universe.
Its not a bad movie. In fact it's really good. The problem is following up two great movies.
As a big fan of the first 2 and the Scorpion King, They left too long a gap between the 2nd and 3rd movies, so much of movie franchise success relies on momentum and that means churning out new entries at max every 3 years. (with some exceptions) the saturated movie landscape changes too drastically year to year. Audiences grow and find new things.
This movie may have had a chance in 2004/2005 but by 2008 other franchises had swooped in and taken hold, Fast and furious, Batman, Harry Potter, spiderman, pirates of the carribean, transformers, etc.
A 7 year gap is no man's land. At that point you should just wait 20 years and try to make it a nostalgia thing.
By 2008 this movie was doomed. It came out the same year as The Dark Knight FFS. It was just out of its depth at this point and got drowned by stronger competition
They messed up by recasting Rachel
Funny thing, in the animated series, they went to China and Peru.
The Mummy movies went the same way as Evil Dead movies. Second movie is a remake of the first one. Third movie is something else and because of that some fans hated it. Does it deserve such hate? In my opinion -> no, there are tons of worse continuations that completely destroyed the plot of a movie (I'm looking at you, Terminator 3). So no, it's still a good and fun movie, but different.
I had this playing in the background on Sunday.. Mummy 3 is a disappointment
Although not as good as the first 2, i really enjoy the third mummy movie
I actually liked this mummy 😂😂
Rick's story ended with TMR. There was no third entry.
Without weisz, it should have been something else entirely
what about WTF happened to SIR CHRISTOPHER LEE?
he died?
@@darkstar55087 yeah, they well gonna uploaded this video like Vincent Price
I liked em All & own all 3!
There’s 4 movies if you want to count Scorpion King.
@WesternXC i don't but also enjoy it just not it's sequel
The only good one is the first the 2nd was a dumber retread of part 1 with the same villain while 3 embraces the already inherent silly blockbuster vibe of the franchise that 2 started embracing and 3 brought full circle. The first is the only good one because it balances the horror and comedy and action well the other 2 are just more mindless action flicks.
@@boomstickcritique902 beauty is in the eye of the beholder 👁🎥
@MattPowers209 A Grenade when off next to my face it's why I'm so pretty.
Because no one wanted a part 3. They changed the wife, made the son grow up even though we didnt really care in the first place. Even as a teen i knew it was going to be trash and of course we were right. It suffered much like rush hour 3 unneeded and unnecessary
I think you got wrong on the first films box office wrong it made 417 million
Reboot the whole thing and have it fight mummy, the creature Frankenstein, and lagoon monster in a while new trilogy.
Only thing wrong in my mind was the replacement of Evie
I loved the van helsing movie
2008, the year everyone pandered to China. Beijing Olympics, this, the dark knight with batman extraditing the accountant from hong kong, kung fu panda, IP man, like the whole year was about china, and the global economic crisis. and also Heath Ledger as the Joker. good thing Iron Man and the incredible Hulk didn't have anything about china. and Iron Man was great. is this the only year Marvel and DC released a great movie?
None of the mummy movies are horror films...
Uhhhh yeah they are
@@goodburger1114 yes, 3 is horrific
Definetly more action than horror but they still had some scary parts.
Won't say I hated it, but once was enough. I hate recasts. I hate ambitious writers/directors/studios slagging OG characters to build their own projects on. Teen angst in a character too old for it.
The most annoying thing though, to many powers. What we got just looked like excuses to put effects on screen. Too often effects shots feel iike someone rewrote the script to wedge them in rather than natural parts of story. Like the story serves to lead to the effects. You end up feeling like the director doesn't care about the story or characters, just the flashy CGI.
This movie would have been so much worse if it was made now. It would be some AliBaba slop blatantly geared to a specific market
The story was really dumb
For the most part, this was an ok film and I enjoyed it. It's sad about the recastings and some of the tone changes, but I would say it's still worth watching. A fourth one would have been nice as long as they stayed true to what the first two had done with the blend of action, horror, and comedy.
WTF happened to these videos? Might as well just post a merch link.
Honestly, the Mommy 3 wasn't that bad. Was it as good as the first 2? No. but it wasn't unwatchable.
I couldn’t through the MASSIVE 20 minute exposition dump at the start of the movie.
Where is the early gang at?
With ur mom
@@goodburger1114hahah
@@goodburger1114rip mum :(
@@mattrockets391thts what I like to see friendly banter taken as friendly banter as heeth only jest for sport
First watch was lil cringe but it’s actually not that bad
I’d ignore Mummy 2 given how bad the cgi is. Visually it is one of the most unpleasant films I’ve ever watched.
Too much overblown CGI and aging actors. Just do a simple explorer story where they solve puzzles, riddles and use historic knowledge to survive a death trap. 😮
If you pay close attention at the Start of the film, Evie is reading a book to a crowd, I believe the scene is meant to convey the Evie we see in the Mummy 1 and 2 is the 'Idealised Version' from the viewers imagination, Like when you imagine a character in a book but then see a illustration from the author. I may be mistaken.
Also Abominable Kitty Cats!
👍👍👍🎥
The original script was much better …more links to the first two films
Bro this video has major portion about the movie's storyline and less about the reason we watched it.. Next time try to trim down the storytelling portion
As much as I love Jet Li, Brendan Fraser and Michelle Yeoh, this movie wasn’t very good. I’ll stick with the first one.