Guess What?! They're rebooting THE MUMMY!

[TheVileOne]

Terrible career move by Wiseman. Why would he want to do another big budget remake after what happened with Total Recall?

 

[Gianakin_]

The real question would have to be: why give him a big budget at all?

 

[Sawyer]

He could probably do better with a lower budget, strange as that may seem. Less frills and ****, more actual storytelling.

 

[Gianakin_]

No argument there. But I really believe the particular guy is useless with any kind of budget in his hands.

 

[Naked Shia]

He's just a yes man. He's not that bad, but he's nothing special. Mummy 99 was really fun. And I liked mummy 2 as well. It was over the top but it was never boring. And it still had Rachel Weisz.

 

[Gianakin_]

Scantily dressed at parts.

 

[Silvermoth]

Len Wiseman >>>>>>>>>>> Stephen Sommers

That's not really fair. Sommers may have made a bad career choice with the last GI Joe film but come on, he was working for a studio who as soon as he was gone replaced him with the director of Justin Beiber's movie just because it made alot of money!

The first Mummy movie alone puts him way over Wiseman who is quite boring I think and not very creative at all.

I was kind of interested in seeing where they were going with this when I found out one of the writers of Prometheus was writing it but I'm not so keen now. Oh well.

Just for the record, I thought before this that it would be cool to see Hayley Atwell as Evie and James Corden as Jonathan if they were maintaining the old characters.

 

[Gianakin_]

Very well said, Silvermoth (regarding Wiseman vs. Sommers).

 

[jmc]

Just when you thought things couldn't get any more pathetic.
http://www.deadline.com/2012/09/len-wiseman-wrapping-up-deal-to-helm-universal-reboot-of-the-mummy/

With Len Wiseman, no less!

Must they?

 

[Piper Maru]

I'm indifferent about this. After all these remakes/reboots you get used to it.

 

[Haff]

The last Mummy movie 1999 was actually pretty good it doesn't need a goddamn remake it's only been about 12 years. I can understand Judge Dredd because that needed a remake. Nothings original anymore they'll just keep regurgitating the same movie titles every year.

 

[Ultimatehero]

The last Mummy movie 1999 was actually pretty good it doesn't need a goddamn remake it's only been about 12 years.

It's not a 'remake' any more than Batman Begins is a 'remake' of Tim Burton's Batman and Casino Royal is a 'remake' of Dr. No.

This Is an OBVIOUS different take with different characters and in the modern day world with everything different except for the notion of who the monster is. It's a new take on a classic property. Maybe it's just as a literature guy and ancient film guy that I'm unsure why people are going on seemingly about it being like 1999 when in the article they themselves have said it's entirely different. No Rick O' Connell in sight going through ruins. Not Indiana Jones. From the sounds of it - it will be a horror movie, probably in tone a lot like Hollow Man to The Invisible Man. And from what it seems like it's as similar to 1999 as Dean Koontz's Frakenstein is to Marry Shelly's. I'm just really surprised some people are acting as though it is a remake. Universal has always thrived off of it's classic monsters. They've made a lot of Dracula and Frankenstein and Jekyll & Hyde films over the years, none of which seem anything alike other than its title character. So, why the "they can't make the Mummy again!"? It's not a remake. It's a monster. I can understand not liking the people behind it, but -- in comparison? The Mummy has been seen and used very little as a character in comparison to the number of times we've all seen vampires and werewolves - I'd say it's a welcomed change-up.

Plus? It's been around since 1827 in popular culture and the film since 1932! To me, I'm just hard pressed to call properties that old 'reboots.' If it it came out in the 90s or 80s, yeah - sure... but to me it's as much a reboot as mirror,mirror and snow white and the huntsman is to disney's snow white.

 

[Spideyfan93]

Doesn't matter if it's a re imagining, alternate take, whatever!

It's too damn soon. It took decades upon decades to get 1999's Mummy. And the last sequel came out 4 years ago!

It's just...why? Unnecessary.

 

[bullets]

I enjoyed the Underworld films. This might have some potential.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Doesn't matter if it's a re imagining, alternate take, whatever!

It's too damn soon. It took decades upon decades to get 1999's Mummy. And the last sequel came out 4 years ago!

It's just...why? Unnecessary.

Once again... why?????!!!!

There's no reasoning behind it.

We keep on getting vampire movies over and over and over and over and over again. Same with werewolves. Over and over and over and over again. Same with superhero movies over and over and over again.

Mummies in comparison -- zilch, nada, not a lot. And definitely not a lot to say "stop making Mummy movies!" This has absolutely NOTHING to do with the Steven Summers films!

If it was a remake with the same time period, characters, and everything - then yeah, it is is too soon... but it's... NOT... from what can be gathered it's set in modern day with a more scientific approach to it, there will be action but it will not be anywhere close to Indiana Jones, and it'll be more of a horror film this time around. As said, in the interview itself - they went on and on about how it WON'T be like the 1999 film franchise and more akin to Michael Chrichton horror.

People are complaining over this - which IS EXACTLY the same as a movie having vampires, werewolves, and even ghosts - why exactly? Should we stop making ghost movies as well just because the last one was a couple of months ago? The logic just doesn't hold. From the scientific and MC approach this sounds as similar as Hollowman to the Invisible Man.

 

[Destructus86]

This has potential. The Mummy was great, but the rest of the films were horrible. I think they could improve on them.

 

[Vapor]

His Total Recall was very generic but I liked his first Underworld film. Maybe if he can tackle it with that sort of vibe (or similar to the first Sommers Mummy with a slightly more horror slant than a straight up adventure/action film like Returns was) and do a mix of cgi and prosphetics for the Mummy like with the Werewolves then.... it could be ok.

 

[Wesley Dodds]

Sad part is I'm completely used to entirely unnecessary reboots now.
Once upon a time, I'm sure this news would've really confusedme, but these days I don't feel much at all...

 

[E.NormusJohnson]

I'll take Live Free or Die Hard over Die Hard 2 any day of the week.

Um... just no.

 

[TheVileOne]

It just seems like bass ackwards career move for Wiseman after what happened with Total Recall.

I don't hate Wiseman at all, I think he's a very talented director but I think he needs to try and do something different or something of his own again instead of other people's franchises. I think it was a bit of a waste for his first movie in five years to be a Total Recall remake no one wanted.

I mean a Mummy movie, it will be set in modern day and be a darker take I guess looking at his stuff like Underworld. OK, but I mean why? He's done Die Hard which did OK but Total Recall was a failure. Why not try something else before going back to older franchises again?

I think Wiseman should try doing something smaller cooler and different to prove himself again.

Think of it like The A-Team. Now I enjoyed A-Team by Carnahan but the movie flopped and it failed to ignite a new movie franchise for Fox. But after A-Team Carnahan did a smaller, hard survival action thriller in The Grey and it was a big hit. So despite the failure of the A-Team, Carnahan was able to quickly regain a bit of his credibility again with The Grey.

 

[Octoberist]

This shows how desperate Universal is. Thought MGM is king since they almost died off and now are banking on Bond, Hobbit and 100 remakes on the horizon.

 

[TheVileOne]

Yeah but umm Robocop remake.

 

[Octoberist]

Which I'm on the fence on. It could be awesome or a Gavin Hood situation.

 

[TheVileOne]

It's not like MGM is doing this themselves anyway. WB is co-producing and releasing the Hobbit movies. Sony is co-producing and releasing Robocop and the upcoming James Bond movies.

 

[Octoberist]

I kept Hobbit and Bond ina differet category. There's also Red Dawn, Carrie and potentially Poltergeist.