My thoughts on why 'the Mummy' failed to launch Dark Universe

I still contend that "monsters as heroes" *could* work. The problem, or at least one of the problems, is that Universal decided not to do that. Instead of making the Mummy the hero, they kept the Mummy as the villain, and tried to make the hero Tom Cruise.

Simple fix they should have though about if they wanted hero Cruise: Evil Mummy Kharis breaks out first, Ahmanet awakes afterward seeking to stop him, and instead of trying to curse Tom Cruise with an evil spirit, she's brining back her mentor Imhotep.
 
Except they sort of turned Tom Cruise into the Mummy at the end :)
 
I thought the Mummy in The Monster Squad movie was creepier than the one in the Tom Cruise movie.
 
I thought the Mummy in The Monster Squad movie was creepier than the one in the Tom Cruise movie.

cf13bd22-a168-4ab8-9512-c1b80001ea94.jpg
 
I still contend that "monsters as heroes" *could* work. The problem, or at least one of the problems, is that Universal decided not to do that. Instead of making the Mummy the hero, they kept the Mummy as the villain, and tried to make the hero Tom Cruise.

The only way you make the monsters work as heroes is if there's some redeeming quality about them. Ultimately you would set it up so they are the antagonist in their respective films, but when the team up film comes when they battle like Dracula or whoever they would be the protagonists. You've got to make them sympathetic to the audiences first in order for that to work.
 
The only way you make the monsters work as heroes is if there's some redeeming quality about them. Ultimately you would set it up so they are the antagonist in their respective films, but when the team up film comes when they battle like Dracula or whoever they would be the protagonists. You've got to make them sympathetic to the audiences first in order for that to work.

A good number of them should probably be sympathetic anyways. Several of the classic monsters were sympathetic in their original films such as Imhotep, Frankenstein's monster, Larry Talbot, RKO's King Kong, and more.
 
And several others have possible sympathetic angles you can play for. Dracula Untold worked fine, as a plot outline, and isn't even the first time Dracula has been done as a dark anti-hero rather than a cackling black hat villain. Likewise, you could dial up the sympathy level of the Mummy ( less human sacrifice ), or do a mix of the two types of classic Universal mummies, and have a risen intelligent superpowered Mummy brought back from the peace of death by wrongs committed in the modern world.
 
A good number of them should probably be sympathetic anyways. Several of the classic monsters were sympathetic in their original films such as Imhotep, Frankenstein's monster, Larry Talbot, RKO's King Kong, and more.

I rewatched The Wolf Man (1941) just the other day. A very sympathetic portrayal of Talbot by Lon Chaney.
 
It's actually pretty straight forward now I think of it, you make The Mummy, Invisible Man, Wolf Man, Frankenstein's Monster, Creature from the Black Lagoon sympathetic characters and/or characters looking to redeem themselves. The end of each film sees them taken in by Prodigium. Big team up film sees Dracula as the big bad, the all get released to battle him.
 
It's actually pretty straight forward now I think of it, you make The Mummy, Invisible Man, Wolf Man, Frankenstein's Monster, Creature from the Black Lagoon sympathetic characters and/or characters looking to redeem themselves. The end of each film sees them taken in by Prodigium. Big team up film sees Dracula as the big bad, the all get released to battle him.
Sounds great.
Too bad we probably won't see it now.
 
It's a shame they never expanded on the fact Imhotep is scared of kitties. It would have been fun to include Bast at some point
 
Oh man, I loved that scene in the first Mummy where Fraser holds up a cat and sends Imhotep fleeing. It’s comedy gold.
 
Its a pity.
They were talking about a version of The Creature of the Black Lagoon where the creature was female.
I really wanted to see that.
 
One thing those Universal horrors of the 30s and 40s have in spades is atmosphere. Watching them I've never really felt like I'm in eastern Europe, ancient Egypt, or an English country estate; I'm in a magical alternate take on those places. For 85 mins or so I'm completely immersed in a world of fog-machined, studio-bound, supernatural adventure. I get a similar feeling of 'it's our world - but not quite' watching the earlier Basil Rathbone/Nigel Bruce Sherlock Holmes movies.
 
No that's true. Even it's the same with '60s spy flicks. They had a real aesthetic and atmosphere.

Maybe Vaughan could do a forties gothic horror thing?
 
I think they struck out with this whole attempt. I thought they should have put some $ on the table for Guillermo del Toro. He seems to be a perfect fit for the style they needed. Just ask him what monster do you want and go from there.
 
I'm burned out on Del Toro. I feel like he's fallen into the same problem Burton did in that he makes beautifully stunning visuals and not much else. Crimson Peak was terrible, and Pacific Rim was atrocious.
 
Crimson Peak was generally poor, but it did have an atmosphere that reminded me of those old Universal movies.
 
I freaking loved Crimson Peak. But I think they won't want straight horror again, more action adventure with horror elements
 
I freaking loved Crimson Peak. But I think they won't want straight horror again, more action adventure with horror elements

Just copying the S. Sommers Mummy films......if thats what they wanted they should have included B. Fraser
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,328
Messages
22,086,625
Members
45,885
Latest member
RadioactiveMan
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"