The Mummy Returns (2001) Poster

User Reviews

Add a Review
904 ReviewsOrdered By: Helpfulness
Better than some would make out...
mentalcritic21 May 2001
When The Mummy hit theatres in 1999, critics everywhere panned it as being a poor man's Indiana Jones. While the two movies are about as similar as Dr. No is to GoldenEye (thankfully), I suppose comparisons between one non-stop adventure film and other are inevitable. In the end, what really counts when determining a film's quality is the level to which it can entertain. And if there is one thing The Mummy did well, it was entertain. Brendan Fraser, Rachel Weisz, and Arnold Vosloo were very well chosen for their roles.

The Mummy Returns is easy to see as being another sequel churned out to satiate the greedy money-machine that Hollywood has become, but it has a few things working for it. One thing that is immediately obvious is that the sequel was very much intended to be a film that could be enjoyed without ever having seen the original. The only references to the previous film are done to fill in the narrative gaps about who Imhotep is, and why he is the way he is. The addition of The Scorpion King was an interesting effort to give the film a new antagonist, but the lack of screentime didn't work well in this tangent's favour. Another tangent that could have been better developed was the rivalry between Imhotep's girlfriend and whatever her name was. Imhotep originally mistook Rachel Weisz's character for being his girlfriend reincarnated, so the use of a woman who looks exactly like her while creating this new tangent needed to be developed differently.

Most people won't give a damn about complex story tangents and will want to know if this film is entertaining. And it is entertaining, alright. There is barely a dull moment in the film's substantial running length, and Oded Fehr does a bang-up job of providing a Mad-Max-cum-Indiana-Jones hero. I want to know where they get those groovy costumes and tattoos from, they look quite nice. Anyway, when all is said and done, this is an eight out of ten film. A few badly constructed story details here and there, but some extremely entertaining action sequences make up for them. Don't listen to the nay-sayers. This is matinee-style material at its (almost) best. Get the DVD when it comes out, it will at least tide you over until George Lucas gets his head out of his proverbial and realises that the VHS era is well and truly over.
65 out of 77 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Pretty good for a sequel.
daria847 May 2003
This movie is pretty good, it delivers pretty much the same thing we got in the Firs movie. Some characters are more developed and some others more expanded, all the same, some others are reduced and we are introduced to new characters. The plot is good, not as good as the first movie, but still does a good job keeping you interested and entertained the whole time.

The sequel takes place 10 years later, when Rick O'Conell (Brendan Fraser) and Evelyn Carnahan (Rachel Weisz) are now married, and have a son, Alex (Freddie Boath). Alex has been kidnaped by the bad guys, including the infamous Imhotep (Arnold Vosloo) and his eternal love reincarnated (Patricia Velazques). Now it's just a matter of time for them to find Alex before it's too late for everybody...

The performances are pretty good, almost all of them. Brendan Fraser does a good job once again as the handsome Rick, he is strong, funny, charismatic, what else can you ask? Rachel Weisz role has been developed a lot more, she is no longer the clumsy egyptologist wanna-be, now she runs the British museum and is a mom; and she does a great job with that. John Hannah is also back as the useless Jonathan, this time not as funny as he used to be. Oded Fehr character has been expanded a lot, we get to see him a lot more in this movie. He did a good job as Ardeth. One more time, the winner of this movie is Arnold Vosloo as the villain; his performance was excellent! He manages to express all the emotions without opening his mouth! This guy has great acting skills, too bad not many movie producers/directors have noticed it. The Rock does his movie debut with this movie, he is the Scorpion King, the whole movie turns around him, even though he was in the movie for the first 5 minutes of it. Still he did a good job for his first time. Patricia Velazques was the only one who did a BAAAAD job. Her acting is awful! She is pretty and everything, but she really needs some acting classes.

The music once again is one of the key parts of this movie, it is really good, even though Jerry Goldsmith wasn't in charge of it. The direction is good too, just like in the first movie, and we get to see a lot more of special effects.

This movie is good, i really enjoyed it, I liked the first one better though, but that's just me. You might like this one better, so YOU MUST SEE THIS ONE! **** out of *****
29 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Special Effects Extravaganza
jhclues8 May 2001
If you've seen the trailer for this movie, you're probably expecting fast paced adventure, non-stop action and a special effects extravaganza with just enough story to keep it all interesting. And if that's what you're hoping for, you certainly won't be disappointed; because that's exactly what you get in `The Mummy Returns,' written and directed by Stephen Sommers. The story begins in Egypt, where Rick O'Connell (Brendan Fraser) and his wife, Evelyn (Rachel Weisz) discover an ancient bracelet that had once belonged to a warrior known as `The Scorpion King (The Rock),' who, back in the day, had sold his soul to the god, Anubis, for control of his armies and domination of the world. Now, it seems, The Scorpion King's resurrection is imminent, and if he succeeds and once again raises the armies of Anubis, he could very well take over or destroy the world. Followers of Im-Ho-Tep (Arnold Vosloo), however, who are privy to this information as well, decide to resurrect their dark leader so that he can face The Scorpion King, defeat him, take control of Anubis' armies and conquer the world himself, putting them in control. But the key to the whole plan lies with who has control of the bracelet at the time of The Scorpion King's resurrection. And the O'Connells have taken it back home with them to London.

So the adventure begins in earnest, moving from Egypt to London, then back again to Egypt. Along the way, there's plenty of mummies, fighting, and bugs, but very few surprises, except for one scene near the end when something quite unexpected happens. The story itself gets somewhat lost in the muddle, but it doesn't really matter; plot is fairly insignificant in a movie like this, as long as it maintains at least a thread of credibility and can give the action some context. And that it does, so all is well and it allows you to get on with what this movie is really all about, which-- simply put-- is having a good time.

With shades of `Indiana Jones' and `Star Wars' abounding, the real success of this movie lies in the fact that it never pretends to be anything other than what it is or what it was meant to be, and that is an entertaining, fun movie. It's visually explosive, from the sweeping, desert vistas of the converging, battling armies, to the mummies and assorted demons and creatures generously sprinkled throughout. And the hand-to-hand combat scenes between Evelyn and Anck-Su-Namun (Patricia Velazquez) are especially thrilling. The one element of the film that doesn't seem to work too well has to do with a particular mode of transportation to which the O'Connells must resort upon their return to Egypt, and which ultimately plays a significant part in the outcome of the whole adventure. It's something that seemingly would have been more appropriate in `The Adventures of Baron Munchausen' or `Peter Pan.'

As far as the performances, suffice to say that the actors involved all do their jobs well; after all, in a movie like this you're not going to find anyone struggling with `The Method.' Fraser strikes a handsome, heroic pose-- call him a poor man's Indiana Jones-- and Weisz is becoming as Evelyn. Most importantly, they all walk the walk and talk the talk, and Sommers keeps them on track and wisely avoids allowing any lapses into `camp' or tongue-in-cheek character interpretations, which makes this a solid, fun-filled, action-adventure movie that is what it is.

The supporting cast includes John Hannah (providing some comic relief as Jonathan Carnahan), Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje (Lock Nah), Freddie Boath (Alex O'Connell) and Obed Fehr (Ardeth Bay). As with most sequels, you'll get more out of `The Mummy Returns' if you've seen the original, which had more of a story and, of course, would give you the background of the characters. But even on it's own and taken at face value, this movie is a feast for the senses, and just a lot of good fun. Just don't go in expecting anything more than what the trailer promises; if you can do that, chances are you're going to enjoy the movie and have a good time. I rate this one 7/10.
31 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A good Sequel
mjw230525 January 2005
Rick and Evelyn now married with a son, find themselves amidst the second coming of Imhotep. After their Son Alex is kidnapped by Imhotep as he seeks the Scorpion King (The Rock) Rick and Evelyn must pursue their sons capture, with the aid of the clues Alex leaves along the way.

Aside from some unusual revelations in Evelyn and Ricks past, the movie concentrates mainly on the action this time out and runs a little short on story.

I Liked the evolution of Evey's character, now she's hardened up she makes a mean adversary, and takes part in some good battles.

All in all, i enjoyed the experience and once again the Visuals were more than adequate.

If you enjoyed the first, then watch this one, its good fun and has some fine moments.

43 out of 53 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A fast-paced, inventive adventure
Shawn Watson24 October 2004
Warning: Spoilers
Mummy Returns takes the characters and story from the first film and develops on them in a big, big way. The situations and set-pieces are wilder, the odds even bigger and character arcs more complex.

Set 10 years after the first movie Brendan Fraser and Rachel Weisz have made a rich living out of plundering tombs and pyramids. Who could have predicted that their old nemesis I'm-Ho-Tep would return faster and stronger than before.

But I'm still having trouble seeing I'm-Ho-Tep as a villain. Surely it's the scheming, lying, conspiring supplicants that are the real villains. The look in his eyes at the end, when his lover betrays him, is heartbreaking. I can't root for him as a bad guy when he never really does anything bad. Sure he wants to rule the world and all but who doesn't?

The effects are not the best (Star Wars Episode 2 used up all the space at ILM at the time) but there are loads of them and they're all lavish and imaginative. I HATE movies that are carried by SFX but Mummy Returns incorporates them into the story in a seamless way. How cool is the big balloon? Or the approach of Anubis' army?

Most directors screw-up big budget, big scale movies (AVP, King Arthur, Sky Captain, Exorcist Prequel, Catwoman) but Stephen Sommers knows where the heart of this kind of movie is and delivers, once again, a cheeky adventure with loads and loads of action and enough story and character to back it up. Filmed in Panavision the 2.35:1 anamorphic picture is perfect and the Dolby/DTS 5.1 is very loud and thundering. A very good soundtrack indeed. The extras are total fluff and not worth the time.
19 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Non-stop action
moviesleuth214 June 2010
The success of "The Mummy" in 1999 surprised everyone, and on the day that it opened, Universal Studios greenlit another sequel. The original (the 1999 one) was a lot of fun because it mixed creepy scares with awesome action and goofy humor. The sequel does more or less the same thing, except that the action sequences come pretty much one after another from beginning to end.

Rick (Brendan Fraser) has married his love from the first film, Evelyn (Rachel Weisz), and the have a son, Alex (Freddy Boath). After finding the bracelet of the mythical Scorpion King, they're attacked by villains who are intent on raising Imhotep from the dead (again) so he can kill the Scorpion King and take over the world. Of course, it's up to Rick and Evelyn to stop them.

All the characters from the first film in the franchise are back, and they slide into their parts easily. Arnold Vosloo gets to do more with his character, and Patricia Velasquez (who has about 10 times as much screen time as she did in the first film) has a lot of fun acting like Jennifer Lopez's alter-ego. There are a few new characters as well, including young Freddie Boath, who is excellent as Alex. His screen appeal rivals Macauley Culkin at his best. Shaun Parkes is a much better source of comic relief than Kevin J. O'Connor (he's consistently funny, and the dialogue between him and Rick or Jonathan is hilarious). Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje is suitably creepy as a new villain and Alun Armstrong is suitably kooky as the ringleader.

Stephen Sommers knows how to create an action movie. He creates real characters, not actors who are given different names, and sends them into action scene after action scene. It's a fun and exciting flick, and that's all it tries to be.
15 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Simply Awesome!
rye99692 June 2003
On my day off from work today, I decided to pop in the Mummy Returns for something fun to watch. I hadn't seen it since it was released for homeviewing, so it's been about a year or two. I must say that this movie takes my breath away each time I see it. The Mummy Returns is a roller coaster ride which barely stops during the entire 2+ hours! I love the CGI effects, and how lavish the scenery looks. The movie made me feel as though I was witnessing Ancient Egypt and and the 1930's era in person. So what if things look 'cartoony' during the battling sequences! I think that the battle sequences in Two Towers looked just as much the same. I find that with many fans nowadays, they take things way too seriously. If a movie or TV series is not what they hope for, then they blast it all to hell just because they are whining babies. Take for instance Star Trek Nemesis. That was another really good movie, yet the so called 'fans' ripped it apart piece by piece and then fed it to the dogs. I just wish that the babies would enjoy the movies instead of complaining that a movie isn't good quality. If thats the case they should just go back to their rooms and watch Fargo or the English Patient! Both the Mummy and the Mummy Returns rock as far as action movies go. Get a huge bag of chips a large bottle of pop, sit down with your girlfriend and enjoy two great movies!! Excellent fun!!
69 out of 94 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Enjoyable thanks to the humor and the many special effects.
Philip Van der Veken31 October 2004
Most people compare this sequel to the first movie 'The Mummy', which is a good thing of course, but I haven't seen the first one, so no comparisons from me.

So what can I tell you? Well, the movie isn't as bad as I expected. It's all to clear that the director's first thought wasn't about the script but about the many special effects, but i still quite liked the movie. What made this movie work for me was the humor. Normally this kind of movies takes itself much too serious, there is no place for any joke or funny situation at all. In The Mummy Returns this is different.

Thanks to the humor, this movie was very enjoyable, but it is of course the many special effects that make this movie what it is. Don't expect anything real: a mummy coming to life, sucking the life out of people, armies of mythological creatures... will of course never exist in reality, but it certainly was nice to see.

I guess it is best to qualify this movie as some excellent way to pass some boring hours on a cold and rainy afternoon. It's certainly not an intellectual movie, but I didn't mind about that when watching it. I give it a 6,5/10.
59 out of 81 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Romance makes movie complete
halebopp32 December 2001
After seeing "The Mummy" in the theaters for the first time two years ago, I knew I would be hooked. I've watched it about twenty times since then, and as many people know, this movie does not get boring or less funny after watching it numerous times, in fact, I think it gets more and more thrilling each time. I began hoping for a sequel to be released, and when I heard that one was in the making, I was relieved that they weren't going to end this great storyline with just one film. When "The Mummy Returns" was finally released in theaters, it didn't recieve very many good reviews right away. I was dissapointed because I didn't understand how Stephen Sommers could direct such a great movie classic and then totally botch a promising sequel. I let the reviews get to me and I didn't see the movie while in the theaters. I waited until this past weekend to watch TMR on pay-per-view not expecting much due to the bad reviews, but I soon found out that, boy, were some of those critics wrong.

Right from the opening scene I knew I wasn't going to be disappointed. The action, special effects, acting, comedy, and romance were all better than it's prequel in my opinion. The plot was a little confusing, and the Scorpion King graphic at the end looked like the same one used in the video game, but all in all it was an extremely fun and enjoyable movie. I actually found myself watching it three times in a row. I probably could have watched it 24 hours straight, but I didn't want to ruin it right away.

The SFX in TMR were outstanding. The pymies were so amazing, and the Anubis warriors were excellent as well. But, on to the greater aspects of the film. I thought that Jonathan, played by John Hannah, is one of the funniest characters ever, his one-liners are terrific, I was laughing out loud during his lines. Arnold Vosloo is great as the title character, but could have been more like the original, he was not as powerful in this film but was good anyway. Many people disliked Alex O'Connell, played by newcomer Freddie Boath, but I found him to be quite funny and likable. He had many great lines and was sarcastic when the film needed it. He is a cute kid and l hope he will have a good acting career. Oded Fehr is wonderful as Ardeth Bay. He keeps the heroes grounded.

Meela/Anck-su-namun, played by Patricia Velasquez has some good scenes, but I found her to be not as great as the rest of the cast. I wasn't really looking forward to seeing The Rock as the Scorpion King in this film, but he wasn't as bad as I thought, even though he was only it for about three minutes, I would have labled him as an extra. It was all hype for him. My favorite part of "The Mummy Returns" was the great chemistry between Brendan Fraser (Rick) and Rachel Weisz (Evie). They looked like an actual couple in this film, unlike other recent movies. This was why I liked this one better than the prequel. A little bit of romance was what was missing from the first 2/3 of "The Mummy", and I am so glad it was included much more in this film. Brendan Fraser is very easy on the eyes and he looks like a down-to-earth guy, not like a stereotypical moviestar. I think this is why the two seem so believeable in TMR, they are just two normal people who are still very beautiful people. I am glad they made Evie more attractive in TMR, she deserves to show off her pretty eyes. Rick is great because he is still the same sarcastic, wise-guy, handsome hero, who has all the females in the theater (including myself) drooling and sighing, that he was in the first mummy movie.

I hope that they will make another sequel with Fraser, Weisz, Hannah, Vosloo, Fehr, and Boath all included. They can't take out any of these characters without the movie being butchered. I probably won't see "The Scorpion King" since Brendan and Rachel, my favorite characters, won't be in it. I know there are many others just like me who love the romance in this film. I highly recommend this film to anyone who likes action, SFX, comedy, romance, and good clean fun. I would give this movie a 9.9 out of 10 points with the 0.1 being subtracted because it wasn't long enough to really explain the plot in more depth. When it ended, I wished it wasn't over. This goes in my top 5 movies of all time.
59 out of 83 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Unpretentious and fun. 7/10
zetes4 May 2001
The Mummy Returns is maybe a step above the first one. The action is non-stop, and it does manage, for the most part, to rouse the audience, or at least me. The good guys are likable. Brendan Fraser is where he belongs. Rachel Weisz is beautiful. John Hannah amuses as Jonathan, and Freddie Boath manages not to annoy as Alex, the kid. He's pretty good as a smart-mouthed brat. The bad guys are, for the most part, fun to hate. Im-Ho-Tep is a good villain. Maybe he isn't given enough to do here, but he's still cool. Patricia Valazquez is a real stunner as his love interst, Anck-Su-Namun. She's probably the best thing about the film. Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje was good as Lock Nah, the main henchman. Perhaps the weakest part of the film is the Rock as the Scorpion King. The narration during the film's prologue is not nearly as good as it would be if we were watching the story develop. The Scorpion King is basically a boring character. His computer-animated doppleganger at the film's climax is neat, but it would have been better if there were some feelings towards that character.

People who know their action flicks will notice that the Mummy Returns steals about every action scene from every action movie made in the past 20 years, quoting movies like Aliens, Indiana Jones, Jurassic Park 2 (why? that movie was terrible), and especially Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace, with which, if you remember, The Mummy I was competing with in the box office successfully in May of 1999. They don't try to hide any of it. They even make a jest at Spielberg with a shadow against the moon from ET and Amblin Entertainment. It's all in good fun. You shouldn't be too angry at the sloppy script. If you are going to be angry, the shoddy computer animation should be your target. Still, it's not bad.
55 out of 81 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
It was awful. It was offal.
DevastationBob-33 May 2001
Warning: Spoilers
All right,(shuddering intake of breath) here we go.

This movie was bad. Now look up bad in every english thesaurus ever made, and all the words there won't begin to describe how bad this movie was.

I LIKED the first Mummy. I give it a ten. While there might have been a couple tiny bits that left a bad taste in my mouth, overall I thought it was great. Stephen Sommers is an awesome writer/director, I've always enjoyed his films. But this...

When I saw the previews, my mouth watered, it looked awesome. Sure it had a kid in it, but I didn't think he'd weigh the film down. They had all the original cast coming back, John Hannah, Oded Fehr... slam dunk, hole in one. But this...

They took the first movie, then instead of taking all the good stuff, they just condensed the Bad Taste In My Mouth parts. I'm amazed the Kid wasn't the worst thing about it. Oh, he was Bad, but there's a lot of bad in this movie. Historical innaccuracies, zero characterization, cliche's galore...any one of those I could have forgiven, but not all of them.

This is a big, soulless, hollywood, summer movie. This is Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. I hated Short Round...and I hated this Kid. For the most part, it's a total rehash of stuff from the first movie. I'd put in a SPOILER warning, but if you saw the first one, you know how this is gonna turn out. Bad. It's bad.

The chick that played Ananck Su Namun is back, and apparently she wanted a speaking role this time. Bad Idea. The Rock out acted her. Not the wrestler, one of the rocks on film. Not that good acting would have saved this plotless chunk of filth. If you want decent characterization, I guess they thought it would carry over from the first movie. The actors were there for filler in between pointless special effects, and dumb fight scenes. (If you're a fan of either, forget what I've said, go see it, enjoy.)

Plot holes, oh the plot holes. Big enough to pass the Giza Pyramid through. How did Oded GET to england, much less to Rick's mansion? He says he's never been on a bus before. Evie is a kung-fu chick? Why didn't these neato abilities kick in in the first movie??? They sure as heck woulda been useful. Rick is a magi? Does he need a DAMN reason to fight the mummy? Flashback to Ancient Egyptian Foxy Boxing, why? The huge honkin' tropical rainforest...around a the middle of a DESERT!!! No one noticed this before? Seems odd in a world filled with ROCKET POWERED BALLOONS!!! Sorry, suspension of disbelief only goes so far...jets...we didn't even HAVE JETS THEN!!! That guy would have made some serious money with his inventions. I know the Germans woulda been interested...

And the special effects...sure, they're impressive...but they don't make a movie "Good" in my book. Case in point, Dragonheart. Nuff said. Goin' to see a bad movie for good special effects is akin to goin' to the circus to gawk at the "Freak Show". Well, looky that. If that don't beat all! They're nice, they're gravy...but I'd rather have a well made movie. And the Scorpion/, flashback to Clash of the Titans. Ray Harryhausen is turnin' over in his grave...if he's dead. I hope not, Ray's a good man. But this...guh.

I'm not alone in my feelings either. Pretty much all in the theater felt this way. When the balloon thrusters kicked in, I screamed and threw a bottle of mountain dew at the screen. Many others followed suit.

Okay...guess that's it. I tried to stay calm and rational...I guess I coulda sent in a comment that was just full of screaming and profanity...which was going on in the car on the way home...but I figured this has a better chance of being put up as a warning. If you liked the first one at all, I don't think you'll like this one much. If you're just looking for a stupid summer movie...go ahead, it's YOUR soul. Peace.
11 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Past lives and airships
Maddyclassicfilms12 August 2016
Warning: Spoilers
The Mummy Returns is directed by Stephen Sommers and has music by Alan Silvestri. The film stars Brendan Fraser, Rachel Weisz, Arnold Vosloo, John Hannah, Oded Fehr, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, Alun Armstrong, Patricia Velasquez, Freddie Boath and The Rock.

Set several years after the first film, this sequel finds Rick(Brendan Fraser)and Evelyn(Rachel Weisz)now married. The couple have a young son called Alex(Freddie Boath). The trio are in Egypt looking for artefacts, they come across an ancient bracelet which once belonged to The Scorpion King(The Rock).

The Scorpion King sold his soul to the Anubis, in return he had command over an evil army and was seemingly invincible. Unbeknown to the O'Connell's, followers of Imhotep have once again raised him from the dead, his former lover Anck Su Namun(Patricia Velasquez)has been reincarnated and the pair want the bracelet of Anubis to command the armies so they can dominate the world. Alex tries on the bracelet and discovers he can't take it off, Imhotep and his followers kidnap the boy. Rick, Evelyn, Jonathan (John Hannah)and Ardeth Bay(Oded Fehr) try and get him back and foil this evil plan.

Evelyn keeps having strange visions which we soon discover are past memories, she is revealed to have been the daughter of the Pharaoh murdered by Imhotep.

This film has much more action than the first one, it's a non stop thrill ride and has a cracking score. The special effects are once again not all that great, especially those for the mummy and Scorpion King.

I didn't like Evelyn turning out to have been an ancient princess or what is revealed about Rick, I think that takes something away from the film. In the first film and for the first part of this sequel, Rick and Evelyn are just normal people who come up against out of the ordinary things, they find the strength and courage to fight those things. Making them connected to the past takes away their normality, learning that these things were meant to be just seems unnecessary to me.

The cast once again deliver good performances, Oded Fehr is hysterical as the badass Ardeth Bay. Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje is chilling as Lock-Nah one of Imhotep's supporters, he's great at playing villains and is very intense here.

Worth a watch, but it's not as good as the first film.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Yeah, right, and no harm ever came from reading a book. You remember how that one went?
Spikeopath14 August 2013
After the financial success of The Mummy two years earlier, the sequel was inevitable. The big players from the first film are back, Brendan Fraser, Rachel Weisz, John Hannah, Arnold Vosloo and Oded Fehr. Stephen Sommers once again directs (and writes), Patricia Velasquez comes in to be a main player after her cameo in the first film, and young Freddie Boath plays the son of Rick and Evelyn who are now married. This time the cameo goes to Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson who plays The Scorpion King and who is replaced by a very bad CGI version of himself at film's finale.

When the second sequel, The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (2008), was released, Brendan Fraser went on record as saying that for The Mummy Returns they basically remade the film they had already made in 1999! This is absolutely true, some new characters and an expansion on the O'Connell romance have been put in to beef it up, while some Zombie Pygmies are around to add extra monster factor, but yes! It's a retread only with more money spent, more effects (and better effects apart from Scorpion King) and more noise. This actually is OK for those who enjoyed the first film immensely, because "Returns" is every bit as enjoyable as family blockbuster entertainment. The Worldwide box offices rang to the tune of over $330 million in profit. That's a lot of happy families you would think!

So yes, it's a bit of a cheat, but much like the film before it, it gets away with it because the makers do everything they can to entertain the action/adventure loving crowd. With legions of Anubis warriors, those awesome Pygmies and the all round funny by-play between a cast comfortable with the material (again), The Mummmy Returns delivers exactly what can reasonably be expected of it. 7/10
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Cartoons, Cartoons, Cartoons...
Tasos Tz.23 May 2002
What a joke this movie is. The first Mummy was quite alright, with the right dose of suspense, an interesting story, likeable characters and quite subtle visual effects. Not an 'Indiana Jones' in any way, but an enjoyable movie nevertheless.

'The Mummy Returns' looks fake from start to finish. Sommers tried to create a sequel that is bigger an better than the first one, but he failed in almost every way.

Someone should tell film makers that today's computer technology is not yet able to replace EVERY movie set and definitely it's not ready to replace actors!!

This movie includes some of the worst effects ever created by ILM and maybe it's not even their fault. Because it's their job to do what the director wants, so if they were asked to create the Rock as a CGI character, they just had to do it.

Of course the result is totally laughable, an embarrassing moment for a movie with such a high budget. Also the moment where the pyramid sucks in all the jungle, is the stupidest, most fake, over-the-top effect I have ever encountered.

What the hell was Sommers thinking? "Ah, that's a nice idea, I'll just ask the ILM guys to do it and we're done". Well, it looks totally cartoonish and ridiculous.

Having recently watched the good old 'Big Trouble in little China', all I have to say is that the rubber monster in no way worst than any of the effects in 'Mummy Returns'. Why? Because principal photography is at least applied on set and can -with the right director- produce a quite realistic result.

Listening to the DVD audio commentary by Stephen Sommers, all I can say is that the guy is totally untalented and has no appreciation of art at all. He was just lucky. The people are always hungry for Indiana Jones type of adventures and he was there at the right time. He is under the impression that because his movie sold well, he created something good.

Well, this movie has zero suspense, the characters are now unlikeable (except for the always brilliant John Hannah) and everything's totally predictable. Plus, there are so many elements in 'Mummy Returns', you just can't keep track of. Pygmy mummies out of nowhere, flying zeppelin things, projector bracelets, weird reincarnations, among others. It's like having a sandwich with everything on; in the end, you just don't know what you're eating.

The script isn't totally bad, but it's loaded with so much useless information that makes the movie hard to watch, even for the sake of the story. I had to listen to the DVD commentary, to realize that the building Eve and Rick return to, is their home and not a museum! What was that?! Who produced this joke of a movie?

The humor is good though, I grant Sommers that. Also did you know that the 2-disk set DVD sold ever more that the movie itself? And it's a terrible release too. The second disc was totally unnecessary, it's full of the Rock being interviewed - who cares about him anyway?

If they followed a more subtle direction, they could have a good movie. You know, Sommers said that computer guys cannot replace an actor. Well, THEY HAVE REPLACED YOU, Stevie!
9 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Why is Sommers still making movies?
Knuckle8 April 2006
As fatuous as the first Mummy movie was, it had a certain goofy charm to it. The characters were marginally likable and a few scenes here and there made me chuckle.

The sequel, however, is a monstrosity. It lacks all the cleverness and innocent goodwill of the first movie, which leads me to believe the rumors I hear that a) the first movie benefited from massive uncredited rewrites and b) the same ghost writers left Sommers to his own devices for the second after getting shafted on credit for the first movie.

So here we have it, a clear portrait of Stephen Sommers' film-making abilities and they are meager. As a writer he gives us some real gems of dialog. You know that any movie that has a kid say, "My dad's gonna kick you a**," is going to be a real stinker. The rub in this situation comes when you realize that it's the best line in the movie.

CGI effects dominate this movie and they are bad. Everything from the midget mummies to the flying boat zeppelin looks fake and stupid.

Don't waste your time. This movie was a monumental waste of time and money.

1 out of 10.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
One of the worst movies ever made!
Onlyindreams174 October 2001
I can't even begin to put into words how horrible this movie is. The total lack of effort in creating an interesting story and translating it onto film was beyond my comprehension as to why movies are made. This embodies everything that a film should not be... a story that serves no purpose either to itself or to the audience, the lack of interesting characters (because who really cared about what happened to any of them throughout the movie?), and senseless action that didn't even drive the plot (oh look, here comes another tidal wave with the dude's face in it for no reason). The Mummy Returns just goes to show how technology, which is suppose to enhance the visual aspect of an actual story, has been manipulated so that movies nowadays are only about how cool stuff looks onscreen without taking any interest to the film itself. And on top of that, this movie's visual effects weren't even good. It just looked like Brenden Fraser in a cheap cartoon. This kind of modern raping of the cinema has most likely ruined the minds of the mass viewers. Aside from the fact that it grossed $200 million dollars, which shows how tasteless movies like this have made us, it really isn't worth it once we realize how far behind this will put us in ever going back to making quality movies again.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
It's like you're part of that family
Timsterdam20 July 2001
When I got to the movie theater I couldn't think of what they could do better at the first part. But now I can't wait until the DVD-release! What a great movie, which has more speed then the first part!! 'The Rock' is great but Arnold Vosloo his part was kept a little under pressure, but he's still excellent.

The included family story isn't annoying at all, it feels like you're part of that little family with the o'Connells and of course Jonathan (he still is a funny chap!)!

I saw the movie tonight in the local theater and I can't wait to see it again maybe next evening!

10 out of 10
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Adventure Is Reborn - And it's better then before!
BobaFett-12 June 2001
The Mummy Returns is a definate "must-see" movie. It has Great Effects, great acting, a great story, all done, by amazing people! If you liked the first Mummy, you will LOVE this one. It has action, adventure, romance and comedy all the way through, it's great! I have found nothing wrong with it. The story was very well written by a great man, Stephen Sommers. This one is very funny and keeps you entertained all the way through. The music is superb as well, it is also nice that the main cast returns as well as 92 percent of the crew! At first I was not sure of Freddie Boath but as soon as I saw the first scene he was in I knew that if a child of that age can act that well, the so can all the adults. Anyone whose anyone must see this movie. Nothing bad can be said about it. So, get to the cinema now and relive the adventure started off in the first one, and continued in this one.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
No Plot, Just A Wild, Wild Ride
Ashekenaz2 June 2001
Warning: Spoilers
****Spoilers Contained Herein****

First off, here's the disclaimer. This movie has no plot whatsoever,nought, nowt, not a lot. Zilch, thats the Big O. If you like your movies to hang together and have deep, complex and meaningfulplots, and don't like it any other way, then you may as well go and get out a video, because you will utterly loathe the Mummy Returns.

If however, you enjoy a good, fun film, to be watched with brain switched off, bucket of popcorn, and several mates, and you like a good laugh, then this is for you.

This is a Wild, Wild ride. This is Indiana Jones written large, with more humour and a few twists. This is the 1930's equivalent of Steampunk, with the rocket-airship and all the gun-play, as well as all the magic and mayhem that goes on. It's a fascinating kind of style really,and one which I'd like to see movies use in the future (albeit maybe with more plot :@) ).

So, right from the first scenes, where they find the bracelet, you realise this sequel is going to at once pay homage to its predecessor, and send you out on some new thrills along the way. You know how it works. Find artefact, make bad quote, accidently unleash ancient evil, race against time to fix it. The Kid is funny, he just has this habit of being incredibly sarcastic at the most inappropriate moments, which is hilarious when you see the reactions he gets. Brendan has made this style his own, and he does the hero schtick very well, fighting, shooting, quipping and complaining his way through the film. Rachel gets to kick ass some more in this film. Lara Croft has nothing on this girl, lets be honest (its the tight black that does it for me). John Hannah plays Jonathan with that usual bumbling Englishness that he did so well in the first film. Arnold Vosloo is as scary as all hell as Imhotep, although I would have liked to have seen some of his other powers. The other players turn in excellent and amusing performances too. The Rock even gets to do his famous eyebrow!

The whole film is just one huge, fun, wild romp through fantasyland from beginning to end. I even liked the music, and the Live song at the end of the credits (Forever may not be long enough) was a good counterpoint to the rest of the film.

I thoroughly enjoyed this. I think you will too.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Film Shouldn`t Revolve Around CGI
Theo Robertson15 May 2003
The problem I had with the original film was that the script seemed to be written around the special effects , especially the CGI . Well the bad news about the sequel is that it suffers from the same problem multiplied by ten. Witness the opening prologue of massed armies fighting , an oasis appearing from nowhere and the scorpian king`s army overrunning a city all of which might have looked good on paper but on screen is badly executed due to some really apalling CGI . I don`t know what it is about this type of cinema technology but think of all the films where it`s been used in set pieces that fail to convince ( ESCAPE FROM LA , DIE ANOTHER DAY etc ) and watching it used in THE MUMMY RETURNS left me shaking my head wondering why directors and FX maestros haven`t been able to improve upon it . Watching the action scenes in this movie is like watching a cartoon.

Equally unconvincing and uninvolving is the screenplay which revolves around the bad guys wanting to get their hands on Rachel Weisz chest . Who can blame them ? you ask , well it`s not that sort of chest I`m talking about , it`s a treasure chest containing something or another which I didn`t bother to digest because the plot takes second place to a bunch of CGI inspired set pieces . Unfortunately most of the set pieces are stolen from the previous film which gave me a feeling THE MUMMY REMADE WITH A SEQUENCE STOLEN FROM JURASSIC PARK:THE LOST WORLD would have been a better title . And watch out for the number of scenes where one of the good guys is in serious trouble only to have the hero appear to save the day . It really does get tedious after the first three or four times it happens

I may be accused of taking this film far too seriously and not realising it`s a dumb popcorn movie . Perhaps but what`s wrong with an intelligent popcorn movie ? And does anyone else miss the good old days when monsters were men dressed up in costumes or stop frame photography ?
13 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Don't You Just Love Social Realism?
James Hitchcock7 December 2004
The plot of this film is too complex to set out in any great detail. Suffice it to say that a group of villains, including one of the curators of the British Museum, have revived the corpse of the Ancient Egyptian priest Imhotep, who was put to death for his part in the murder of the Pharaoh, a crime carried out by his wife Anck-su-Namun, who was also Imhotep's lover. The villains are also seeking to use a magic bracelet to revive the Scorpion King (a warrior from another period of Egyptian history who sold his soul to the dark god Anubis in exchange for military success) and his army. The idea is that they will then use Imhotep to kill the Scorpion King, which will give them control of his army, which they will then use to achieve their ambition of world domination. The only people who can thwart their schemes are Rick O'Connell, an American archaeologist, and his beautiful English wife Evelyn, whose young son Alex has stolen the magic bracelet. Evelyn just happens to be the reincarnation of the daughter of the murdered Pharaoh……….

You get the general idea. Don't you just love social realism?

Despite the fact that the plot of 'The Mummy Returns' is clearly nonsensical, I rather enjoyed the film. It is set in the 1930s, and it clearly owes much to the 'Indiana Jones' films, also set in that period. Both involve Egyptian archaeology and artefacts with mystical powers. Although this will sound heretical to the army of Spielberg devotees, who have voted 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' to number 17 in your list of the 250 best movies of all time, I have to say that I enjoyed 'The Mummy Returns' at least as much as any of the 'Indiana Jones' series (and considerably more than 'Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom'). The reason is that the film is fast-paced and occasionally witty; the film whisks the viewer from one adventure to another and generates enough excitement to make him or her forget the many absurdities and inconsistencies in the script. The film never makes the mistake of taking itself too seriously, a mistake that can often ruin an adventure film of this nature.

The best thing about this film is that it stars the gorgeous Rachel Weisz. Indeed, it helped to change my ideas about her. I had previously seen Rachel as an attractive, but rather conservative and proper actress, always playing English rose types in art-house movies. 'The Mummy Returns' (I have never seen 'The Mummy') showed that she has a larger range than this and has not only the looks, but also the sex appeal and cinematic presence, to take the lead in Hollywood blockbusters. (Her predecessor as official English Rose, Helena Bonham Carter, has also made a similar move). Brendan Fraser has never really been my favourite actor, but here he did well as Rick, the solid and dependable family man.

This is very much a 'family values' thriller, like 'True Lies' or 'The River Wild', in which mum, dad and the kid all play their part in thwarting the bad guys. This phenomenon perhaps marks a change in the way in which women are seen by the film industry. At one time, leading actresses often disliked being cast as a mother, even of young children, as it was seen as a sign that their career as a leading lady was over and that henceforward they only had 'character' roles to look forward to. Rachel Weisz, however, plays a mother both here and in her next film, 'About a Boy', without her career suffering any harm.

Of the other characters, there was an amusing cameo from John Hannah as Jonathan, Evelyn's cowardly and avaricious brother. The villains do not really stand out , with the exception of Patricia Velasquez as the reincarnated Anck-su-Namun, a villainess almost as sexy as the heroine. (Her duel with Rachel Weisz will probably strike most male viewers as the film's most memorable scene). The sense of menace overhanging the heroes comes more from the film's computer-generated effects. One thing I did not like was the Scorpion King, in the early scenes a human being but in the later ones a rather ridiculous and unconvincing half-man half-scorpion monster like something from a cheap B-movie.

In a way, the film could be seen as a modern-day B-movie; an updated large-scale big-budget version of those old Saturday morning quickies. Much the same thing, however, could be said of many of Spielberg's films (and not just Indiana Jones). 'The Mummy Returns' may be nonsense, but at least it is entertaining nonsense. 6/10
9 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
No Soul
tedg26 May 2001
Warning: Spoilers
Spoilers herein.

My disappointment in this film was profound.

Most films are ordinary, and being ordinary are about other films. In this case, the precedent is Indiana Jones which added a comic book perspective to the well-established genre of mummy curse films. The key elements (from both Lucas and Spielberg) were chases and humor. The kernel of the idea comes from an enterprising reporter who formed a cosmic revenge story around the discovery of Tutankamen's undisturbed tomb in the 1922s.

That tomb (as all such tombs) cursed the disturbers (`death shall come on swift wings to him who disturbs the peace of the king') and Lord Carnarvon, the first man to enter did indeed perish soon after of a strange malady. There are even fresh arguments concerning mold spores. 11 others also died mysteriously. Around that curse were resurrected cosmic battles about the powers of gods and the nature of the afterlife. (A near contemporary, Akhenaton, lost the battle but won the war on this matter as a tribe of semites later left Egypt and founded the one-god, belief-of-the-book, modern-heaven religion that now permeates the west.) Comic book versions followed.

This is great stuff around which one can spin a popular tale of terror from the afterlife. To Indiana, the first Sommers Mummy movie added some novel computer work, which still amazes us. But the core notion of reach from the afterlife was relatively preserved. Here, the same team used the theory of more to produce a mess, preserving nothing.

We still have massive computer graphics, and for a year or two more, we will still marvel. But the underlying structure has no soul, it has inexplicably been tossed, leaving us without a footing for our thrills.

Simple stuff: Fraser has a greater comedic range than celebrity franchise Harrison Ford, but humor is rare here.

Instead of one good guy, we have a whole extended family, plus the `good arab.' The chief guy - we discover - is destined to save the world (as designated by a tattoo). The chief girl is the reincarnated good girl (so she can play both the good daughter and good mom). Its confusing whether the kid is special - tapped by fate - or just stumbles on the bracelet.

Instead of one bad guy, we have: the scheming museum curator (and his unexplained sect); the reincarnated (in body only - whatever that means) bad girl; the bad mummy priest; the more powerful scorpion warrior-king who himself is a hireling of someone we don't meet; the black guy who has some special role; the moriarty gang; and the pygmy demons.

Instead of one magic, we have the 12 tribes of Magi (clearly related to the magic of the word); the magic of the books; the magic of the spear, bracelet, diamond (which will factor in the sequel); the magic of the scorpion curse; the magic ofthe mummy's curse. But despite all this magic, everything revolves around fights with knives. How quaint.

Instead of one vision of the underworld, it is: a parking place for demons to be recalled from, sort of a suspended animation zone; or a Dante-like place of eternal torture. Neither is particularly Egyptian.

Which brings me to the sense of place. Many of the sets are lush. We are supposed to feel the sense of (in turn) ratty Egypt; lux London; spectacular desert + train; ancient magical Egypt. Think now - were they successful with any location? Did you get any feel of magic, like say even `Stargate' conveyed? Were you awed by the visions the bracelet produced?

Worse: the horror was all mouth horror. You know, Disney is accused of his humor (the stuff he wrote) being mostly butt humor. Check out all the `scares' here - they are all open mouths. Does this lack imagination? Worse yet, here we have two pernicious stereotypes of American blacks: the feral, muscular buck (`I's gonna keel you') and the goldtoothed stepinfetchit (`don't shoot me in the butt.') Wasn't anybody checking behind this guy?

So no soul. Only two moments of camera art: flashes on Fraser when entering the pyramid, and 20 seconds of stop-blur on Bey during the battle (against a supposedly invincible demon army).

The only touch of class was with the closing credits.
8 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Excellent movie!!!!!!!!!!!
Tasha Burdette5 April 2013
An excellent 2+ hour special effects adventure here is a sequel that does what most sequels fail to do and that it is actually good, this movie carries on from the previous plot perfectly and all the actors seem to actually have a feel for the movie instead of just simply being there and Weizs does it again and pulls off that beautiful role anyone can love. Very creepy but not to creepy loads of action but not overdone loads of love and drama but not outspoken and clever laughs and visuals and if I was to be asked for a flaw to mention on this or the first movie my response is simple there is none get your friends family snacks soda sit down and enjoy that simple.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
One of the best sequels ever
Universalmike1519 July 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I remember the day when i saw The Mummy (1999) and thought to myself, "this is a damn good movie! I'd love to see the sequel!" And, sure enough, the sequel was released just two days later. The opening of the film had already utilized many special effects including the Tower at Thebes and the two armies fighting till the death. Also, The Rock (even though his only line was in Ancient Egyptian) was still pretty solid. After an intense war scene, we finally arrive on the O'connells. Rick (Brendan Fraser) is now a family man. his son, Alex, shows as much strength and warmth that both Evy and Rick have. Throughout the film, the relationship within the family grew and amassed to that of an odd family. The film doesn't slow down yet, we are then treated to beautiful sets that have you believe they actually were in Egypt all those years ago. Also, Alan Silvestri has a truly magnificent score that is used to its fullest potential. The film takes us to Hamunaptra, where Imhotep is found inside of some cocoon like object. later, we are at the museum in a truly memorable fight sequence. There are also some nice scenes to look at, interesting dialogue. And, some AMAZING special effects.

Overall Consensus: The Mummy Returns is, without a doubt, the best Sequel ever made. It's fun, engaging, Beautifully shot/acted and will make the audience feel as if sand is between their toes, wanting to see more of the action.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Well Worth The Wait
RMullen3 April 2002
This sequel was one of those all-too rare films, a sequel which was way better than the original. Not that the original was poor, it was superb - this was just that much better. Fantastic effects, terrific acting, and talent galore - just love this!!
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews