Hack or Slash - A Horror Movie Review Podcast
Each week a panel of horror fans discuss horror movies past and present. We believe horror is for everyone, regardless of how familiar you are with the genre, or which flavor of fear you fancy most. We dissect new releases, compare originals to reboots, and tell you whether or not the movies are a hack (a waste of time) or a slash (totally killer - pun intended).
Hack or Slash - A Horror Movie Review Podcast
What happened to The Mummy? | 1932 - 2017
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
This week we're unraveling nearly a century of cinematic history as we explore what happened to The Mummy. We debate whether the franchise ever had a true identity, compare the gothic horror of the original films to the swashbuckling spectacle of the 1999 version, and unpack why the 2017 reboot lost the heart that made the property iconic.
Mentioned in the Episode
Watch the Movie
Related Episodes
417: The Phantom of the Opera (1925)
Main Episode
'Lee Cronin's The Mummy' Trailer: New Line Conjures Ancient Evil In Reimagining Of Classic Monster
The Mummy: Brendan Fraser Movie Sets 2028 Release Date
Ready or Not 2 Directors on Bloody Shoot, Brendan Fraser and Their Next Big Swing: 'The Mummy'
The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (2008)
Support the Show
We've launched our Patreon to have a place for listener support to help keep our show going. We are accepting support in the form of small monthly donations from our audience. The proceeds we gain from Patreon are put towards ongoing website fees, funding for new content, and equipment upgrades. In return, our patrons enjoy bonus content, early access, live streams, and exclusive channels in our Discord server.
We're building a community where our listeners and horror fans as a whole can connect and share the ideas, movies, games, experiences, and stories they are most passionate about. Our community is completely free and powered by Discord, which you can access from both a web browser and mobile app. We're looking forward to your arrival!
Contact Us
You can connect with us by creepin' on us on our Instagram, @HackorSlash. You can also share your opinions with us by leaving us an audio message on our website, hackorslash.live.
Special Thanks
We want to give a special thanks to these patrons for continuing to make this show possible
Music Credits
"Hack or Slash" by Daniel Stapleton
Thanks for listening to Hack or Slash! Want more from the show?
Join us on Patreon for extended episodes, bonus reviews, B-sides, watchalongs, behind-the-scenes extras, and more ways to help keep the show alive and slashing.
You can also hang out with us between episodes in our community spaces. Join the Discord for watch parties, episode discussions, horror recommendations, and general spooky nonsense.
Follow Hack or Slash:
Have thoughts on this week’s movie? Leave a comment, send us a voicemail, or tag us online. We love hearing your thoughts on the movies we cover.
Happy slashing!
Music Credits: "Hack or Slash" by Daniel Stapleton
Greetings and salutations, and welcome to Hackerslash. If you're joining us again, welcome back. If this is your first time listening, welcome to the party. We are a horror movie review podcast typically dedicated to telling you whether a movie is a hack, a total joke, a waste of time, or a slash.
SPEAKER_00Totally killer, pun intended.
SPEAKER_02For this episode, we're doing something just a little bit different. This is actually a bonus companion to our review of Lee Cronin's The Mummy, where we're actually taking a step back to zoom out and look at the entire property as a whole. My name is Chris, I'm your friendly neighborhood slasher enthusiast. This week I'm joined by the classic horror connoisseur Sean.
SPEAKER_00I have lived a thousand lives.
SPEAKER_02And our special guest, actor, creator, and aspiring Scream Queen, Cristina Heraldo.
SPEAKER_01You're probably wondering, what is a place like me doing in a girl like this?
SPEAKER_02If you ask three different horror fans who their definitive mummy is, you're likely to get three completely different answers, and that's part of the franchise's problem. Somewhere along the way, this property lost its sense of identity, and now, for the first time in 94 years, the mummy is answering to two different studios at the same time. And there are two films pending from Warner Brothers and Universal, which only highlights just how fractured the vision of this has become. Before we can debate what the mummy is now and will be, though, we have to consider what it's been to us. And I know for me, personally, I was obsessed with the mummy from 1999, and that was a core part of my personality for a significant part of my childhood. Now, Sean, obviously you started with the original.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, I mean, you would think, being born in 87, that I would be probably like the 1999 version would be the one that I saw first. But yeah, no, I started with the original. My grandmother used to love the Universal Monster movie. She was infatuated with anything like ancient Egypt. And so The Mummy was her favorite film. And so between that and Frankenstein, those are the movies that I just watched over and over and over again. And so, yeah, 1932. That was me.
SPEAKER_01Um, 1999 too. I was obsessed, like so obsessed, that I thought I could teach myself hieroglyphics in elementary school and took out a book in my library. My mom was really, really, really pissed off when I would not check the book back in. And $120 later, the book was now mine. Probably cost $20 to begin with.
SPEAKER_02That is absolutely hilarious. I too went through the phase of trying to learn hieroglyphics, and I I really thought that I could just do the damn thing. I remember I was just talking to my sister over the holidays, and she was like, Man, you remember when you're in elementary school and I got you an excavation kit because you really wanted to go to the H Ruins? I absolutely like this was I cannot overstate what a core part of my identity was. And I also think Evelyn, Rachel Wise, actually shaped a large part of like the women that I would end up being attracted to in my life. Like, this was a definitive movie for me. And I remember finally watching the 1932 version, and I was like, oh damn, this is what it's supposed to be? Like, this is what it was. That's crazy.
SPEAKER_00How do we get from here to here? It is pretty crazy. I think there's just so many different films when you think of where the mummy started to where you know we are now with an upcoming reimagining, I guess, maybe a rebound. I don't even know. That from 2026, so it's a large span of films, and I think I've seen a good portion of them. I've seen probably I I would say all of the classics. So obviously the mummy 1932, the mummy's hand, tomb, ghost, curse, you name it. Like I've seen all of those. Even Abbott and Costello meet the mummy. But the I don't think I've seen actually all of the Hammer series films, which is interesting.
SPEAKER_02I didn't even know the Hammer Series films were a thing until meeting you, Sean.
SPEAKER_00Oh wow.
SPEAKER_01I've seen most of them. Some of them I wish I had not seen. I really wish I got that time back. But the 1999 version and then obviously the subsequent 2001 are probably the ones that are like most definitively ingrained. I think in pop culture, like I'm gonna go out on a limb and say pop culture, but definitely in my mind, Evelyn and Rick were like, I think everyone's awakening, to be honest, because that couple was gorgeous. They could kick butt, and I, for one, was obsessed with them.
SPEAKER_02100%. And I think you mentioned as you're preparing for this episode, like the parallels between Evelyn and Rick and Jack and Rose. What a dynamic.
SPEAKER_01What it's just there was something about that time and like couples on screen that just, I don't know what it was, but there were like some really, really iconic couples that came out of the 90s. And I think with Jack and Rose, it was like so romantic and all of these things. But Evelyn and Rick had this really cool, like funny banter between the two of them. There's, and I'm sure we'll get into it more, there's like this amazing like heart and humor around the 1999 mummy. And I think that's what, even like as a little kid and 1999, how old was I? Oh my god, I was four. I was a wee babe. I also don't know what I was doing watching this, but this is what happens when you have young parents, they just let you watch anything. But yeah, there's something about that movie that just like sticks with you and makes you want to watch it over and over and over again. And I've definitely come to appreciate like the 1932 version and maybe some versions more than others as I've gotten, as I've gone through the Mummies series of films. But yeah, 1999, I don't know what does it for everyone.
SPEAKER_02So how long was it before when you saw the 1999 one? Obviously, when you're a little wee babe. And then eventually you saw the 1932. What was that gap in time?
SPEAKER_01Like thir like what I'm 31. I watched it maybe last year. So it's been 25 years. Yeah, it's crazy. And I uh I will get into it more, but I have a deep love for universal monsters in general. So it was really great seeing kind of what the origination of what the mummy was supposed to be versus what it's become now.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, you know, that's such a fascinating take in thinking about the mummy, and I'm gonna I know Sean has a lot to offer here in terms of the expertise, but I think it's fair to ask what is the mummy even supposed to be? Because if you enter in the franchise in the 30s or randomly in the 50s, 70s, and then you then come into 1999, you're gonna get so many distinct answers. And even now, looking back on it, obviously my journey with the mummy started with the mummy. However, as I look into the original film from 1932, it has significant parallels with like Dracula and Frankenstein, even. So it feels like how much of this is the mummy's identity versus the formula of universal horror.
SPEAKER_00That's a fair point. I think it really speaks to the era that you're in, maybe. You know what I mean? Like the classic era, everything feels very dapper, very classic, very smooth, you know, and then you get into like the 70s and things get a little bit wonky, it's a little bit weird. We're like doing some weird experimental shit, and then eventually we get into the 90s. The 90s ones are fun, like when you think of the mummy series that came out of the 90s with Brendan Fraser, they're just fun. Like it's a you go into these movies, you want to watch a mummy movie, you gotta really decide like what's my vibe? What am I going for when I want to watch these movies? But all in all, I think, of course, you know, I have to say the mummy from 1932 is the mummy that I think of when I think of the mummy, because it's just a classic. I think in its essence, Boris Karloff just nailed it. I think it's it's the definitive, moody, atmospheric masterpiece of early horror. I just think the mummy in 1932, I just think it got it right the first time because it accidentally just solved a problem the franchise has been struggling with ever since. And I'm not saying like you look at all the Hammer film series, you look and maybe the 90s as a shift in tone, right? And that's fun, and but it's a different type of mummy for sure. And then you go into the 2017 one, and I don't know. I just think that this one knew exactly what kind of story it was, and it never really tried to be anything else.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I agree. I think that the really interesting thing is thinking about the mummy as a whole. Like, if you would have asked me a few years ago, I definitely would have said like it's action sprinkled with a little romance, a little comedy. I would have never ever defined it as horror. And then going back to the 1932 version recently, definitely much more of that like classic universal horror element, obviously, because it's a classic universal monster. But I think that what's interesting to see in kind of like the span of the mummy is the fluid in terms of the character. I think you look at any universal monster and you identify Dracula, you identify the Wolfman, you identify Frankenstein. These are very, very solid figures in pop culture and people zeitgeist. But the mummy has always looked different. It's always appeared different to different people, which I think is very exclusive to the mummy as a monster versus any of the other universal monsters that we've gotten.
SPEAKER_02So totally agreed. Hear me out though, because part of this, again, just going back to the core of what this is, sometimes the mummy as an icon, as a character, is the star. And sometimes the mummy is the vehicle. It's uh the the excuse for the set pieces, the excuse for ancient Egypt as a setting or decor or mythology or the love story. When you think about the mummy and all of its variants, you really get like ancient evil, emotional obsession, adventure, some chemistry, but a clear point of view on like what that film specifically is trying to bring to the table. But sometimes it gets muddied and lost along the way. And when you look at the different adaptations of Frankenstein, when you look at the different adaptations of Dracula, they all have one core heartbeat that's there and consistent. So it just raises a question for me if you were to person personify the mummy, is the mummy a people pleaser? Is the mummy the kind of person who doesn't have an identity outside of the relationship they're in?
SPEAKER_01I think that's a really valid point. I don't know if I would look at it necessarily as like the mummy being a people pleaser, but definitely the director is directing the mummy are people pleasers. They're kind of buying into whatever the vibe is at the time. I think that the mummy is very you look at a Frankenstein film and it's kind of timeless. Whereas you look at a mummy film and it feels very of the time, which is interesting to me. So yeah, I don't know if that says more obviously about the mummy as a character or the directors, the people involved in actually making these films.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, 100%. You're both making great points. I mean, you said it best, I think at its core, the mummy is definitely one of the most fluid horror icons that we have. I think you have the core like archetypes of the of the mummy, and it's just this you have this resurrected ancient being. It's you've got either you're getting this horror aspect of it, which is like kind of going over like death and curses, this slow kind of dread. It goes, or you're getting maybe this romance angle where it's all about eternal love, those Dracula plels, the obsession, the reincarnation, or we get into the adventure of it all, and you're going into like tombs and the treasure of it all and the action sets and all that stuff in the 90s, and you get all of this fun stuff. Chris, you were you were kind of talking about it. The tension of the franchise is always like, is the mummy a monster or a tragic lover? Like, what are we gonna get here? Are we gonna go for scary or romance? And I think that when a mummy movie works, it nails at least one of those things, right? You either have the gothic horror or the swashbuckling adventure, it's either slow dread versus spectacle, you know what I mean? But it's just, I don't know, is the mummy just a person with emotion or is it a force of chaos?
SPEAKER_02I think the question is in a world where everyone is clamoring to be Gomez and Morticia, should we actually be clamoring to find the emoteptor or our nox and the moon?
SPEAKER_00Maybe.
SPEAKER_02If this man is not willing to murder a pharaoh, resurrect himself, and then resurrect you and bring a plank upon the world just to feel your love again. I mean, maybe we're just not getting what we deserve. I don't think I want it otherwise. Exactly. Pure obsession.
SPEAKER_00Yeah. What I think works best with these films, right? You no matter which one you go to set out to watch, I think that usually what makes a really strong film as well is just if we're getting something that's not just the mummy, right? Because you have to have strong supporting characters, you have to have a nice tone, the pacing has to be good. The more the mummy becomes the only focus in the movies that we've seen over the years, the less rewatchable I think it tends to be as a film. That's the difference when you get from 1932, where you have these really great, this great storyline with these characters that aren't just 100% 100% centered around the mummy or emotep, like you have all these other characters, and then some of these other movies that came, it was really just like you could tell they just put all of it into the mummy and it just didn't work.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I agree. I think that what the mummy needs is this heart to the film, this like core center truth. And I think that whether, again, whether it's like a tragic love story or it's adventure, there's like I think all of the mummy films that have worked is that there is something, there is like some truth everyone watching the film can like identify with, whether it's unrequited love or like the want for adventure or the like need for need for acceptance. I think that there, there's like this central truth that's deeper in the mummy films that I don't think a lot of people necessarily look at when they're watching mummy films. They're like, this is just a good time, but there is like to Chris's point, this like all this desire by the mummy to always be loved by someone or to be accepted by someone. And I think that when you get away from that, that's when you kind of lose. I think what makes a good mummy film, to me at least.
SPEAKER_02100%. I think it's because at the very core and the in the blueprint of what this property has become, at the very beginning, it all started with this ancient love and this commitment to it. I know Sean looking at the history of the mummy obviously begins with a film that's near and dear to your heart and so essential to the kind of horror fan you are today.
SPEAKER_00Oh, yeah, a thousand percent. I mean, we've already been talking about it because how could you not? But yeah, the the mummy 1932 with Boris Karloff, it was it's the birth of this franchise, right? It's it's these weren't just action movies, right? They were slow, eerie, gothic horror dramas. That's where the where it started from 1932 and went into the you know the mummy's tomb and and all of that stuff. It was slow, eerie gothic horror dramas, the best way you can describe it. They were dialogue heavy for sure, they're atmosphere driven. They're to your points, they're much closer to some of the other universal monster movies, the parallels to Dracula than anything you know more modern or whatever. But the mummy wasn't just chasing people through sandstorms, and I don't say that to like make a knot, like just to knock the other films that came after it, but it it's to kind of really just tell you that this was a story, and it really was a beautiful story, and I think it was quietly manipulating fate. And I think when you look at the older films, especially with 1932, Emotep, right, was as a character in its core in his core, is intelligent, very calculated, deeply tragic, motivated by lost love, and it resonates with you that story. Everyone loves a good like romance story, and this is basically a reincarnation romance disguised as horror. And I think that the fear and the the scariness of it all, I think, is because he's so patient and it feels so inevitable and he's so emotionally driven.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I agree. I think the 1932 version is definitely not horror in the way people have come to expect horror nowadays. I think people, unfortunately, within the horror community have become like impatient. They want the, for the most part, not everyone, but like want the jump scares, want the like sudden satisfaction of being afraid from the beginning. And the mummy, the original mummy, I think is like a slow build. It's a slow burn, it's eerie, it's creepy. But then, like with that eeriness and that creepiness, there's like, to your point, Sean, like this romance that comes with it, not just because of the actual plot points of the film, but because of the way it's shot and the costumes and the makeup and all of this stuff, like harkens back to this old time for us. Um, and I think that having a tragic figure like the mummy is weirdly romantic in a way, whether like not romantic in the sense that this is, oh my gosh, Rick O'Connell, a leading man who's handsome and gorgeous and all of these things. I'm not, I'm not pining after the mummy in that way. But there is, I think you look at like the Phantom of the Opera and you look at all the characters who there's this magnetism, this pull to them. And you watch the 1932 film, and it's both in the way that it's shot and just like the mummy as a character, because he's slow, he's silent. It's different than like what a leading man would look like now. But there is like this creepy romance almost to the to the film.
SPEAKER_00Yeah.
SPEAKER_02You bring up such a great point. And for me, as I'm considering you in the mummy, the phantom of the opera, and I'm thinking about even Frankenstein, the horror of these stories is often the horrors of isolation and a love that is lost or has never been felt, and a craving and a yearning for that love that manifests in absolutely terrible ways, either through rejection from society or having to cross oceans of time. And uh, that's the uh Brahm Stoker version from 1992 for Dracula, but there is some kind of obstacle that gets in the way. And at the root of this, and I guess when you think of even just our our own philosophy for the show, horror being for everyone and being a catalyst to bring people together, so many of the things that bring us together are these stories where there is a loss of connection and an antagonist who is perceived as an antagonist, even though they are just craving that connection.
SPEAKER_00Yeah. Outside of all of that, and you think of what this version did in 1932, and I think you know, there's there's a lot going on here, but when you think of the mummy as a character over the years, there's a lot of you know, there's a lot of action-packed sequences involved with the character. And when you think of what Boris Karloff did, he plays the stillness like a weapon. He literally barely moves throughout the entire film, but he's so commanding in his presence on screen. He has these really intentional slow turns of his head, there's a lot of controlled posture there, there's a lot of long, unbroken stares, and instead of really chasing his victims like we're used to in some of these modern films, he really lets the room come to him, and that creates this almost authority presence, this unease about him in a sense that he's really beyond normal human urgency, and he doesn't act like he's in danger at all in the film. He acts like literally time itself belongs to him, which I think is very unique.
SPEAKER_02I mean, time itself clearly belongs to him as represented by that very leathery skin. He was he was ancient. That makeup was doing wonders. But you made such a great call-out because he is such an excellent connective tissue between the rest of the universal properties and the mummy. He is someone who obviously defined Frankenstein's monster in the public image, but a lot of the DNA that's core to uh this story and even what the other stories are is just this monster being able to be a tragic and expressive icon on screen. And Karloff brings that gravity. It is absolutely incredible to go back, and I had no idea initially, like when you see the mummy 1999, you have no idea that this is anyway going to be connected to Frankenstein, but then to trace that straight line all the way back and to see what Emotep was like in the very beginning, portrayed by Karloff, there's like a gravitas there that you just cannot look away from.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, it's wild. And then when you think of the the shift that happens, because we get into the 40s and the 50s, and we have films like The Mummy's Hand and The Mummy's Tomb, and we introduce Karis as a character. This is really where everything changes. This is where everything kind of shifts its tone. And what really changed coming from the mummy being the character of Emotep to Karis is the, you know, you go from like this genius type of character to this really this almost silent brute. It's a very different tone. You've got tragic lover versus this almost mind controlled monster. It's psychological horror versus repetitive formula that you've seen in a lot of horror movies. And so it kind of like starts to this is where it kind of strays a little bit. So it, you know, these are all these are films that you can have fun with, but it's nothing close to what we got in 1932 because Karis himself is. As a character, is I don't know, he's what in that if I'm not mistaken, in those movies, he's controlled by priests. You know, he's basically a prototype slasher villain, to be honest with you, if you really think about it. And I think this is just where the mummy itself becomes more of a creature than a character. But it gets, I mean, it gets even stranger as we like go down the path of like the evolution of the mummy and the films that we get, we get towards the end of the 50s, 1959, all the way through 1971, is the that's the hammer film era. And with the mummy in 1959 starring Christopher Lee, we love Christopher Lee, but this era adds a lot of color, a lot of blood, a lot of intensity. It's very on brand for the hammer films. For the, you know, when you have the hammer film like Dracula's and all of that, it's very on brand for like what the tone of those films are. And it definitely keeps the the Karis style storytelling. It leans harder into the physical menace of it all. It's still horror, but it's a lot more visceral for sure. It's definitely more visceral, I would say.
SPEAKER_02You really make me want to watch these movies, Sean. I have never once really sat and thought, okay, let me look at the whole chronology of the mummy, because every time I've thought to rewatch it, it's either Boris Karloff in the original, largely what's to come in the 90s.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, for sure. I think what's interesting when you think of like, because now we're talking a span of decades, right? A lot, you know, 1932 through 71, it's almost third, it's what, 40 years of of going over different films. And I think what carried forward in this franchise is you still get like the curses and the resurrection of it all. You it doesn't lose necessarily the ancient Egypt mythology, which of course is good because if we lost that, I don't know what we're doing here with the with the mummy film. But I think the also the tombs, the bandages, the visual, like just the visual aspects of what you would expect. But you have all of that. But I think what's unfortunate is what you lose over time with these films as we go through them, is you you definitely lose the tragic romance depth of emotep, you lose the intelligence of the original character, which we talked about. And I think it's just the early years really define two competing versions. You either have the tragic immortal or you have this unstoppable monster. And then this is where you really start to see the shift of what defines you as a mummy fan. Not it's not to say that you can't just love all of mummy fans or all the mummy films, but you you definitely have two ends of the spectrum. Are you into the classic mummy character, that tragic immortal character, or are you kind of in for like this monster, this unstoppable force?
SPEAKER_02The hard-hitting questions. That's true journalism there, Sean. But looking at again what those movies are and what the mummy began as. And I think especially as we look at this next chapter of history for the mummy overall, it really is grounded in the recipe of the mummy being ignotep and eternal devotion. And considering just how monstrous this character becomes, you think about where it's born and where it sparked from. I mentioned earlier just these parallels with Dracula versus the mummy versus Frankenstein, and they all have a very similar tone when you look at the three original films, except Dracula wants to possess, Frankenstein wants to be understood, and then also have companionship through that. But the mummy specifically wants to reclaim, and romance becomes her pursuit. That is what is at the core of the 1999 film that is such a gateway for all of us, because then this becomes a tale in two different parts, two different love stories. The rise and fall of Emotebana and Oksunamun, and then Evelyn and Rick on the side, even down to the point where both couples get the same score, like they get the same music behind them. So I think it's interesting as you just consider what this movie ends up becoming and how it changes the trajectory of the franchise.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, I think it's true. Like it's a definitely a different tone, it's a different vibe. I think it's where the the the 1999 version that we get with Brendan Frazier and Rachel Weiss, I think it it's the first time that we're introduced to this like franchise where it's not really horror at all. It doesn't feel like it. Like it it feels more of an adventure movie with a horror costume. And I don't want to say that like I still I love the movies, so I don't want to like come off as saying that like it's a bad thing, but it is the first time that we're introduced to a more adventurous version of this tale, and you you end up getting something kind of close to like Indiana Jones crossed with supernatural horror elements, which isn't a bad thing, it's kind of fun, but I think that's what really reached out to a huge and broad audience.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, it goes from being this random horror movie, but to being a swashbuckler, and that's a huge difference. Yeah.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, and I think that the 1999 version did something interesting where you get these two different characters in the earlier versions, and this one kind of I feel like does a good job marrying the two almost. It's debatable whether this character is scary or not. I think that you would have asked me when I was a little kid, terrifying. I look at the CGI now and I have some questions for some people. But I think that in general, like you get this character that is really emotep is really smart. He has this obviously tragic love story. He um in the 1999 version, but he also is scary. He's menacing, he chases after people. So you get it, I think it's the first time that you get someone that is like a true antagonist and just like really scary character, but also kind of keeping true to like the intelligence and the core of who Emotep was with in the first iteration of the films, which is, I think, probably why it's probably one of the reasons why it's so successful.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, that's a good point. Like it's a balance that you get, which I think is really good. It's even though you shifted from you know that slow dread to this fast-paced kind of spectacle, it reintroduces Emotep as a character, which is great. So it's not just a monster, but it's kind of a mixture of both to your point. And and it's it's this genre blend of you've got the horror of it all, the mummies, the curses, but you have this treasure hunting adventure feel. You also have a little bit of comedy and some banter in there, which is great. And the balance of all of that together is what uh kind of really defines this movie as something new and fresh, and why it probably works so well.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, it's that balance that it strikes that it seems so damn hard for actually, honestly, even the third movie in its trilogy to capture, and then especially what we got with the Tom Cruise film. This is a take on the story that makes it feel a little bit more mainstream and accessible. So I think it opens it up to people who are just not looking necessarily for horror. It definitely, with its grandeur and its scale, makes it feel a little bit more cinematic, but it also is super emotionally sticky, again, because of the quality performances that we get and the way that it anchors its story. But man, I was just re-watching this in our Discord server last night among friends, and I am just absolutely amazed how well this movie ages outside of its CG.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, the CG has something to talk about. I think it's I think to your point, it's like the there's something so captivating about like the sets. And and I think it's like why obviously Indiana Jones is such a classic. Almost in a way, it's set in a different time period. So you don't have like these things like nowadays with with films where the you'll get like a cell phone here and there, and like something that can age the film where this feels like it's timeless. And so I just I think that when you watch it, and especially like probably at the age that we all watch the 1999 film, it's there, there's something so vivid and so magical about seeing it on screen that kind of holds holds true, like no matter at what age you watch it. And it like stuck so, so intensely in my head. I was like, I need to get to Egypt. Like, I don't know how, I don't know when, but I'm gonna go to Egypt and I will excavate, I won't learn a hieroglyphics, I don't care. But there's a magic to it. There's there's something really beautiful about the the movie, not just in the the story and like the the love of it and the tragedy of it all, but just in the cinematography, the the film itself is just something, it's a spectacle.
SPEAKER_02I was just thinking about this because I I too had this dream of going to Egypt. And I got so damn close. Unfortunately, my proximity to Egypt started and ended with being on an aircraft carrier transiting the Suez Canal. So I could look to my right, I could look to my left, I could see Egypt. There even like there was like a huge like natural decor where it had Egypt kind of spelled out. And I was like, man, if I could just lean over the side a little bit and just touch the sand, it would be like a childhood dream come true. But again, when you have a movie of this level of fun, this level of blockbuster, it's a spectacle, it's entertainment, it really won the hearts and mind of society. And that is like this is this feels to me as I'm thinking about this, a borderline universally beloved film. I have never heard anybody say anything bad about the mummy.
SPEAKER_00Yeah. Aside from the CGI, aside from aside from the CGI, but they're people love Star Wars and the Star Wars has some wonky CGI sometimes.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, very true, very true. But I think, yeah, I think there's also it's not just the obviously the look and feel are something people love, but I think that something that was really important to me and has been important to me, and is the reason why I still like go back to the these two movies over and over again, being the 1999 and 2001 version. It's the dynamic between the characters. I care about them. Like I care about what happens to them. And I think you can speak to this in any genre. I think horror, sometimes we unfortunately like we have a lot of characters that we just don't care if they die. We don't care what happens to them. And then you have great films where you do care. And I think that this is one of those films where you care about like Rick and Evelyn's dynamic. You are really excited and you're giddy, like at their romance building, and you care about Evelyn's brother. Like, there's just so many side characters that are really fun to watch that make it such a well-rounded film. It's not just horror, it's not just romance, it's not just action or adventure. It's a little bit of everything, and you get that from all of these like character dynamics that kind of sprinkle get sprinkled throughout the film.
SPEAKER_02Absolutely. This is a classic moment of the ensemble was ensembling. Like this is that brought to life. And it it culminates in broad appeal, right? So horror fans get your monster, you get your death, you get your gore-ish, gooey, whatever.
SPEAKER_00Yeah.
SPEAKER_02Animal fans, you get the cats. Can't go wrong with a good cat vid. Adventure fans get the action, romance fans get Rick and Evelyn and Naksuna Moon. Uh, comedy fans get banter, and it's firing on a lot of cylinders at once, which honestly just fuels the fire so much more, which makes it really sad when you think about what happened with the third movie when they recast Rachel Weiss. Jeez.
SPEAKER_01I just want to pretend that that film did not happen. I think that like that would be best case scenario, is just we like erase it from the world and we just don't pretend. I'm curious what's gonna happen coming up. Yeah, conversation for another time, but what will happen because Rachel Vice is supposed to come back, she's rumored to come back, fingers crossed, all goes well there. But I think that is unfortunately like Rick, Rick and Evelyn's dynamic is so the heart of this film and so important to kind of the storyline that when you lose that, I think it's kind of the reason, one of the reasons, apart from any, why the 2008 film just did not work for me. And I watch it and I don't and as much as I love Brendan Fraser, like I am missing that dynamic between him and Rachel.
SPEAKER_02Yeah. Would you like to have your worries eased by a theory? I would love that more than anything. Okay, word on the street. Obviously, Rachel Vice is gonna be coming back. So Radio Silence, their take is rumored to be what if the 2008 film is actually I was gonna say retconned? No, well, yes, like it's gonna be, no matter what. Like that's not gonna be a thing. But the retconning would be it's written by Evelyn, and she's kind of like removed from the story because she's narrating the whole thing.
SPEAKER_01Nothing would make me happier. There are so many movies that I wish that they could uh we could write away as uh as this was just a book. The beauty of the 1999 film really is that love story and it really is the dynamic. So I'm just hoping that we get that back with everyone else.
SPEAKER_00I mean, again, it's what makes these films great is when you have characters that work and it's not just the mummy, even though the in the 1999 and these movies, the mummy is a powerful character, you also have that dynamic that you're talking about with Rick and Evelyn, and it matters and it helps to carry the movie emotionally, and it adds the humor and the charm that it needs. So the reason why all of that works so well is because you have those dynamics, the current the charismatic leads, you have the perfect pacing for the film, and you just have this really it's almost like a fun first, scary second vibe, which is why I think that this is the version that most people think of, because it's just the it's probably one of the most entertaining, maybe not the most faithful, but the most entertaining of the entire franchise, and it just speaks to more people, and so hopefully, yes, they get it right when they do this one this new one. Hopefully they do get it right.
SPEAKER_01And just get the CGI better. That's all I ask for. It's the only difference I need in this one. In the year of 2026, we can get the CGI right. I hope and pray.
SPEAKER_00We'll see. We uh say CGI in any movie seems to be hit or miss these days.
SPEAKER_02So actually, speaking of things that hit or miss, obviously we had a great time in the 90s, in the very early 2000s, but then Tom Cruise got involved. And then they thought, let's make a dark universe, let's start with a mummy. We started with a big idea, and then we tried to make the mummy fit into that idea. And I'll be quite frank, one, I know this movie didn't land for just about anybody. I began to watch the film and I was like immediately feeling how robbed I was of any sense of identity about the film. The energy that I got from it was very much this is brand management dressed up like a movie. This is super corporate and also super unspecific. This is like you go into a meeting and they're saying buzzwords, but nothing of substance.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, it was bad. It tried too hard to be the reboot, it tried too hard to be this action blockbuster film. It was trying to be the launch pad, if you will, of this new cinematic universe. And I think it just tried to do too much altogether. And I think why the film flopped, in my opinion, and why it didn't work is because it really, overall, it just suffered from an identity crisis. It wasn't scary enough for horror fans, it wasn't fun enough for adventure fans, it was too serious, I think, for its own concept. I don't know. It just spent more time setting up, trying to maybe set up future films than even being a good one, in my opinion. And I think the mummy in this one, it becomes this, I don't know, becomes secondary to the world building of it all, and it just lacked any emotional clarity. I don't know what was going on in this film. It just was not memorable.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, it's a big fat no for me. I tried to re-watch it the other day in preparation for this, and I I zoned out more than I care to say. I think that it's unfortunate because it's such a stacked cast, and obviously the budget behind this is insane. But I think to both of your points, it's like very, very corporate. Like it feels very much like people in a boardroom deciding what a mummy film should be and what would make people excited and what would make a blockbuster versus actually creating a mummy film that is true to what the mummy is as a character to their core and what the storyline should be. It just leaned so far into action. It lost all the heart for me that what that's what made the 1999 and 2001 films so memorable and what made the 1932 film so memorable for me. It it was just bad. And speaking of bad CGI, bad CGI, like CGI, I cannot forgive. And I can forgive a lot. I can forgive a lot if the movie is good, if the storyline is good, if I care about the characters. But there was not one moment that I cared about anything happening to anyone in that film at all. And that's harsh, but the reality.
SPEAKER_00Didn't Tom Cruise jump out of a plane in this one?
SPEAKER_01He probably died 13 times, and I don't even remember.
SPEAKER_00Why is he always jumping out of planes? Why is that like a prerequisite?
SPEAKER_01I'm convinced it's in his contract.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, he's like, Am I jumping out of a plane? Then I'm not in.
SPEAKER_02Tom Cruise actually had significant creative control for this, and he was a lot of the push behind a lot of the decisions that got made in this movie. How you can do that and still have a joke within the first few minutes of the movie about only lasting 15 seconds is beyond me, but hey, I guess somebody else won that argument. Bad jokes, bad visual effects, it was just bad overall. Which is a shame because I thought on paper the idea that they had was interesting. I thought to to center our mummy on a female antagonist could have been interesting. There could have been really something that happened that could have been special there. And instead it was squandered, it was wasted. And I mean, I guess it begs the question, but again, I'm gonna sit through the rest of this film, but it does beg the question. Was there anything even in terms of the kills in that movie, in terms of the the sheer violence that we see? Was there anything about it that is even remotely scary, given that it abandoned the heart, it abandoned the soul, it abandoned the fun and the swashbuckling of it. Was it at least scary?
SPEAKER_01No, and I'm gonna be honest, as someone that like jumps at their own shadow on a daily basis, I am the biggest scare. I always joke, I am target audience for horror movies. I will be scared by anything. You give me a an F-list movie and I I find something scary about it. There was not one piece of it that was scary. And I don't know if it was because the characters, I didn't care about anything happening to them. So it just, I wasn't like at the edge of my seat invested in what was gonna go on. Cause even when you watch bad horror films, maybe you find one redeemable character here or there, or you're just like the the villain is so, so frightening that you have no choice but to be scared. I wasn't scared by the mummy. I wasn't afraid for the character. So it just it wasn't frightening to me. I honestly would probably give it a zero in terms of like the scare factor. I didn't, I didn't jump once.
SPEAKER_02Okay, so it sounds like maybe this is me reaching here. Were there things in the mummy 1999 that were scarier than this movie?
SPEAKER_01Heck yeah. Heck yeah. I and that was a rough-looking mummy, and it was scary. Him screaming alone, I was like terrified. I saw those scarabs, those scarabs crawling under my oh my gosh, perpetual nightmares for the rest of my life. I like get the creepy crawlies every time I think of those scarabs.
SPEAKER_00For sure. Like his face coming out of the sand and like that whole come on, that that's awesome.
SPEAKER_02Terrify. Yeah. Listen, there is potential. What excites me though is the the promise of what we may get. So for our listener, you are hearing this on the day that we release the review that we got of Lee Cronin's The Mummy. So you already maybe even know the answer of what we're about to expect here. But and I I hope I don't look like a damn fool in the review of that episode based on what we end up getting in the movie. Lee Cronin did an incredible job with Evil Dead Rise. There was brutality, there was gore, there was emotion in there, like the the heart was in that film, even if it was ripped out of my chest and destroyed. I think we're gonna get something dark. I think we're gonna get something much scarier. And I think what I want the most for this is for this movie to be authored with such a level of specificity that it's going to that it's going to really have that strong emotional center. If what he did with Evil Dead Rise is even remotely close to what he plans to do with the mummy, I think I'll be satisfied put in the perspective of not having a mummy that feels Like a compromise, but really having a mummy that feels like it's committed to a specific vision.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I agree. I think I'm excited to see this. I feel like it's definitely, and I may be going out on a limb, it's definitely gonna be the scariest mummy I think we've encountered on our screens, depending on your definition of scary, whether it's like slow moving, like the 1932 version, or if you're more of like a jump scare kind of classic fear person. I think it's going to be really scary just from the trailers alone. I've gotten quite a few jumps in at my at the movie theater. I'm excited just because I feel like to your point, Evil Dead Rise was such a great movie. I was petrified from start to finish. I was emotionally invested in the characters. The the film itself was just such a sight to see. It was so cool looking that I'm excited to see what his directorial lens kind of lends itself to in this film and what a mummy character that has been so fluid looks like from his point of view.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, I'm with you. I I I am excited, but you know me, I also am also very weary. I feel like the track record of all of these like reboots, if you will, or just you know, whatever you want to call them, extensions of the franchises of all these universal monsters, they've been kind of, I don't know, I feel like less than desirable for the most part. There's been some good ones for for sure, but for the most part, I haven't been super, super impressed with them. But I I do think Lee Cronin has at the helm will probably be very promising. I did also really love Evil Dead Rise, and I think that you're all right, you're both right. Like it's gonna be a very dark and serious direction for this franchise. It's gonna be something that we haven't really seen before. And I think, especially from what we get in the trailer, it's shaping up to be definitely one of the darkest versions, definitely a different approach from what it looks like. And so that could be it could work for it or against it. I don't know. It could be exciting, it could be bad, but it looks like it's gonna be pretty good. I think where it needs to focus on to work is it has to establish its identity from the start. It can't get lost in the sauce. A mummy that is both emotionally compelling and visually threatening, I think that's what's gonna make it work. It just can't be trying to launch anything bigger and and just be this great standalone film and and try to just make a really good horror movie, I guess, is is what I'm hoping for, and not try to do too much.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, and I mean I think honestly, I know we were talking just a moment ago about even what's gonna happen in 2028 when we get the next mummy film, but continuing Rick and Evelyn's story, I don't want that to do too much either. I know we're we're considering what we'd want to see, but man, to catch lightning in a bottle twice, you cannot manufacture magic by recreating it or just referencing it. Like you have to truly pour a lot of soul, a lot of effort into it. Now, Radio Silence does a very good job with their work. I enjoy their films, but what this is gonna come down to is going to be Rick and Evelyn's chemistry. And I think it works that uh Brendan Fraser and Rachel Vice have a great chemistry together, just organically. I think they both have spoken incredibly highly of each other, not only during the production, but even in the years since that production. So it has to be more than a reunion tour, but I think they have the right cast to really bring it together.
SPEAKER_01Yeah. I think the the unfortunate reality is that we as a society have been like scarred by Hollywood when it comes to any remakes, adaptations. It's I don't I don't hold my breath for things to go well, but I think that what is great is that they did catch lightning in a bottle twice. I love the 2001 film. So I'm hoping and praying that it's going to just because of the dynamic between the actors themselves, I think that makes so much of the film. It will catch lightning in a bottle a third time. We'll see. It'll be interesting with this much time spanned between the last iteration of these mummy films versus now, what is that chemistry? What is that dynamic going to look like? And where are their characters? Like it's such a big span of time. And I think that that's gonna be interesting, like filling in the gaps between where they were to well in 2001, our time versus where they are now. I'm really excited to see it.
SPEAKER_00I just think the question for this upcoming film that we will get is is the is continuing the story going to be is it gonna be exciting or is it gonna be risky? And I I say that because it if it's exciting, right, is it gonna be like built in the chemistry of these characters? Is it gonna have the nostalgic factor, or is it just gonna be risky because our expectations are really high? And there's the I don't is the tone gonna match the memory? You know what I mean? Like so often with these remakes or when we bring these these franchises back and and we see it again, like it there's nostalgia for sure, but sometimes we lean a little bit too far in the nostalgia and the story kind of suffers. And so I'm just wondering, like, is it gonna be is the story gonna be exciting or risky? Is it gonna be like just that they're back or is or is it gonna tell us why the story still matters?
SPEAKER_02I was just doing the mental math here because you pointed out 21 years our time. And I was like, damn, I forgot that movie did take place in the 20s. I mean, that that is gonna be so if we go 19 21 years since the first movie, that puts the story potentially taking place in 1947.
SPEAKER_01That'll be really cool. Really cool to see kind of like where these characters are and what they've been up to. I think also to your point, Chris, that you made earlier, it's like, what is this 2008 version that we all wish didn't happen but did happen? What does that mean for this like humming storyline, especially because now we're reverting back to the original Evelyn? I am curious to see how that kind of gets explained away, whether it's this book concept or something else, and if it's going to feel substantial enough for us, or if it's just gonna be something that's like, okay, we're gonna just explain this and then like move on really quickly. I think the other thing is with horror nowadays and what the expectation behind horror is. I'm curious to see like what those elements look like in a 2028 version of this film and if it's gonna stay true to the kind of more romance adventure with like light touches of horror, or if they're gonna try to lean much heavier into the horror aspects. And I don't know, as a horror fan, I'm a little concerned that it's gonna go too far horror. And I know that that's like sacrilegious to say if you love horror, but I kind of want it to stay true to the feel of the two originals, which is a completely fair thing.
SPEAKER_02It's a completely fair thing. Of course, I fucked up, y'all. I was actually just looking and doing the math again because the mummy returns takes place in 1933. So if we do 21 years after that, that puts us in 1954, baby. That's prime welcome to dairy time, and those people got fucked up in Welcome to Dairy. This is about to get messy.
SPEAKER_00They sure did.
SPEAKER_02Imagine a world in which in the same canonical universe you have Pennywise the Dancing Clown messing up the kids of dairy and then emotep on the other side of the world. Fuck. That'd be terrible.
SPEAKER_01The world is screwed, and I do not want to go there.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, don't cross paths with those two individuals for sure. But yeah, I guess it will be interesting that to see the tone and the direction that it goes in. I think it it does have to play into the the more of the adventure again. I think that's what makes these ones work. And so to keep the fun, but add maybe some extra weight and some higher stakes might be the play. And I think to make the characters work, it'll be interesting because I think that you have to be intentional. You can't have them frozen in time. Don't give us like a young version of these characters because we know it's not gonna feel or look good. So let them evolve. I think play into the age and the legacy and the experience of it all, and possibly, I don't know, possibly even shift toward mentor roles, you know what I mean? Like maybe they're passing the torch.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, when you have a film where they literally carry torches, why not literally?
SPEAKER_00Why not?
SPEAKER_02Why not literally do it? Why not figuratively do it? Although I don't know that I fully need another radio silence passing of the torch film like we got with uh five cream, scream five, scream 2022. But we'll see. I'm open to it. I'm open to it because I just want to see them be happy. And the one thing that I truly hope for is that they maintain their happy ending and they don't go the way of Dewey and Gail, and they don't go the way of Freddie Fridge Jr. and Jennifer Love Hewitt in the night I know what she did last summer sequel, but I just don't want it. I just don't want it. I want them to have joy. And I think we all in this age of collective global trauma, I think we all deserve joy. And clearly the mummy is a little bit of a mess of a property while there's a lot to love, there's a lot to squint your eyes just right at. And the reality is this is a franchise that's been reinvented over and over and over again for at this point in nearly a century. Every generation gets its version, every filmmaker reshapes it, maybe people pleases along the way. And each and every audience walks away with something a little bit different. And maybe that means that perhaps the real mummy was just the memories we made along the way. But with two more films in the pipeline, we're about to watch this icon reinvent itself all over again. Starting with this 2026 adaptation.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, if you want to find out how you can go further than this episode or check out more episodes like this and go further, consider supporting the show. Visit patreon.com slash hacker slash. You can also check out our new subreddit. That's really fun. You can join in on the discussions there. This is where you can enjoy even more of the show, including bonus content, early access, extended episodes, and movie nominations, and of course, live shows. We all love the live shows.
SPEAKER_02We'll see you next time, folks. And remember, no harm ever came from reading a book.