RSS Feed

The Mummy Returns

September 15, 2015 by Graham Pellegrino   

The Mummy Returns is the sequel movie to the success and brilliant movie The Mummy.  However, as with many sequels it does not live up to the quality of the first movie.  The story and acting is excellent again.  Brandon Frasier is the cool action hero, Rachel Weisz is the Egyptian expert, John Hannah the comic relief as the bumbling fool, Oded Fehr is the mystic warior, Arnold Vosloo the scary evil mummy, and Patricia Velasquez in the murderous henchman role.  All part of the cast that made the first movie so good came back and did a fantastic job, but some obvious plot holes were brought up in the second movie that were unexplainably missed in the first one.  The two most obvious plot holes in the movie revolve around the two main characters; Rick O’Connell (Brandon Frasier) and Evelyn O’Connell/Nefertiri (Rachel Weisz) and how characteristics about them are brought up in the second movie, but not the first.

In The Mummy Returns Rick O’Connell has a strange new tattoo on his forearm that was not in the first movie.  The tattoo symbolizes warrior/fighter but is not existent in on his arm in the first movie of the series.  The whole point of the tattoo is that it meant Rick had a destiny to bring peace to the people of the region over the mummy.  If this is such an important part of Rick’s life and destiny why did he not have this important tattoo in the first movie?  The whole idea of the tattoo and importance to his life seems to be an afterthought of the first movie, added in for the sequel movie.

A second large plot hole in The Mummy Returns is Evelyn’s past life as Nefertiri.  Anck-Su-Namun recognizes Evelyn as Nefertiri in The Mummy Returns but she ran into her many times in the first movie and never referenced her as Nefertiri.  The past life battle ragging between the two of them in the second movie is never addressed in the original movie.  If Anck-Su-Namun recognizes Evelyn as her mortal enemy, Nefertiri, why do they not recognize each other in the first movie?  This intense battle between the two does not make sense to start in the second movie if it was not present in the first movie.

Plot holes of The Mummy Returns aside the series of movies is very entertaining.  The second movie does not have total consistency with the first book, but both are still excellent movies.  The third and final movie of the series however is not worth your time, as it breaks away from the theme of the first two movies and is just laughable at some moments.  Forgetting about the third installment The Mummy series is a great pair of action movies.


3 Comments »

  1. rpp5137 says:

    This is very impressive! The keenness required to see these things is great. How do you do it? I agree with that sequels are a worse version of the original, except for maybe the Madagascar movies. I find the inconsistencies in plots annoying as well. It sort of defeats the purpose of the original plot. I find the Harry Potter movies very inconsistent, but that’s just me.

  2. rpp5137 says:

    This is very impressive! The keenness required to see these things is great. How do you do it? I agree with that sequels are a worse version of the original, except for maybe the Madagascar movies. I find the inconsistencies in plots annoying as well. It sort of defeats the purpose of the original plot. I find the Harry Potter movies very inconsistent, but that’s just me.

  3. arh5604 says:

    I love picking up on mess-ups in movies too! I have never watched an of the The Mummy movies, but they sound interesting. This is such a cool blog topic idea because it kind of surprises people, especially if they have seen the movie before.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Skip to toolbar