In the first scene, a strange boy-child is born, under circumstances-high howling winds and a ferocious thunderstorm-that suggest something unnatural is afoot. We had one particular narrative hook that we were very proud of. “ It made the Mummy story over for the late 20th century, not in terms of its effects-this was before CGI brought its dubious gifts to the process of horror filmmaking-but in terms of content. “ Looking back, our version of The Mummy was precisely what the powers that were at Universal did not want,” Barker told Fango. In fact, they said it was just too “ perverted” to ever make! As Barker relayed to Fangoria back in 2015, the overall idea was so outside the box that Universal rejected it outright. The story revolved around the head of a contemporary art museum who turns out to be a cultist trying to reanimate mummies, but the concept got way weirder than that. The original choice to direct? Clive Barker, fresh off making Hellraiser!īarker’s vision for The Mummy, which he fleshed out with fellow master of horror Mick Garris, was to make it scary, violent and sexually charged. According to producer James Jacks, Universal wanted to turn The Mummy into a low-budget horror franchise, intent on keeping the budget around $10 million for a remake of the original classic. Wouldn’t it be awesome if Universal Studios filled their Dark Universe with smaller horror films, rather than mega budget action movies? Ever since the Brendan Fraser-starring The Mummy franchise came onto the scene in 1999, Universal has seemed way more interested in spectacles than scares (aside from the standout 2010 version of The Wolfman, which unfortunately flopped at the box office) but their plan wasn’t always to bring their legendary monsters into the action arena.īack in the early 1990s, Universal actually had their sights set on making a new version of The Mummy that would be both scary and low-budget, which would’ve made the film a far cry from what we got in 1999 and what we’re getting here in 2017.
0 kommentar(er)
