Pages

The Mummy (1999)

Genre
Action/Adventure
Written By
Stephen Sommers
Logline
On an dig in the ancient city of Hamunaptra, a smart-mouthed American faces the fight of his life when his expedition crew accidentally awakens a 3,000-year-old mummy.
Why break it down?
I'll be honest…when it comes to movies, summer is my season. Hate all you want, but the numbers don't lie; people (not always smart ones, but certainly ones who buy tickets) love action, and I'm not ashamed to be one of them. That being said, I've been let down by as many blockbusters as I've liked, meaning they - like everything else - can be tricky to get right. A good blockbuster has to do a number of things to be deemed good, one of the most important being CREATING ACTION THAT'S PURPOSEFUL (I.E, ACTION THAT DOESN'T JUST HAPPEN TO CHARACTERS, BUT COMES AS A RESULT OF WHAT THEY DO). So what kinds of scripts can we study to better understand the anatomy of a good blockbuster? Enter one of my childhood faves, 'The Mummy.'

'THE MUMMY' IS AN EXAMPLE OF A CLASSIC THREE-ACT ACTION/ADVENTURE SCRIPT, which can help us understand where specific beats need to be in order to keep our stories driving forward. IT CAN ALSO TEACH US HOW TO WRITE PURPOSEFUL ACTION, so that we can avoid that dreaded "It was fun, but it was missing something…" feeling.

So read up, keep an eye out for the beats (a new one happens every fifteen pages!), and we'll look at the film's structure after the jump. (Click the [+] button for a summary of each scene.)

ACT I
00:00 - 07:00 (7.00 pages) [+]
07:00 - 12:30 (5.50 pages) [+]⇡⇣ OPENING EXPOSITION
12:30 - 17:30 (5.00 pages) [+]
17:30 - 19:00 (1.50 pages) [+]INCITING INCIDENT
19:00 - 21:30 (2.50 pages) [+]
21:30 - 23:30 (2.00 pages) [+]PLOT POINT #1
23:30 - 24:45 (1.25 pages) [+]

ACT II
24:45 - 25:00 (0.25 pages) [+]
25:00 - 26:00 (1.00 pages) [+]
26:00 - 29:00 (3.00 pages) [+]
29:00 - 33:30 (4.50 pages) [+]
33:00 - 34:30 (1.50 pages) [+]
34:30 - 36:00 (1.50 pages) [+]
36:00 - 36:30 (0.50 pages) [+]⇡⇣ FUN AND GAMES
36:30 - 39:30 (3.00 pages) [+]
39:30 - 41:00 (1.50 pages) [+]
41:00 - 43:30 (2.50 pages) [+]
43:30 - 48:00 (4.50 pages) [+]
48:00 - 53:30 (5.50 pages) [+]
53:30 - 57:30 (4.00 pages) [+]
57:30 - 59:00 (1.50 pages) [+]
59:00 - 66:30 (7.50 pages) [+]MIDPOINT REVERSAL
66:30 - 68:15 (1.75 pages) [+]
68:15 - 68:30 (0.25 pages) [+]
Midpoint
68:30 - 70:00 (1.50 pages) [+]
70:00 - 72:30 (2.50 pages) [+]
72:30 - 74:00 (1.50 pages) [+]
74:00 - 76:00 (2.00 pages) [+]
76:00 - 77:00 (1.00 pages) [+]⇡⇣ ROLL DOWNHILL
77:00 - 77:15 (0.25 pages) [+]
77:15 - 79:30 (2.50 pages) [+]
79:30 - 82:15 (2.75 pages) [+]
82:15 - 85:30 (3.25 pages) [+]
85:30 - 90:00 (4.50 pages) [+]PLOT POINT #2

ACT III
90:00 - 90:45 (0.75 pages) [+]
90:45 - 96:00 (5.25 pages) [+]
96:00 - 114:30 (18.50 pages) [+]CLIMAX
114:30 - 116:45 (2.25 pages) [+]RESOLUTION

Analysis
Take a look at the second act of this film. See a pattern? What's neat about it is that Sommers cut it up into clearly defined segments broken up by little action beats, each of which gives the characters a new goal to accomplish or a new hurdle to get over. Let's take a look at where these plot points show up, and briefly talk about why they are where they are:

Opening Exposition [+]
Flash-Bang Open [+]
Inciting Incident [+]
Plot Point #1 [+]
Fun and Games [+]
Midpoint Reversal [+]
Roll Downhill [+]
Plot Point #2 [+]
Climax [+]
Resolution [+]

3 comments:

  1. Really interesting statement concerning purposeful action. I think another key part in creating successful action sequences is attaining a certain degree of immersion on the part of the character as a vestibule for the audience's individual immersion. So much can be happening to the character or around the character as a George-Lucasian sequence often does, where we have no sense of scale and relation and therefore cannot be involved as onlookers into the action. Sure, it may be exciting for a few moments, but ultimately we cannot relate to the situation untless there is an intimacy with the main character and their fears or emotions within the sequence. This being said, if the sequence is a "result of what they do," the action sequence can come off as even stronger, as the audience attempts to interpret how the character feels about making the mistake from which the action sprouted, but are constantly thwarted by the action.

    Make sense?

    Check out this interview. Not only does it make me excited for the movie, but it kind of relates to what I said about scale and being able to relate to an action sequence: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-favreau/if-i-die-you-die_b_885526.html#s299786&title=Human_Scale

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yeah, that's spot on. I saw 'Transformers 3' over the weekend and the problem was exactly that; an action sequence can be as cool as it wants to be...but if I don't care about what the characters want or even understand how they got to this point, the whole thing just comes off as boring.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am writing a story with very similar plot structure to The Mummy. Stumbled upon this. I love your breakdown! Keep up the good work!

    ReplyDelete