The old adage: "What goes around comes around," is never more true than in horror movies. A few years ago, as you will remember, both Dracula and Frankenstein were resurrected for a Nineties audience by Francis Ford Coppola and Kenneth Branagh. Both substituted big stars, lavish effects and huge budgets for the creepy, cheaply shot classics of old.

When the latter went belly up at the box office five years ago, plans for a series of vintage classics rehashed for today's audience were scuppered. Until now that is.

Writer and director Stephen Somers pitched his big budget version of The Mummy very simply. Raiders of the Lost Mummy sums it up in the high concept soundbite of which Tinseltown is so fond.

Universal, makers of all those old classics, decided to go with the young film-maker. After all, it had been five years since Frankenstein and maybe the time was right for another big budget horror thriller.

With no big name stars - the biggest perhaps being the excellent Brendan Fraser from George of the Jungle and Gods and Monsters - the bulk of the budget could be spent on lavish sets and special effects which actually do prove quite special.

In an age when everyone has seen just about every effect possible, it's good to see a few new licks on some well worn trickery.

The plot in a nutshell lifts liberally from a number of sources. As with Bram Stoker's Dracula, the anti hero is robbed of his one true love and swears to return from the dead. Buried alive and eaten by bugs, he does indeed make good on his promise, reborn in a Hellraiser-style resurrection. Alas, due to some extensive cgi effects, the computer crew almost wreck the movie with one fell swoop. His basic skeleton looks phoney and rather comical - a sort of Swamp thing - staggering around like an ill-animated marionette.

Then, with the aid of a poor sap's eyes, he starts to reknit himself from the victims of a handful of unwilling accomplices. Arnold Vosloo, a South African born Billy Zane lookalike, is the charismatic eponymous villain, all sly smirks, menacing stares and yawning, ferocious grimaces.

Brendan Fraser is likeable hero, Rick O'Connell, his big lug persona strangely doesn't get in the way of his considerable charm. For some reason the man's forearms are perhaps the most prominent of any hero in recent years. Throughout the movie, he's constantly flashing his well developed muscles, firing guns like they're going out of fashion and grabbing the straggling co-star who has stopped for a minute to look at the lavish sets before they are obliterated by clever special effects crews.

And so it goes. The script is not up to much, the one liners are all rather obvious - "We are in serious trouble," is no match for Harrison Ford in Spielberg's 1984 adventure, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Who could forget the classic: "We are going to die," a spike-laden room threatens to crush our grizzled hero.

Okay girls, so Brendan Fraser may have got your attention but what's in it for the lads?

Well, Rachel Weisz is a gorgeous heroine who has proved in countless press interviews that, yes, she really is that sweet and dressed in a series of jaw dropping dresses that look like they were either sponsored by Georgio Armani or Gap, or straight from the peg of some shop selling The English Patient cast offs. There's the added bonus that her breasts are so fantastic in the movie that she should pick up an award for them alone.

Although Scotland's John Hannah looks severely out of place as her idiot brother, he is always a watchable actor whose turns in Four Weddings and a Funeral and TV's McCallum prove that he is capable of some fine acting when the occasion demands.

The photography by Adrian Biddle (veteran of Aliens and Willow) is one of the best aspects of this movie, as is the production design. The special effects crews have clearly been wracking their brains trying to come up with interesting wonders to stagger the senses. Walls of sand with the face of the villain; knights clambering across the walls of a cave like spiders; diaphonous souls wafting on the wind like embodied fog all are very easy on the eyes - even though we have seen elements of their like in Dracula and T2.

If the summer of 1999 will be remembered for anything it will be the season that a new breed of film-makers entered the scene and with a love of movies such as Blade Runner and Raiders of the Lost Ark, delivered their take on such classic themes.

If The Matrix was the thinking man's adventure - that may sound like an oxymoron considering it stars Keanu Reeves but bear with me while this analogy pans out - then The Mummy is surely the popcorn hit for those who don't like to think while watching films. In fact, throughout the film, the constant rustling of sweet wrappers accompanied the soundtrack, illustrating the fact with heavy strokes.

With its staggering success in America - well over $150million in around seven weeks - you don't need to be Barry Norman or Harry Knowles to realise a sequel is in the pipeline and Universal bosses are even now wondering what horror classics are left for them to remake.

Somers can either rest easy now as blank cheques arrive on his doormat from eager producers keen to back his next venture or worry as he ponders how he's going to top this epic adventure.

He is a likely contender to direct a fourth Raiders of the Lost Ark movie if that ever comes to pass. After all, Harrison Ford is getting on a bit and some heroes are perhaps best left alone.

Warner Bros could do worse than hire him for Batman 5 with Fraser a likely, if somewhat young contender for the dual role of The Dark Knight and Bruce Wayne. Just a pity Stephen Herek has beat him to it on the Tomb Raider film as Somers would have been an ideal choice to helm the big screen adventures of Lara Croft.

Whatever the result, The Mummy is likeable adventure which is best seen on the big screen with decent sound and your brain slipped into neutral.

TM and © 1999 Crow and its related entities. All rights reserved.