I totally agree with Draackje.
this movie really missed the chemistry between Chris and Evelyn, that was still there between Rachel Weisz and Brendan Fraser in the first two.
it all felt as if the actors were doing it because they had to, not because they wanted to, not because they actually enjoyed making this movie.
too bad.. all ingredients were there, but the mix didnt add up to a nice bowl of soup.
I had this whole write-up about this movie when my computer decided that it needed to restart, and I lost it all. But the gist was...
No Rachel Weisz, No Stephen Sommers, and no freaking Mummy?!?
BIG mistake!!!
The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor is one of those late sequels that should have never been made...period.
You can't just replace Rachel Weisz and expect a good movie. No where near the level of the first two.
The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor is a pathetic attempt to revive this dead adventure series. The story finds the O’Connells in retirement after World War II when they are unexpectedly sucked into a mummy adventure after their son uncovers the tomb of Emperor Han on an excavation in China. The acting is especially bad and the recasting of Rachel Weisz with Maria Bello significantly hurts the film. None of the characters have any chemistry and the film really stretches for story. The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor is a vapid, unintelligible waste that only serves to degrade an already decrepit series that doesn’t have much action or adventure left in it.
Mixed emotions about this one. As a simple action/adventure movie, it's a lot of fun much like the first two. Its pitfall, for me, was that it just became over-the-top ridiculous at some points...almost cartoonish, in fact. I mean, come on...movies about mummies and 2000-year-old dead emperor's coming back to life are over-the-top to begin with; I wasn't looking for realism here. What I was NOT looking for was the cheesy script, the horrible cliche's, the bad "I thought I lost you..." moments, the very cartoonish "stop-the-plane-just-inches-before-it-falls-off-the-cliff-ege" scenes, etc. This was just one bad scene after another almost from the very beginning. There are movies that are "so bad they're good" but this one fell short of that mark; it was just bad. It was a bad STORY and it was portrayed badly. As a movie, it was fun but disengaging your brain for the full 100+ minutes is definitely required. I suppose that's why I had some problems with it; it was a fun movie but a bit too juvenile for that long, almost like the movie was targeting a juvenile audience instead of grown adults. I have no regrets about watching it but would hesitate before watching this one again. I've enjoyed Brendan Fraser movies but this one just fell short. (It didn't help that Rachel Wiesz didn't return in this one.) I'm giving this one a "7" (GOOD) but based only on its watchability; it was, overall, a fun movie but definitely over-the-top in far too many aspects.
The beautiful rachel weisz was replace with someone that could never measure to her in beauty or in acting, ruined the whole movie for me.
Just not as good as the earlier movies, which were over the top stupid fun
It missed a lot with the gap of Rachel Weiz
But saddest to see the great Jet Li being introduced a new generation of movie fans through something like this. I appreciate he probably can't do the things he once did, but this is definitely not his finest moment
The most forgettable of the three. Though it does at least give us a different Mummy. The Scorpion King should have been the villain of the second Mummy without the first mummy returning.
The first Mummy was a dumb and fun to watch movie. The second one was much dumber and not fun at all... but that's how it usually goes with sequels anyway. At least we got to see another (bad) adventure with the same characters, right?
This one is just plain stupid. It's not even a sequel, it has nothing to do with the previous movies, other than the O'Connells (and the obnoxius brother/in-law) being in it. There even isn't a mummy in the whole movie! It could have been the Smiths or the Bartowskis instead of the O'Connells and it wouldn't have made any difference. At least it would have explained Rachel Weisz's absence.
Also, what with soooo many Chinese dialogs? Was that for realism?
I liked it more than other times, although if it is the weakest of the 3
Shout by DraackjeBlockedParent2011-06-04T13:35:06Z
This movie tries very hard to bring the same feelgood vibe as the first Mummy, but it fails throughout. I can't really nail it down, because it's got everything it needs: ancient villain, interesting backstory, over the top action and chases,cheesy dialogue and oneliners, unrealistic storyline, pretty nice special effects and romantic interests.
The only thing I guess is missing is some soul. I didn't really laugh once, I didn't care who won the end battle, I didn't worry if the main character would get hurt, I didn't feel any romance/chemistry between any of the characters. I just missed the fun.
Even the badass looking yeti's/dragons/hellhounds/zombies (I could go on..) couldn't make this right. This whole film just felt too formulaic and empty.