MovieChat Forums > The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (2008) Discussion > Let's put this "There's no Rachel Weisz"...

Let's put this "There's no Rachel Weisz" criticism to rest

posted 5 years ago by Wuchak (8732)
15 replies | jump to latest

While it's regrettable that Rachel Weisz opted out of this third film in the trilogy in order to be with her one year-old son, Maria Bello is a solid replacement and actually looks better in tight pants (as she's curvier and therefore more physically appealing).

Of course the film’s preposterous in the tradition of the previous two and the Indiana Jones flicks. But let's give credit where credit is due: “Tomb of the Dragon Emperor” bends over backwards to entertain with tombs, priceless artifacts, mummies, Shanghai, the Great Wall, the Himalayas, yetis, Shangri-La, zombies, a three-headed dragon and martial arts.

If you can get past the absence of Weisz and embrace Bello -- which, let’s face it, isn’t that hard to do -- this is easily the second best of the trilogy. Interestingly, Roger Ebert maintained that it was the best and he ain't no slouch when it comes to appraising pictures, whatever the genre (https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-mummy-tomb-of-the-dragon-emperor-2008).

Yet my wife zeroed-in on the film’s flaw, which is the same as the previous flick: It tries too hard. It frantically throws in everything but the kitchen sink and is the lesser for it. (Yetis, seriously?)

[–] Otter (24464) 5 years ago

It's a better movie that it ought to be. I mean it's cheesy and hopelessly derivative, but it's goofy fun in a brainless way, and splashy as heck to look at.

But Bello is fucking terrible! Her British accent is Costner-level bad, and she totally lacks the clever spark and the chemistry with Fraser that made Weisz so good in the role. She's just... there, looking good in her period clothes. Weisz is a top-level actor, one of those actors who can make a terrific script shine and make bad material look better than it really is, and Bello... has her limitations.

[–] Wuchak (8732) 5 years ago

Exactness of foreign accents was never that important to me in film and the Mummy trilogy has too much goofiness to determine the quality of acting beyond being fittingly animated for one's role. Weisz had become too thin by this point while Bello was winsome enough and filled out her clothes better. So I didn't miss Rachel a bit and was perfectly happy with Maria.

[–] Otter (24464) 5 years ago

Well, it's nice that somebody, somewhere, liked Bello's performance.

[–] Wuchak (8732) 5 years ago

I don't get what the big deal is. Sure, Weisz was wonderful in the first two films -- in the prime of her cuteness (especially the first one) -- but it's not like these movies depended on her to be effective. Since Rachel chose to opt out, what were producers going to do, say: "Without Weisz we'll have to throw in the towel"? That'd be absurd. So they replaced her with Bello, who was a fine substitute IMHO.

I respect your preference for Weisz though.

[–] Otter (24464) 5 years ago

And I respect your preference for filling out trousers properly. These are "Mummy" films, after all!

But IMHO Weisz brought more than cuteness to the film, she brought real charm and well, seemed like a real person, which was much more important than you may realize. In silly or unrealistic films like these, they don't work unless there's a character that the audience genuinely likes, believes in, and can identify with. I mean, compare "The Wizard of Oz" to "Oz the Great and Powerful", in the classic film Judy Garland seems very real and very likeable, and the fact that this real person seems to believe in the bizarre happenings around her allows the audience to believe in them too. In "Oz the Great and Powerful", on the other hand, star James Franco smirks at the audience, and if the protagonist doesn't really seem to believe in the weirdness happening onscreen nobody in the audience believe it either, and he comes off as a total dick anyway so they feel nothing when he's endangered.

Good acting matters, even in bad movies. Or anyway, it can matter.

[–] Wuchak (8732) 5 years ago

I didn't say Bello only filled out her pants better than the too-skinny (by that point) Weisz, I also said she was "winsome enough," meaning Maria had the charm -- the attractive mojo -- to pull off the part as a substitute for Rachel since the latter understandably didn't want to leave her 1 year-old son and travel to the other side of the world for weeks on end.

Weisz obviously has her devotees, but I was perfectly happy with Bello as a replacement in the role of Evy. Besides, the role wasn't that strategic to make or break the movie. Practically any charming, wide-eyed competent actress would've filled the bill. If actors playing James Bond can constantly (and easily) be replaced, Evy's a piece of cake.

[–] Otter (24464) 5 years ago

Well, I disagree about the winsomeness, but finding someone to be adorable is a subjective response, and someone else may find her utterly charming when I do not.

I do have a much stronger response to bad fake accents than you do, that has to be a big part of why we regard the same performance so differently. To me, a horrible Costner-level Brit accent constantly totally kills my willing suspension of disbelief.

[–] Wuchak (8732) 5 years ago

It might help that the movie includes cat-like Yetis.

I'm just having fun with you. It's all good.

[–] Otter (24464) 5 years ago

I'm far more willing to forgive silly monsters than bad accents!

No, really.

[–] HarlemEagle42 (17735) 5 years ago

Right? Accent aside, their chemistry was terrible. I think it'd been better off if they just killed off Evey.

[–] Kowalski (75528) 5 years ago

NO...BELLO IS WHINY GARBAGE NEXT TO WEISZ.

[–] Wuchak (8732) 5 years ago

Maria Bello, Maria Bello, Maria Bello, Maria Bello!

[–] Kowalski (75528) 5 years ago

I FEEL LIKE THATS HER ACTING STYLE.

[–] Wuchak (8732) 5 years ago

lol

[–] strntz (12225) 5 years ago

Maria Bello, Maria Bello, Maria Bello, Maria Bello!

Nice try.. That Betelgeuse trick *never* works..