Official RAZZIE® Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > FORUMS on NON-NOMINATED 2008 RELEASES w/LYNX! > THE MUMMY: TOMB OF THE DRAGON EMPEROR
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: MUMMY: 3, AUDIENCES: ZERO!
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

MUMMY: 3, AUDIENCES: ZERO!

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
Message
HeadRAZZBerry View Drop Down
Berry Important MODERATOR
Berry Important MODERATOR


Joined: April 23 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5068
Post Options Post Options   Quote HeadRAZZBerry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: MUMMY: 3, AUDIENCES: ZERO!
    Posted: July 30 2008 at 3:27am

TALK ABOUT SEQUELS NO ONE WAS ASKING FOR!

SEVEN YEARS(!) AFTER the SECOND MUMMY MOVIE (DOES ANYONE REMEMBER IT -- EVEN OR CARE?) "UNIVERSAL's ANSWER to INDIANA JONES" IS BACK...ESSENTIALLY UNINVITED.

WITH a COMPLICATED PLOT THAT SHIFTS the ACTION from EGYPT to CHINA (INVOLVING GHOST EMPERORS, DRAGONS and ENOUGH EYE-IRRITATING SPECIAL FX to MAKE IT OVERLY-EXPENSIVE as WELL as UNWELCOME) MUMMY 3: TOMB OF THE DRAGGIN' EMPEROR DID HAVE ONE LONE REASON to EXIST: SO the TACKY MUMMY RIDE at UNIVERSAL's STUDIO TOUR COULD SEEM a TAD LESS IRRELEVANT LAST SUMMER.

OTHER THAN THAT, ON the QUESTION of WHY THIS FILM EVEN EXISTS...WE GOT NOTHIN'...

WHADDA YOU GOT? FEEL FREE to POST YER THEORIES BELOW...

FRASER: "Our only hope is to kill off EVERY critic -- before they can write their reviews!"

Ye Olde Head RAZZberry
Back to Top
Nasty Man View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: December 08 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 194
Post Options Post Options   Quote Nasty Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 30 2008 at 3:43am
I could have told you this would bomb: Every time the trailer has shown in a theater, my 12-year-old son (who's usually fascinated with Asian culture) all but yawns. Even at his young age, he immediately spotted this as a blatant Indy knock-off...
Everything SUX!
Back to Top
#1-Movie-Fan! View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: April 26 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 129
Post Options Post Options   Quote #1-Movie-Fan! Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 30 2008 at 3:47am

This sure looks like Universal spent a lot of time, money and resources on it. Yet even before it opened, it already seemed irrelevant and out-dated.

I subscribe to the theory that the studio was hoping to pick up "table scraps" from audiences left hungry by Indian Jones #4. And as anyone who's seen that film knows, "Indy 4" left most movie-goers more bored than hungry...

 

Back to Top
ITbeast View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 01 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 526
Post Options Post Options   Quote ITbeast Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 30 2008 at 4:16am

At least we know why Rachel Wiez did not return  -- so far this movie is getting the big Fat 00% at Rotten Tomatoes. I was hoping to be wrong, but my gut is telling me otherwise.  

The "Networking IT" Movie Buff!

Words to live by:
"Money doesn't make you happy. I now have $50 million but I was just as happy when I had $48 million." - Arnold Schwarzenegger
Back to Top
thomsonmg2000 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: October 20 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 184
Post Options Post Options   Quote thomsonmg2000 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 30 2008 at 7:53am
And yet, according to one of the actresses, there are plans to make even more sequels! Talk about diminishing returns...

To me, this doesn't really look like Razzie material, but it definitely does not look like a masterpiece, either.
Seltzerberg is back?

OH MY GOOOOOOOOOOD!!!!!!!

http://www.disastermovie.org
http://www.vampiressuck.org/
Back to Top
saturnwatcher View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: July 14 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2577
Post Options Post Options   Quote saturnwatcher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 30 2008 at 10:01am

At least this time around, they couldn't find an excuse to give Dwyane ("The Rock") Johnson a paycheck...  

Just out of curiousity: Does anyone else out there find the concept of casting Brendan Fraser as an action hero as absurd as I do?

Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken
Back to Top
Michaels View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 12 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2848
Post Options Post Options   Quote Michaels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 30 2008 at 10:37am
At least Rachael Weisz had the common sense to get out when she could. Is it just me or does moving the story to China make no sense? I mean the history and allure of mummies is firmly planted in Egypt. And as if Chinese mummies weren't enough, they also have Yeti ... more than one.
Back to Top
moviewizguy View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: January 23 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2137
Post Options Post Options   Quote moviewizguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 30 2008 at 10:40am
Brendan Fraser makes a good action hero when he delivers one-liners, because it's not as horrible to hear it from him as from other actors. I believe he delivers good comedy in action movies...but that's just me. lol
Back to Top
thomsonmg2000 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: October 20 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 184
Post Options Post Options   Quote thomsonmg2000 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 31 2008 at 3:55am
Originally posted by Michaels

At least Rachael Weisz had the common sense to get out when she could. Is it just me or does moving the story to China make no sense? I mean the history and allure of mummies is firmly planted in Egypt. And as if Chinese mummies weren't enough, they also have Yeti ... more than one.


Well, at least China has a very long history, and Egyptian mummies seemed to have been overplayed already in the movies, so no, not really.

However, I have a sinking feeling that this will be a huge bomb for Universal, especially with its $175 million and so far, only negative reviews.
Seltzerberg is back?

OH MY GOOOOOOOOOOD!!!!!!!

http://www.disastermovie.org
http://www.vampiressuck.org/
Back to Top
movieman View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 23 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 220
Post Options Post Options   Quote movieman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 31 2008 at 10:11am
My siblings want to see this so bad, God knows why....
Back to Top
thomsonmg2000 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: October 20 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 184
Post Options Post Options   Quote thomsonmg2000 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 31 2008 at 10:31am
I think this might the lowest rated movie on RT that costs over $150 million... I can't think of other expensive movies with such a low grade.  
Seltzerberg is back?

OH MY GOOOOOOOOOOD!!!!!!!

http://www.disastermovie.org
http://www.vampiressuck.org/
Back to Top
Michaels View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 12 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2848
Post Options Post Options   Quote Michaels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 31 2008 at 12:15pm
Wow, 0% rating at RT?! This might be a Razzie sleeper hit from out of nowhere. Can "Disaster Movie" top this stupidity?
Back to Top
Berrynoia View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 24 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 200
Post Options Post Options   Quote Berrynoia Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 31 2008 at 1:51pm

Originally posted by Michaels

Wow, 0% rating at RT?! This might be a Razzie sleeper hit from out of nowhere. Can "Disaster Movie" top this stupidity?

Well, it has gone up to 12% as of now.

Anyway...my father is a big fan of the (first two) Mummy movies.  He enjoys the goofy humor and the characters involved.  I liked the movies myself...remember the kissing scenes ("Oh, please!").

However, I am going to need to warn my father that this is probably direct-to-DVD material that is appearing on the big screen.  And I seemed to find three possible reasons Rachael Weiz wasn't in this:

1.  She has a child now, and the role was too much of a hassle.
2.  She complained about the script, saying the role wasn't right.
3.  She smelled a turd from the beginning.

Wikipedia currently suggests #1, but I have been wondering about #3...

Back to Top
cvcjr13 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: September 01 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1189
Post Options Post Options   Quote cvcjr13 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 31 2008 at 2:43pm

How about this crazy theory? . . .

The reason why this movie exists is because Universal had decided to start a grand tradition of positioning an obvious humongous waste of money during this time every other summer.  Remember Miami Vice

Back to Top
moviewizguy View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: January 23 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2137
Post Options Post Options   Quote moviewizguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 01 2008 at 1:49am

Well, not many critics liked it because they are cynical old people who would never try to have fun with a movie and expect logic and rational scenes in a summer movie like this. They expect something like "Citizen Kane" but get something worse. That's why I whole-heartedly agree with Roger Ebert's review. He liked it for being dumb and perpostrous and anyone expecting more should not bother watching it.

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Okay, even for moviewizguy, this is one of the more outrageous claims I've seen on this Forum...

Critics do not go into the business of being critics because they're "cynical old people who would never try to have fun with a movie" -- Most of 'em became critics precisely because they love movies (albeit good movies). Otherwise, why would someone seek out a job that basically consists of nothing but going to (and writing about)...MOVIES!

And where do you get off claiming any critic would've gone to MUMMY 3 expecting CITIZEN KANE?? Most critics know better than to expect anything of such superb caliber, except on rare occasions.

Once again, I feel I must ask you moviewizguy (perhaps for the 317th time): You seem to want to be a movie critic, yet you are almost never critical of any movie. And with this posting, you have basically trashed the entuire profession. 

So what is it you DO want to do with your intense interest in (and none-too-discerning love of) the movies??? 

 

Back to Top
Michaels View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 12 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2848
Post Options Post Options   Quote Michaels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 01 2008 at 1:49am
Originally posted by Berrynoia

And I seemed to find three possible reasons Rachael Weiz wasn't in this:

1.  She has a child now, and the role was too much of a hassle.
2.  She complained about the script, saying the role wasn't right.
3.  She smelled a turd from the beginning.

Wikipedia currently suggests #1, but I have been wondering about #3...

I'm pretty sure the reason is #3, but she used #1 as an excuse to get the hell out.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down