ROTTEN TOMATOES: Maria Bello Talks Mummy 3

Maria Bello Talks Mummy 3

by Jeff Giles | September 12, 2007

Discuss Article | Blog Article | Email To A Friend

While promoting The Jane Austen Book Club at the Toronto International Film Festival, Maria Bello talked to reporters about her role in The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor.

As it turns out, all the rumors regarding Bello taking over the role of Evelyn O'Connell from Rachel Weisz were accurate: When she was asked why she'd dyed her hair dark brown, Bello replied, "It's for Mummy 3, and I love it," before providing a few details about her character's evolution. As Sci Fi Wire quotes Bello:

"She has the same name, but she's a very different character than Rachel played...she's a bad-ass action chick. I had to train a lot. I had to do wushu, a martial-art form, some kickboxing, swordfighting, rifle training for a couple of months before we even started shooting. It's the role of my dreams. It is just a blast."

Bello and her Mummy 3 co-stars, Brendan Fraser and Jet Li, are scheduled to spend two months shooting in China. The film is slated for an August 1, 2008 opening.

Source: Sci Fi Wire

Related Items

Movie:	The Jane Austen Book Club
Celeb:	Brendan Fraser
	Jet Li
	Rachel Weisz
	Maria Bello

(1-20 of 31 posts) | Reply

Gimy writes:
on Sep 12 2007 06:23 AM

actually, the Rachel whiney-Weisz character was a bad2ss in the second one...she did all the action stuff in flashback form...and i think a fight scene at the end as well. the first one she was dainty though. this is probably on my top 10 Wanna See list for next year...nowhere near DarkKnight though. lets just hope its not as bad as the 3rds of the trilogies we saw this summer...

(Reply to this)

lonechicken writes:
on Sep 12 2007 07:03 AM

Hmmm... Different kind of date than the first weekend of May opening of the previous two.

A couple of the "3rds of the trilogies" from this summer were better than their seconds. Like Pirates and Ocean's.

(Reply to this)

digitalsoul68 writes:
on Sep 12 2007 07:58 AM

I love Rachel, so it's going to be tough for Bello to replace her. But mmmm....I'm still thinking of Maria in the cheerleader outfit in History of Violence.

(Reply to this)

inessalenin writes:
on Sep 12 2007 08:05 AM

Rachel Weisz turn down Mummy 3 cause she's riding high since got Oscar. On the contrary, Brendon Fraser's career is not smooth as Weisz so he continue to do the sequel once he announecd he wouldn't do Mummy again.
But for Maria Bello, it might be a chance, who know? At least she could learn some skill of martial art.

(Reply to this)

moviefrk13 writes:
on Sep 12 2007 08:06 AM

I love "The Mummy" movies, but I don't see why they had to do a third one. Especially since Rachel Weisz isn't coming back. She's a huge part of the first two films and it will be weird seeing someone else playing the character she created. I'll still go see it though....

(Reply to this)

jeremyd4 writes:
on Sep 12 2007 08:07 AM

Having watched Pirates #2 again... I'm thinking I like that the best in the series. It has a real Pirate'y feel to it, not as over the top as #3 and a bit more adventurous and epic than #1.
I used to love those "Monkey Island" computer games when I was younger, the more I watch the Pirates of the Caribbean movies, the more I'm convinced they drew a lot of inspiration from these games.

As for Mummy 3, I'm glad they're changing the setting to China - seems like a fresh idea and not a rehash of old ones like Mummy #2 was. Not too happy bout Rachel Weisz being replaced though, couldn't she just be at home and it be a father and son pic like Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade????? That would've been perfect. As for any love interests to keep audiences satisfied - just make it for the kid and not Brendan Fraser's character. Simple.

(Reply to this)

inessalenin writes:
on Sep 12 2007 08:08 AM

Rachel Weisz turn down Mummy 3 cause she's riding high since got Oscar. On the contrary, Brendon Fraser's career is not smooth as Weisz so he continue to do the sequel once he announecd he wouldn't do Mummy again.
But for Maria Bello, it might be a chance, who know? At least she could learn some skill of martial art.

(Reply to this)

Gimy writes:
on Sep 12 2007 08:22 AM

urgh, again with the weisz thing? she turned the second one down because she didn't want to be apart of the franchise that MADE HER, they begged her to do it. we've discussed this before. had ZERO to do with the oscar.

pirates 3 wasn't better than pirates 2...and i didn't see Oceans, so maybe you're right on that one lonechickity

(Reply to this)

DaHypr1 writes:
on Sep 12 2007 08:43 AM

booo mummy 3, they should have stopped after the second one, which I didnt find all that good either.

and pirates 2 was horrible. I thought the first one was the best, because at least that one had some **** to do with the ride.

(Reply to this)

pressboy writes:
on Sep 12 2007 08:47 AM

Weisz turn down the role because the script was horrible.

Here are the links that prove it:

From Eonline:

http://www.eonline.com/print/index.jsp?uuid=a0ce5525-aa1d-4237-9159-1451829ecdb5&contentType=awfulTruth

From: Cinemablend

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Rachel-Weisz-Leaves-Mummy-3-4912.html

http://iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2327&Itemid=99

(Reply to this)

Jesus McNasty writes:
on Sep 12 2007 09:11 AM

Whoa, One tough-big-budget-oscar-winnin' shoes to fill.
Two- Why is Ms.Hardcore indy cred being tapped for it anyway.
Wouldn't mavericks like Bosworth, Alba, or Knightly be better suited to uphold the high artistic integredity that's neccesary for this film to be a uber money sucker on it's opening weekend.

(Reply to this)

Pleasuretown writes:
on Sep 12 2007 09:11 AM

I really enjoyed the 2nd Mummy, but then again i was a lot younger...
So it may not be so great anymore, but the idea of a third movie is terrible.
And to make it worse, no Weisz?
She made the first two movies.
And Pirates 2 and 3 were some of the most over hyped movies ever.
They were terrible.
The first one is great.

(Reply to this)

taran72 writes:
on Sep 12 2007 09:52 AM

Lame, lame, lame. Apparently they couldn't afford Knightly or Beckinsale. If this is some kind of "reboot", it's way too late for this lame series. Good luck.

(Reply to this)

ZEZEtheX writes:
on Sep 12 2007 10:10 AM

I groaned @ "she's a bad-*** action chick"

(Reply to this)

Gimy writes:
on Sep 12 2007 10:12 AM

pressboy, google her and the word "typecast" and they say the same thing your links ASSUME. problem is, your theory doesn't roll entirely because she was complaining BEFORE the second one about not wanting to be in the Mummy movies. had nothing to do with script, same "i don't want to be in these movies" kind of thing. basically, she finally had enough...thought she repaid the hand that fed her...and quit. gotta look at the whole picture bra. the franchise will be fine(nless they have crap cgi like the rock in the Returns) and they won't lose a dime over her absence.

(Reply to this)

pressboy writes:
on Sep 12 2007 10:32 AM

The links prove that she left because of the script and there are articles that have Rachel saying that she would have liked to come back to the series before she read the script. You sound like Rob Cohen, who lies a lot in his Mummy 3 blog in order to hide the fact that the script is terrible and it has been proven on other sites that he has been deleting posts that have question the information he has been giving.

You sound like a studio plant trying to sell this film.

(Reply to this)

Elixor writes:
on Sep 12 2007 10:45 AM

I don't know what people find so enjoyable in the Mummy movies. To me they're corny, but somehow not funny, they're not serious enough to draw you into the movies, the characters are bland, the action is middle-of-the-road at best, and there's nothing interesting about the plots. For me the Mummy movies could be grouped together with National Treasure, which is another worthless movie getting a sequel. Somehow these movies get a lot of money, so what makes them so entertaining for people?

(Reply to this)

nickb1016 writes:
on Sep 12 2007 01:24 PM

ok it doesnt matter who they get to replace weisz its going to be weird. even if rachel weisz didnt make the franchise she was part of the formula that made it work. u replace any lead character in a major franchise and something is going to be off. and considering her last movie was eragon and her next major film is fred clause i think it would take a pretty crappy script to scare her off

(Reply to this)

extremesplash_81 writes:
on Sep 12 2007 02:10 PM

eh, rachel weisz can be replaced, now if they got rid of fraser that would be a different story... Anyway, don't think badly of me, but I enjoyed both of the Mummy movies. They were no Shakespeare and didn't pretend to be, but they were good entertainment and had a sense of fun around them. If they can keep the same tone and fun in this new one, then I'll be all for it.

(Reply to this)

Gimy writes:
on Sep 12 2007 02:26 PM

yeah, i'm a plant. i said the second one had BAD cgi and i've ALWAYS said the end was a joke because it looks so stupid. good one. your links don't PROVE anything. i just told you, she stated BEFORE the second movie(which makes your argument less worthy) that she didn't want to be type cast and didn't want to be apart of it. if she said it ON THE SECOND ONE...why would she NOT have the same attitude on a third? get real, i don't like ungrateful people and i've tracked her comments since they started TALKING sequel after the first one(YEEEARS AGO) because i liked the original. second one? eh, not so much. the 3rd one COULD suck, i don't know. i'm honestly fearing it will. i didn't like the kid in the first one and it felt ALOT like phantom menace with the annoying child being anakin, annoying and out of place. all i know is what i've read in INTERVIEWS dating back to the original, back in 99. she was fine back waaay back then, but her career was going nowhere at the time. then she got decent parts...got tired of the "hey look, its evelyn from the Mummy movie!" talk...and wanted out. YOU on the other hand are stuck on the recent articles and thats it. look at the entire picture, AGAIN. just don't argue about something you know half about.

(Reply to this)