ROTTEN TOMATOES: Rob Cohen Delivers a Mummy 3 Update

Rob Cohen Delivers a Mummy 3 Update

Directors be bloggin', yo.

by Jeff Giles | September 26, 2007

We've still got nearly a year to wait for The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor -- but if you're itching for an update on the sequel's production, director Rob Cohen is more than happy to oblige.

Thanks to a report posted at Movieweb yesterday, we were alerted to a new entry in Cohen's blog, which shares a few details from the set, including the following:

Tomorrow begins the big ten-day count-down to finishing the first half of the shoot, our sojourn here in Montreal. We then move to the desert north of Beijing to shoot the epic ending battle where the Terra Cotta Army takes the field once more. There are over 700 visual effects shots in the film and a good percentage of them will take place in the last twenty minutes of the movie.

I am still on schedule, which is as much a miracle to me as to the studio brass. There have been many days of elation and many moments of pain but, overall, it has been a shoot of smooth flow and meticulous detail. I've been editing behind myself because in a large VFX movie like this, I have to turn over sequences to Digital Domain and Rhythm & Hues, our two VFX houses, before the whole film is cut, or shot for that matter, just to make the delivery date in early July.

Yes, he did say "Terra Cotta Army." From the film's synopsis:

Rob Cohen (XXX) directs this sequel that fast forwards the archaeological action of THE MUMMY RETURNS to 1946. Rick (Brendan Fraser) and Evelyn (Maria Bello in the role originated by Rachel Weisz) may have retired to England, and their now-grown son (Luke Ford) is following in their footsteps. But it's the resurrection of China's ten-thousand-strong terra cotta army that brings the adventuring couple back into the action.

For more behind-the-scenes info on the latest chapter in the Mummy saga, click on the link below!

Source: Rob Cohen
Source: Movieweb

Related Items

Movie:	The Mummy
	The Mummy Returns
Celeb:	Brendan Fraser
	Rob Cohen
	Maria Bello
	Luke Ford

(1-20 of 28 posts) | Reply

MMacKK writes:
on Sep 26 2007 06:28 AM

Weak.

No Rachel = Blasphemy.

The Mummy was a made little film. Returns, not as much, thanks to that **** annoying child. Just like Phantom Menace.

(Reply to this)

Hurmoth writes:
on Sep 26 2007 07:47 AM

They should have just written Rachel's character out. This film will be ruined with someone else in that position unless they come up with some good explanation as to why she looks like a different person lol

(Reply to this)

Hurmoth writes:
on Sep 26 2007 07:48 AM

They should have just written Rachel's character out. This film will be ruined with someone else in that position unless they come up with some good explanation as to why she looks like a different person lol

(Reply to this)

jajar writes:
on Sep 26 2007 07:48 AM

How wude! Mesuh no likey you!

(Reply to this)

wordweaver writes:
on Sep 26 2007 07:51 AM

Maria Bello as evy? uggggh...that is a blow to all the mummy fans. Rachel so disappointed you are ditching the role that made you famous. No matter what, you owe it to the Mummy for giving you a wonderful career. :( I am depressed about this.

(Reply to this)

jajar writes:
on Sep 26 2007 07:59 AM

Ohhh noooo!!! Mesuh now in big doodoo! My last comment was meant to be a reply to Mmackk for comparing Mummy 3 to Phantom Menace. Mesuh very very sorry for mistake.

(Reply to this)

welease_woger writes:
on Sep 26 2007 08:04 AM

Stwike jajar, Centuwion, vewy woughly!

(Reply to this)

Gimy writes:
on Sep 26 2007 08:10 AM

i made that comparison awhile ago about the kid in the mummy returns and anakin skywalker, ya mooch. way to steal material MENCIA...

and good god, get over yourselves weisz lovers. she was cute, played the role well...but GET OVER IT! she didn't wanna be in the movie. its not like they're replacing the star(fraser) with say...Andy Milanokis. the movie will go on, it'll still be decent...end of story.

uuuurgh, jar jar was one of the most annoying characters i've ever seen in a movie, add "annie" in that hung of crap and lucas shoulda bowed down and licked the short curlies of Ray park n' ewan mcgregor, the ONLY two reasons that movie was half worth watching. hey, lets steal material from Full House for christ sake(how wuuude!), pathetic. thanks for the flashback...

(Reply to this)

Man_Of_Iron8905 writes:
on Sep 26 2007 08:14 AM

Add the Legend of Zorro to that list of mishaps and now we are talking.

(Reply to this)

Bloody Mathias writes:
on Sep 26 2007 08:27 AM

Rachel is an oscar winner now and she knows a horrible script when she reads it.
She went to Universal to voice her concerns but when they weren't willing to improve it, she walked out.
Its the writers and Rob Cohen (The genius that brought us xXx, Stealth and Fast anf the Furious) fault for going ahead with an awful script and hoping we'll be distracted by all the FX.

The first Mummy was so great. It had the perfect mix of humour, horror and adventure but the sequel was a typical focus on saving thw world instead of the characters muck and this looks twice as bad. I know it'll suck.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna pop in my Mummy DVD and cry into my popcorn.

(Reply to this)

wordweaver writes:
on Sep 26 2007 09:04 AM

In reply to this comment (#1150068)
The fact that Rachel is an oscar winner now does not mean that she cannot star in cheesy, adventure blockbusters. Most people think that when they win oscars, they should only star in provocative, serious and thoughtful movies. Well, this world has serious issues and there's also a lot of fun in it. What happened to just letting go and having a wonderful time with the people who made you famous enough to win an oscar? people are always too worried about what the critics think. Of course we need to make serious movies but can you imagine a world without spider-man? batman? goofy movies like sydney white? she's the man? etc
The mummy made Rachel famous enough to win an oscar so the least she can do is to accept to star in a sequel. You say that the script was really bad, surely it can't be as bad as the second. She starred in the second installment, which was really bad compared to the first, so I don't see any reason if she can't star in the third. If she didn't want to star in it because of the bad script why did she star in the second installment which equally had a bad script? Now that she has an oscar, she's talking about a bad script? please. Rachel you should be ashamed of yourself for ditching this project.

(Reply to this)

Gimy writes:
on Sep 26 2007 09:18 AM

gimme a break on the whole "she didn't like the script" idea for her not being in it. she didn't want to be in the movies anymore, PERIOD. "she knows a horrible script when she reads it". yes...Envy...absolutely awesome movie. Eragon? breeeathtaking! Constantine? phew, great judge of character she is. i tell you what, if Bello taking her place is the WORST thing about this flick...then i'll be ecstatic. i'm more worried about laughable cgi and the fact that trilogies seem to have waned in recent years almost ruining the feeling of the franchise. you guys act like this is the Godfather anyway, its a simple cute action series...one SUPPORTING chic character doesn't meant that much. they could have done worse...would you rather see Lohan or Courtney love being Evy? that'd be interesting...watching the chic snort the dust off the tombs because they're so used to powdery substances...

(Reply to this)

dahluzz writes:
on Sep 26 2007 10:25 AM

wordweaver, shut your word hole. why did weisz do the mummy returns? because she wasn't famous enough not to. now that she's won an oscar, the bad press she would get for choosing this as one of her next big projects would vastly outweigh any monetary compensation. she has no motivation to do it. and imagine her during those endless weeks of tours and press junkits, explaining over and over again why she chose to reprise the role when she could have had her pick of parts in almost anything else. even if she hadn't taken home osky-boy, doing this pic would be a step backwards for an actress trying to be taken seriously in the industry. and what's with your amanda bynes fixation? I know she was on the show, but homegirl ain't All That.

(Reply to this)

Bloody Mathias writes:
on Sep 26 2007 10:30 AM

Wordweaver, you're making a huge assumption. " You say that the script was really bad, surely it can't be as bad as the second."
Did you read the script? How do you know that it can't be worse than the second? Was the second so abhorrent that any complaints that she might have about the third can be brushed away by the second?

Gimy, yes oscars winners can have fun and be in fluffy movies but you guys can't call an actress upitty or snooty if she decides to turn down a role. Sure this hurts the trilogy but believe me, if your more angry about her not taking this role than you are about Rob Cohen directing it, you've got a huge surprise coming your way when this opens.

And no Rachel doesn't owe her oscar to the Mummy trilogy, anyone who says that is ridiculous. You have no idea what the casting director was thinking when he/she hired her so stop making such assumptions.

(Reply to this)

Metafact writes:
on Sep 26 2007 11:13 AM

"Most people think that when they win oscars, they should only star in provocative, serious and thoughtful movies."

What the hell are you talking about? If anything, actors are doing the exact opposite of what you're saying. Just look at previous Oscar winners like Halle Berry, Nicolas Cage, Charlize Theron, and Jamie Foxx, who starred in insipid films right after their tremendous accomplishments. I'm glad that Mrs. Weisz has some standards and isn't throwing in the towel on her career just yet.

Besides, it's not as if she's *only* doing thought-provoking films. Didn't you hear about her role in Sin City 2?

"Rachel you should be ashamed of yourself for ditching this project."

Oh, just shut up, already!

(Reply to this)

pressboy writes:
on Sep 26 2007 11:17 AM

In reply to this comment (#1150115)
That's been Gimy's problem all long which makes me think that's he a studio plant trying to sell this film while at the same time bashing Rachel Weisz for not doing it. There has been articles that prove that Weisz left because she did not like the script and script reviews that back up her concerns.

Here they are for those who want to know the truth:

Rachel left because of the bad script and several sources confirmed 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

From iesb.com

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

(Reply to this)

wiggins writes:
on Sep 26 2007 12:39 PM

IMHOTEP! IMHOTEP! IMHOTEP!

(Reply to this)

Gimy writes:
on Sep 26 2007 12:53 PM

pressgirl, we've gone over this before but you don't comprehend jack sh3t apparently. whine all you want about your excuses for her not taking the film, the proof is what she's said before the 3rd even began as a thought. again, she said the SAME things BEFORE she won the oscar. i don't get how you're that stupid, or else you're the girl's bff or something. and AGAIN, bad script? look at the flix she's done...before and after her oscar. i don't get why you guys are SO defensive of the obvious, she's just being stuck up. big frikkin deal, she isn't the first...WON'T be the last chic. but you act like she's this TREMEEEENDOUS woman who is a goddess for turning down a role simply because she thinks she's better than she is. show her pic to 100 people and i bet, IF ANY OF THEM RECOGNIZE HER, they'll say its the chic from the mummy movies.

"Rachel decided to leave the franchise many years ago, after "The Mummy 2" finished shooting. We all had hopes that she would change her mind but I never had the opportunity to meet her or talk to her." thats a quote from cohen, EXACTLY. none of this "its been said she left because of a bad script". the guy SIMPLY SAYS she left, like EVERY OTHER article BEFORE Mummy returns. she did NOT want to be in the franchise and be labeled "evy" even though that was her entire career. would you PLEASE just accept that and admit you're an idiot? and i said BEFORE, i hope it doesn't suck. thats an awesome way to sell a film, really...you're a genius, i'm a studio plant...good comeback

(Reply to this)

pressboy writes:
on Sep 26 2007 01:39 PM

Gimy, you're such a studio tool that its sad. For one, you're not going to get the truth from Rob Cohnes blog because he's trying his best to save face and sell this film plus i can prove that He's lying about Rachel Leaving because there are several interviews with her saying that she would have liked to come back to the series.

To prove that Gimy to be the studio plant he is, here are the articles that proved that Rachel wanted to come back:

http://movies.ign.com/articles/732/732017p1.html

http://www.cinema.com/news/item/7815/rachel-wants-to-appear-in-the-mummy-3.phtml

http://www.movieweb.com/news/41/14541.php

http://www.moviehole.net/news/20060911_will_weisz_return_for_mummy_3.html

http://www.themovieinsider.com/nr3294-weisz-wants-third-dose-of-mummy.html

http://www.killermovies.com/m/themummy3/articles/6513.html

And here are the articles that prove that Rachel left because of the bad script:

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

Sorry Gimy, but no matter what spin the studio may want you to give, you will always fall on your face. you can't hide the truth.

(Reply to this)

Gimy writes:
on Sep 26 2007 02:41 PM

what studio do YOU work for is the real question. dude, you know she's not going to KEEP coming out and saying "i don't want to be in this movie because i'm selfish, i don't wanna be evy". thats bad PR, especially since her career is SOMEWHAT marketable. sorry dude, you can keep rambling about your recent "uuuh i meant this" bs but she's said for years that she did not want to be in the franchise after the first flick, she didn't want to be "evy" forever. whatever rach pays you...its decent...

you know wahts funny? i really don't give a sh3t about this movie, i'll see it no doubt but i'm not a major fan after the second one was laughable. but i'm not gonna sit here and be told i'm a propaganda junkie by some chump who only reads RECENT garbage and refuses to look at the big picture. for over 5 years she's said it, and you simply say "bad script". yeah...ok dude, good one

(Reply to this)

RottenTomatoes.com