ReaderKenka Let's be realistic.

Usamah Harvey The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Lachlan Coulson This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

graestella Always interested in all things Egyptian and Mummy related I invested £1 on this film at a car boot sale recently. Boy did I waste my money ! The first thing you notice on the DVD is the bad transfer and the fuzzy picture. This is not the high resolution digital imagery we have come to expect from Hollywood productions. The film looks like a bad wedding video made by your brother with a VHS.The movie starts in Egypt 1947, the Valley of the Sorcerer ( wherever that is ) where a young Black Egyptologist carries out a bit of tomb robbing. This is from the first scene ridiculous. How many Black Egyptologists have there been ? You could probably count them on one hand. The elite profession barely tolerated women or middle class ones like Howard Carter. Don't even try to read the hieroglyphs in the tomb. These have just been carved on the Styrofoam walls at random and are meaningless gibberish.Then we jump forward to the Present Day, which for some reason is in Marin County California not Egypt. Elderly TV Movie actor Lloyd Bochner reads some ancient incantations from a stone tablet, he is then attacked by an unseen monster. Presumably this is the Mummy, but we don't see it in order to save money on the SFX.Cut to two bores talking rubbish about canopic jars. These had human heads during the 18th Dynasty. Despite this, one of the 'experts' thinks the jar is 18th Dynasty. Then he inexplicably starts talking about the 3rd Dynasty. As if the the word Dynasty was somehow the link in the sentence.I couldn't take any more, began screaming, and ejected the film from the machine at this point.

lastliberal I had to struggle to get through this one. Louis Gossett Jr. (An Officer and a Gentleman) was the only reason I tuned in. he usually does a great job, and he really wasn't all that bad in a poor vehicle such as this.This is one of those films that you need a bucket and a gun before you watch. That is to either throw up or shoot yourself if you can't escape.The mummy was pathetic, there was little horror, and the ending was a mess.Stay away - far away.

slayrrr666 "Bram Stoker's The Mummy" is another rather traditional mediocre mummy film.**SPOILERS**Robert Wyatt, (Eric Lutes) a budding art historian, is called by Margaret Trelawny, (Amy Locane) his ex, to her father's house to help her with a mystery. Once he gets there, the staff isn't receptive to him, and treat him as an outsider. When strange events begin happening around the mansion, Robert seeks out her father's old accomplice, John Corbeck, (Louis Gossett Jr.) And brings him back to the house. He believes that Margaret's father has come under the spell of Egyptian Queen Tera, one of the most powerful queens. When they find that Tera has taken possession of Margaret, Robert and Corbeck race to stop her from enacting an ancient curse.The Good News: The film is based upon a novel by Bram Stoker, and in fact has been done before as the film "Blood from the Mummy's Tomb," too which there are certain similar characteristics. The fact that the evil being is called Queen Tera, the possessed woman called Margaret, the born-on-the-day-of-discovery angle, a ruby-bedecked ring as a means of possession, and the ailing father all pretty much the same between the films. This allows for some familiarity between the stories and that increases some entertainment if we know a little bit about what's going on in the film. The film does have some nice sequences. One of the best is an attack on a rainy night outside a phone-booth. It sets up the attack beautifully with an earlier attack, and here is the final payoff. It goes out in a pretty grand fashion that features some nice suspense to ago along with the payoff. The resurrection sequence at the end is nicely realized, and the way it plays out provides some nice moments.The Bad News: The mummy sub-genre has had relatively little success in the mainstream, mainly because the myth surrounding it is one that's always been a hard one to film properly. It's always been a hard one to get down, and here the pattern continues. The familiarity with the other film raises the concern over where or not this can be a remake or not, and the debate is a tricky one as both sides have valid arguments. The fact that this is billed as a mummy movie is also a misprint. True, there is a mummy in the film, but there is no shambling corpse wrapped in bandages after people who desecrated it's tomb. It's more of a supernatural film that features a mummy as the source of a curse. There is such a slow pace to this that it can be maddening for something to happen. The deaths are OK, but fall into a rhythm that is pretty far apart. Apart from the deaths, there is really not that much action to speak of, so it's incredibly slow and a long time occurs before anything happens.The Final Verdict: Mummy films traditionally aren't all that spectacular, and this one follows the pattern, with a slow pace, not a lot of action, underwhelming deaths, and a mummy that takes forever to get on screen. It's not a total loss, but it's not all that spectacular either. Exercise caution before giving this a shot.Rated R: Violence, Nudity, some Language and a brief sex scene

Barry_the_Baptist The acting in this film is so hilariously atrocious and the mummy so cheesy that you just might have to rent this the next time you have one of those 'bad movie nights' with your friends. Last but not least, let's not forget the Oscar-worthy acting of Al Borland of "Home Improvement" fame. Who would have thought his film career would never take off? (shocking)! With no actual scares, this film becomes a campfest from the very first minutes. This is a script even Paulie SHore would have thrown out. If you like watching bad movies for pure fun, I also recommend 'R.O.T.O.R.', which is quite possibly the worst film ever made. All in all, this is one great waste of time.