Rating: 
Summary: Cheap Version of 'The Mummy' Legend
Review: As if to cash in on 'The Mummy' franchise, this 'Mummy' was released with the name of Louis Gossett Jr. on top. And it claims that it was based on Bram 'Dracula' Stoker's lesser novel 'The Jewel of the Seven Stars.' Forget these things now, and see 'Blood from the Mummy's Tomb' (1971) or 'The Awakening' (1980), both of which are based on the same novel.
Amy Locane plays Margaret, the daughter of an eminent Egyptologist who was found in a coma. On his body are found seven fresh scars, and the perplexed daughter calls in a help from her ex-sweetheart Robert (Eric Lutes). Then the things get out of control, for Margaret starts to see weird things (ala Rachel Weisz in 'The Mummy Returns'), and so one guy Corbeck (Gossett Jr.) is also called in, who is last seen in some institute (not again, please).
While the snail-paced story attempts to scare us with various familiar tricks, we know exactly what will happen next, well, because the film is called 'Mummmy' after all and you will see some poor guy wrapped in dirty brown bandage will resurrect from the dead, in this case in the dismal basement room of the sun-shining West Coast residence.
By chaging the location to America, and the time to the present-day, the film lost almost all the good things about the original Stoker novel, which belonged to the time of Sherlock Holmes and Dracula. Now, adding to this already criminal deed, the filmmaker seems to have been very reluctant to prepare enough budget. Consequently, the 'Mummy' here is no better than an extra in ragged cloth, which looks so cheap, yes, a cheap mummy you can buy for your kids.
Plus, acting ranges from so-so to terrible. Maybe I shouldn't name names, but you may remember the sad fact that Louis Gossett Jr. is actually an Oscar-winner who must be now living down the memories of doing this film. We want to forget this film, and that fact about Oscar, as much as he does.
Final verdict. Avoid at any cost.
Rating: 
Summary: THIS BRAM STOKER MOVIE DELIVERS...........
Review: BRAM STOKER'S THE MUMMY delivers much more than any other MUMMY movie released. The 1999 MUMMY movie had excellent special effects, but over all the movie's plot stunk skunks to death. Starring Academy Award winner Louis Gossett, Jr. (JAWS III) and a very strong cast. The acting is straight, never stupid. I did minus one star for having a very slow begining, but heck once you got into it, say a half an hour in the movie began to role. Based upon the novel THE JEWEL OF SEVEN STARS by BRAM STOKER.
Rating: 
Summary: Third Time's (Almost) A Charm
Review: Faithful third film adaptation of Bram Stoker's The Jewel Of Seven Stars (following Blood From the Mummy's Tomb and The Awakening) doesn't deliver all it promises, but it delivers enough to be worth watching.Archaeologist Lloyd Bochner is attacked in his locked study, and has left very specific instructions about how he is to be guarded while unconscious - the attack plainly did not surprise him too much, and police inspector Mark Lindsey Chapman wants to know why. Chapman thinks Bochner's estranged daughter, Amy Locane, had something to do with it. His suspicions aren't helped any when other people in the household begin suffering accidents, and Locane always just happens to be the only one nearby. Locane and her Egyptology student boyfriend seek out Bochner's old colleague Louis Gosset, Jr., presently an outpatient at the local asylum. Gosset was with Bochner when he made his most stupendous find in Egypt, the tomb of Tara, a sorceress queen so feared that her name was erased from history. He knows - as does Bochner - that the attack was somehow engineered by Tara's ancient black magic, and that there's more where that came from... The production on this movie is really quite handsome. It's dark and rich and colorful, with a wonderfully atmospheric music score. The sets and set pieces seem more authentic than usual for this kind of film. The performances range from good to adequate. The script is actually pretty decent, and the style refreshingly low-key (though there are a couple of splashy special-effects lapses). It's rather slow, and stretches credibility a bit, but you have to expect that in a movie with dusty mummies walking around strangling people - and the mummy is pretty creepy, at that. All three versions of this story are pretty good. This isn't the best, but it's imminently watchable and attractively packaged throughout.
Rating:
Summary: Terrible!
Review: first and for-most Bram Stocker did not write the mummy, so this is not his story. This is just a ploy to get you to watch this if you liked the Dracula title. This is a crappy way to get people to watch a movie. Maybe they should have called the move, "A Crappy Ploy to Rip Off the Ignorant" Bad movie, nothing origional. Donot waste your money.
Rating:
Summary: Terrible!
Review: First, I would like to say to who ever said that Bram Stoker did not write The Mummy is wrong! Bram Stoker did write the Mummy, I finished reading it in January of 1997! And this, although faithful to the book, is lame, and violent, with bad acting. Whoever made this was trying to copy the brilliance of Bram Stoker's Dracula (which is indeed "brilliant"), but did a poor job. If they wanted a good movie, the director should have been Francis-Ford Coppola, the director of Bram Stoker's Dracula.
Rating:
Summary: A "B" movie for the '90s...
Review: If you're looking for a classic tale of horror and suspense, and life beyond the grave, pick up "The Mummy". You know, the one with Boris Karloff. Universal Studios, 1931. If, however, you fancy yourself a fan of incredibly chessey "B" horror movies, then this is a good one to see. Particularly if you like to watch the old Hammer movies. This is along the same lines.
Rating:
Summary: MUMMY NEEDS A MAKEOVER
Review: Lou Gossett, Jr.----didn't he win an Academy award for OFFICER AND A GENTLEMAN? Hmmm...think of F. Murray Abraham, Ben Kingsley, and others who after winning their awards ended up second bananas in rather trifling movies. Lou joins the lot, and overacts so badly, he should really be ashamed of himself. But, he's not the only bad thing in this movie. Based on a Bram Stoker story, this version is handsomely mounted, but at times is so confusing, one never really knows what's going on. Eric Lutes is an engaging hero, but sometimes he looks like he doesn't know what he's supposed to be doing; Amy Locane is luscious, but doesn't possess the range to go from the darling daughter to the vindictive mummy; Mark Lindsay Chapman who used to claim "Dallas" as his home, is laughably agreeable as the private investigator who gets bugged to death. Lloyd Bochner is wasted in his small role, and the whole movie seems thrown together, rather than orchestrated. Not a truly bad movie, but not a truly good one, either.
Rating:
Summary: MUMMY NEEDS A MAKEOVER
Review: Lou Gossett, Jr.----didn't he win an Academy award for OFFICER AND A GENTLEMAN? Hmmm...think of F. Murray Abraham, Ben Kingsley, and others who after winning their awards ended up second bananas in rather trifling movies. Lou joins the lot, and overacts so badly, he should really be ashamed of himself. But, he's not the only bad thing in this movie. Based on a Bram Stoker story, this version is handsomely mounted, but at times is so confusing, one never really knows what's going on. Eric Lutes is an engaging hero, but sometimes he looks like he doesn't know what he's supposed to be doing; Amy Locane is luscious, but doesn't possess the range to go from the darling daughter to the vindictive mummy; Mark Lindsay Chapman who used to claim "Dallas" as his home, is laughably agreeable as the private investigator who gets bugged to death. Lloyd Bochner is wasted in his small role, and the whole movie seems thrown together, rather than orchestrated. Not a truly bad movie, but not a truly good one, either.
Rating:
Summary: A failed attempt to captilize on the remake craze.
Review: Spurred on by previous experience with 'Bram Stoker's Dracula', we elected to rent this title (thankfully, we didn't purchase it). The most artful aspect of this movie is the cover illustration. The plot was painfully predictable, the acting was soap opera quality (shallow, transparent characters), the special effects were sadly lacking. The complaints that my family continually uttered were the only thing that kept me awake. If you expect a movie similar to the quality of 'Bram Stoker's Dracula' - don't waste your time here. By comparison, 'Army of Darkness' was a true classic.
Rating:
Summary: Where is the Mummy in this movie! Richard Karn shirtless!
Review: The only problems with the movie is where is the mummy ? also for fans of Richard Karn you can see him shirtless ! this movie is wannabe that is seemed to go more the erotic than actually have a mummy in it! It's Ok for a rental in either DVD or VHS!
|
