The Tomb

German director Ulli Lommel randomly emerged into the direct to video horror genre in the mid 2000's and has since then delivered the worst films anyone could ever lay their sorry eyes on. They are actually literally painful to watch where no one gains a thing from them – not even unintentional so-bad-its-good comedy. However, there is a chance that in the distant future his films will become iconic with a cult film formula growing from nothing-but-trash to weird-that-it-was-made, though it's a little unlikely for now as he is making fans of the Horror genre puzzled and confused as to how anyone can create such atrocities of cinema.

If H.P. Lovecraft were still around and saw Lommel's adaptation of The Tomb he would probably be a very sad man and never write ever again; there are just one too many directors who take his well structured stories and utterly destroy them in a demeaning manner through their saddening execution and lack of cinematic talent -- Lommel is a very unoriginal man once again he goes to prove it by creating The Tomb. An unoriginal story is fine granted successful execution, art direction, style, acting, pace – whatever works as long as it isn't in-your-face done before tripe which is exactly what The Tomb is. A major comparison one cannot pass up is the 2004 hit "Saw" with The Tomb having one too many similarities that helps this film fall into the category of either rip-off or cash-in. People are very well aware of Saw by now, the seriousness of their lives, the fact anyone can fall into the trap at any time and you can even wind up dead – whilst The Tomb is an adaptation of another medium its unoriginality is shocking in terms of cinema. Yes The Tomb is quite a seen before pile of crap with many terrible aspects about it like no other.

On top of the films unoriginality is its astonishingly terrible special effects, poor casting and acting, mind numbingly boring music, poor editing, ugly cinematography, shaky camera work that at times is as though the cameraman was drunk and oh how the list just goes on. The Tomb is so much like a home video that someone without a clue about film making could quite possibly pull off a better film that is more watchable. Even a home video can be interesting if it has something to it, something bizarre, appealing and unnatural. An example would be John Waters' Pink Flamingos – its borderline home video and has next to nothing of a budget yet still has international appeal as it's like no other movie out there. The Tomb doesn't have that. It's a prime example of just out right bad horror that hopefully will be forgotten as time goes by as it is just another shot on a camcorder horror film released straight to DVD. This film will make you psychically sad or angry – or hey, even both!

Though Ulli Lommel is a very interesting cinema figure; how anyone can make such terrible, terrible films confuses me, yet draws me to them. He is notorious, a criminal against film and yet still manages to release more than one film at least every year. As the saying goes "It's hideous, yet I cannot turn away" which somewhat summarises Lommel's work – he is so terrible yet sometimes I feel myself renting his movies just to be gobsmacked over how terrible they are. I mean, why has he directed two films based on the Zodiac Killer and released them the same year? It's so bizarre that it almost alienates me from my entire understanding and knowledge of cinema. Still, Lommel is a very bad film director and its movies like The Tomb that make this a fact more than an opinion.

Wow...OK. So, after reading the little feud on here, I decided I had to see this movie for myself. This movie is HORRIBLE. I stopped watching it. I strongly recommend cleaning a closet instead of watching this movie, you'll be more spooked/entertained.

It's low budget with bad acting.

Whoever is giving this "movie" (because this is totally garbage) 10s is completely incorrect and should be disregarded.

I am in no way connected to any of the other reviewers.

Simply put, this garbage is not worth watching.

Very, very, very, very BAD "MOVIE".

This is the worst movie i have ever seen in my entire life. It looks like it was made in someones basement with their fake blood kit left over from Halloween. Why would anyone even bother making this? They couldn't have honestly thought that it was a good movie.I could have made a better movie than this with the camera on my cell phone... Some people should just STOP TRYING! The girls fake blood and make up was coming off through out the whole movie, you couldn't hear what the characters were even saying. and the random shots through the TV were just retarded. why did we need to see some naked girl randomly during the first 30 min. it didn't make any sense. i just think that this movie is an embarrassment to all horror movies ever made. ever. in the history of all scary movies. idiots should just stop trying to make decent movies when they have to have some idea that the movie sucks at life. don't be stupid

I rented this DVD because it sounded better then it was.Lionsgate put it out and I am questioning their horrible taste lately.At first I was thinking yet another movie that has copied saw(but saw copied cube).I have seen a few other movies similar to saw(are you scared and unknown)which no doubt copied it's idea,but they were all watchable and had their own twist.The tomb was just boring and I wasted money on this rental and wish I could get my money back.It started out lame.When we first see the first 2 people they are injured but don't even speak to each other for the longest time.And then as the movie continues I was just bored and could not get into it.I can easily see how this bad movie went straight to video(DVD). It would be nice if these movie makers would stop making these Saw type of movies.It has been done enough.Unfortunately it won't end anytime soon and there are 2 more coming out soon that also copy this idea.

I am a huge fan of Lovecraft and recently decided to re-read his works in chronological order.

"The Tomb" was the first piece of short fiction H.P. Lovecraft wrote as an adult. I would not say that the Lovecraft story is especially scary. The written work is mostly psychological horror, a ghost story with no violence to speak of. but I was furious to learn that this low-budget shlockfest was allowed to bill this film as Lovecraft's work, when it has nothing to do with the story. I mean NOTHING.

On top of that, "The Tomb" is hardly well-known to begin with, so why choose it? For me, it dishonors the memory of Lovecraft for these awful filmmakers to get away with it.

Was this because Lovecraft's works are now in the public domain, because they are? Why not just call the film "Phantom of the Opera" or "Frankenstein?" It would make just as much sense.