La maldición de la tumba de Tutankamón
Título original: The Curse of King Tut's Tomb
PUNTUACIÓN EN IMDb
4,3/10
2,6 mil
TU PUNTUACIÓN
Hace miles de años gobernaba el gran rey niño Tutankamón. Pocos conocen los detalles de su vida y nadie conoce los secretos de su muerte. Pero todo está a punto de cambiar.Hace miles de años gobernaba el gran rey niño Tutankamón. Pocos conocen los detalles de su vida y nadie conoce los secretos de su muerte. Pero todo está a punto de cambiar.Hace miles de años gobernaba el gran rey niño Tutankamón. Pocos conocen los detalles de su vida y nadie conoce los secretos de su muerte. Pero todo está a punto de cambiar.
- Dirección
- Guión
- Reparto principal
Reseñas destacadas
My son is 8 and he enjoyed it. At three hours it was a too long for me, but I remember watching Tarzan movies for hours on Saturday mornings when I was his age, including those awful Mike Henry in South America Tarzan movies. This was better than those. So, even though I didn't like it much, I'm glad movies are still being made that a kid can watch and get lost in. One thing I thought was puzzling, they kept introducing characters that they never really did anything with. Steven Waddington was the only supporting character that managed to shine. The history was of course pretty silly, but they "fixed" that at the end. It made my son want to know more, so we went on the web and looked up what really happened. Definitely a "B" movie, with limited special effects and wooden acting, but still fun for kids.
I've always thought I was one of the more forgiving movie viewers in the country, but I just can't describe how bad this movie is. The "Egyptology" described in the terribly written introduction voice-over must be from not a parallel universe, but a skewed one, because it certainly has nothing to do with this one. The dialog is just atrocious. The acting could have been good -- I choose to believe this because the bad directing so completely overwhelmed any performance talent that evidence of acting ability is completely undetectable. The characters would have to be improved to be two dimensional. The pacing was haphazard at best. I can't remember the editing, so it must have been better than the other aspects of the film. I wish Joe Bob Briggs was still reviewing movies, because that's the most entertainment anyone could hope for from this film.
What else can we expect, this is an example of production companies to make films for 'entertainment' only and not have to pay the high Hollywood star wages.Even the 'bigger' name stars are working for less and as the scripting,historical accuracy is lacking the players get paid the producers can sell it, no real quality needed. Not to mention the new actors (esses) get some experience and become known. Goood movie to watch on a cold rainy day like,today. Anyway how can every movie be as great as Casablaca or Gone With The Wind, and at least its better than a 'teen movie'.The best factors are there is no swearing just to swear and no unnecessary sex.
This is not "The Lord of The Rings" by any means and is not even the best work of Director Russell Mulcahy. And there were far too many natives of India trying to pass as Egyptians. Having said that I found this film to be good escapism entertainment if you realize that they are not trying to present any kind of historical fact. One of the best ways to sum it up is to imagine Indiana Jones on the cheap. Casper Van Dien is always fun to watch once you accept his natural cockiness and are pulled into his ability to be comic and serious at the same time.
Johnathan Hyde is always excellent either as hero (ala "Richie Rich) or as villain, and he seems to be fated to play these evil archaeologist types recently. And Malcolm McDowell is always superb. But the winner in this film was the sets, props and the soundtrack. The film was worth that alone. Still, a tighter shot film in a shorter time frame might have made it all work better. Not Oscar material by a long shot, but worth the time if you have nothing better to do.
Johnathan Hyde is always excellent either as hero (ala "Richie Rich) or as villain, and he seems to be fated to play these evil archaeologist types recently. And Malcolm McDowell is always superb. But the winner in this film was the sets, props and the soundtrack. The film was worth that alone. Still, a tighter shot film in a shorter time frame might have made it all work better. Not Oscar material by a long shot, but worth the time if you have nothing better to do.
One of the most fascinating things about this film (apart from Jonathan Hyde's extraordinary resemblance with Henry Daniell)is watching how the plot meanders and wanders with no destination in sight as if it were an Art Nouveau filigrain.
I suspect that the archeology academics would seriously object at the unorthodox -but revolutionary- system that the protagonist and his buddies use to find the legendary Pharaoh's tomb, namely, by sitting in the terraces of Cairo's seediest bars and leaving them without alcoholic stock. Their interest is, however, scientific, except for the legionnaire buddy who is more interested in gold statuettes accidentally getting lost in his greatcoat pockets (Having mentioned the legionnaire, I must say that I admire the courage of the scriptwriter, who reveals to us -for the very first time- that Egypt was at the time a French protectorate, and not, as we've been led to believe by the official history, associated to the British empire)
The bad guys stick to the old, slow, boring system of studying the terrain and excavating carefully according to old Ieroglyphs, while our hero and his friends discover the tomb the legendary grave by happily throwing dynamite sticks at random: a new path is opened thus for archeology.
I suspect that the archeology academics would seriously object at the unorthodox -but revolutionary- system that the protagonist and his buddies use to find the legendary Pharaoh's tomb, namely, by sitting in the terraces of Cairo's seediest bars and leaving them without alcoholic stock. Their interest is, however, scientific, except for the legionnaire buddy who is more interested in gold statuettes accidentally getting lost in his greatcoat pockets (Having mentioned the legionnaire, I must say that I admire the courage of the scriptwriter, who reveals to us -for the very first time- that Egypt was at the time a French protectorate, and not, as we've been led to believe by the official history, associated to the British empire)
The bad guys stick to the old, slow, boring system of studying the terrain and excavating carefully according to old Ieroglyphs, while our hero and his friends discover the tomb the legendary grave by happily throwing dynamite sticks at random: a new path is opened thus for archeology.
¿Sabías que...?
- CuriosidadesJonathan Hyde (Morgan Sinclair) later described the film as "an absolutely ghastly pile of tosh" and claimed that he only took the role because he had never been to India before.
- PifiasThe scene with the movie audience watching newsreel footage of the team that discovered Tut's tomb shows the silent film in wide-screen. Silent films were projected at 1.33:1, not wide-screen.
- Citas
Danny Freemont: Just kill me.
Morgan Sinclair: Oh, I'm not going to kill you, Freemont. I'm going to mummify you.
- ConexionesFeatured in The Dark Secrets of the Hellfire Council (2006)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y añadir a tu lista para recibir recomendaciones personalizadas
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Sitio oficial
- Idioma
- Títulos en diferentes países
- The Curse of King Tut's Tomb
- Localizaciones del rodaje
- Empresas productoras
- Ver más compañías en los créditos en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- 14.000.000 US$ (estimación)
- Duración2 horas 50 minutos
- Color
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.78 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugerir un cambio o añadir el contenido que falta