ÉVALUATION IMDb
1,8/10
1,5 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA team of archaeologists discover an ancient mummy, unleashing a deadly curse from its eternal tomb.A team of archaeologists discover an ancient mummy, unleashing a deadly curse from its eternal tomb.A team of archaeologists discover an ancient mummy, unleashing a deadly curse from its eternal tomb.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
Marwan Naji
- Arab Guide 3
- (as Mark Naji)
Sevan Hovsepian
- Lybian Soldier 3
- (as Sevan Hovseplan)
Avis en vedette
And not the case of a good premise, weak execution but The Mummy Resurrected actually managed to be disaster from the get go. The way it looks gives an insult to the word amateurish, there have been worse special effects but these effects were stiff in movement and look so hastily done, very slapdash at best. The sloppy editing, drab lighting and haphazard camera shots further add to how bad the movie looks. If you are looking for good dialogue, acting or characters you won't find any of those here. The dialogue has a very awkward vibe, a lot of it sounds like total gibberish and improvisatory. The acting screams of both inexperience and pretty actresses- their beauty is pretty much the only halfway decent thing about The Mummy Resurrected if even that- who just go through the motions, have no chemistry between each them and not one seems to care about what would happen to them. Not once do you care for or connect to a character so you feel nothing when there's one less of them, some are so obnoxious you find yourself cheering inside when they're no longer there. The antagonist is a long way from threatening or scary, if anything more goofy than anything else. Worst of all was the story, one so lacking in fun, suspense or tension and filled with ridiculousness and so pedestrian in pace that it's pretty much non-existent. You can say the same for the directing too. All in all, an abomination that is only redeemed(in a very, very minute way) by the beauty of the actresses, which solely gives The Mummy Resurrected 1/10. Everything else however gets a big fat zero. Bethany Cox
While the concept of mummies is interesting, it is far from every movie adaption that turns out that way, and "The Mummy Resurrected" is a testimony to the fact that not every mummy movie turns out to be great.
This movie was not only boring and uneventful, but it also had a ludicrous storyline that was unappealing and weak.
I tried to get into the movie, but just ended up giving up, because there was nothing to reel you in and keep you nailed to the seat. The storyline was pathetic and almost non-existing, and the performances were not captivating, nor were the characters they were portraying. The only two things that the movie had working for it was the mummy plot and the special effects - although the latter wasn't much around.
I stuck with the movie to the end, hoping that it would pick up pace and actually get into gear. But it just never happened. And as such, I can't really recommend that you waste your time, money or effort on this particular movie, because it is just not worth it.
This movie was not only boring and uneventful, but it also had a ludicrous storyline that was unappealing and weak.
I tried to get into the movie, but just ended up giving up, because there was nothing to reel you in and keep you nailed to the seat. The storyline was pathetic and almost non-existing, and the performances were not captivating, nor were the characters they were portraying. The only two things that the movie had working for it was the mummy plot and the special effects - although the latter wasn't much around.
I stuck with the movie to the end, hoping that it would pick up pace and actually get into gear. But it just never happened. And as such, I can't really recommend that you waste your time, money or effort on this particular movie, because it is just not worth it.
Many people seem to be watching this under a false misconception, and are going in under the impression that it is connected to the popular 1999 Universal remake "The Mummy", and it's sequels/spin-offs. This is not the case. This film has nothing to do with those films- no shared cast or crew, no common story elements, not even a common studio producing this "effort." It has literally nothing to do with those films. This is what is commonly referred to as a "Mockbuster"- a low-budget film from a studio specializing in low-budget productions, which attempts to capitalize off of the success of much larger, more profitable studio films by making itself LOOK like those films through deceptive tactics like using similar titles, similar advertisements/poster designs, etc. But please know- this film and it's creators are in no way connected to or affiliated with any previous "Mummy" movie in any way.
I felt it important to get that out of the way, as the "mockbuster" trend has been a growing problem in the world of home entertainment (thanks to companies like "The Asylum" who specialize almost exclusively in making rip-off "mockbusters"), and has for at least the past decade caused an increasing amount of confusion for consumers and movie-fans.
I'll also note another important fact- "The Mummy Resurrected" is so bad... I wasn't able to make myself sit through it start-to-finish. It's cheap. Lazily constructed. Filled with flimsy scares and ludicrous amounts of padding. And dreadfully acted. Out of the 70ish-minute runtime (yes, it's only about 70 minutes, and is padded out to 80 with a prolonged opening credits and even more prolonged closing credits), I've maybe seen 40 minutes start-to-finish, before skimming through the rest on Fast-Forward.
To go over the plot is virtually pointless. You know what you're getting into plot-wise. Curse tomb, evil mummy, blah-blah-blah.
What you're really interested in are the actors, the scares, the "spooky" effects and the titular Mummy himself. And those are all drastic let-downs.
For starters, the actors (all basically unknowns) mostly fall flat. It's hard to tell if they're truly "bad actors" of if they just can't manage to build any performance from the terrible writing and direction... but they almost universally fail at connecting with the audience and building any personality. This is one of those cases of "cardboard cut-out" performances, where a plank of wood with a face drawn on it would've worked just as well on screen. But I'm not going to blame the actors for this 100%. As I said, it could very well be the product of the lousy production.
The "scares" are just dreadful. For starters, this is a remarkably boring film (mainly due to Patrick McManus' atrocious directorial choices), and the scares are all equally boring and phoned in, often being so needlessly prolonged and padded, they become unintentionally amusing as a result. (Case in point one scene, where bandages ssslllooowwwlllyyy snake along the ground and cover up a victim for what feels like a short eternity.)
The visual effects are poor. Mainly comprised of terrible CGI "sand" that looks like early area 3D-video-game graphics. It doesn't feel organic or even remotely real-to-life.
And the mummy itself is probably going to make you laugh out loud whenever it's on screen. It looks like any cheap "zombie" costume you could find in a Halloween shop, that's been wrapped up in nice, new clean gauze from a CVS pharmacy. You know you're in trouble when your 2014 film's mummy looks objectively worse than the creature from the original 1932 Boris Karloff film. Evidently, 80+ years of development in makeup effects don't mean squat if your design team is completely incompetent.
"The Mummy Resurrected" is one of the most painful entries in the "mockbuster" genre I've seen in quite some time. It's so cheap and padded, it's virtually unwatchable, and it can't even be bothered to give us even a remotely interesting mummy to look at.
This one easily earns it's 1 out of 10 rating. Are we sure this wasn't meant to be a parody or something? Because it certainly doesn't work as a serious film, and supplies more unintentional chuckles than thrills...
I felt it important to get that out of the way, as the "mockbuster" trend has been a growing problem in the world of home entertainment (thanks to companies like "The Asylum" who specialize almost exclusively in making rip-off "mockbusters"), and has for at least the past decade caused an increasing amount of confusion for consumers and movie-fans.
I'll also note another important fact- "The Mummy Resurrected" is so bad... I wasn't able to make myself sit through it start-to-finish. It's cheap. Lazily constructed. Filled with flimsy scares and ludicrous amounts of padding. And dreadfully acted. Out of the 70ish-minute runtime (yes, it's only about 70 minutes, and is padded out to 80 with a prolonged opening credits and even more prolonged closing credits), I've maybe seen 40 minutes start-to-finish, before skimming through the rest on Fast-Forward.
To go over the plot is virtually pointless. You know what you're getting into plot-wise. Curse tomb, evil mummy, blah-blah-blah.
What you're really interested in are the actors, the scares, the "spooky" effects and the titular Mummy himself. And those are all drastic let-downs.
For starters, the actors (all basically unknowns) mostly fall flat. It's hard to tell if they're truly "bad actors" of if they just can't manage to build any performance from the terrible writing and direction... but they almost universally fail at connecting with the audience and building any personality. This is one of those cases of "cardboard cut-out" performances, where a plank of wood with a face drawn on it would've worked just as well on screen. But I'm not going to blame the actors for this 100%. As I said, it could very well be the product of the lousy production.
The "scares" are just dreadful. For starters, this is a remarkably boring film (mainly due to Patrick McManus' atrocious directorial choices), and the scares are all equally boring and phoned in, often being so needlessly prolonged and padded, they become unintentionally amusing as a result. (Case in point one scene, where bandages ssslllooowwwlllyyy snake along the ground and cover up a victim for what feels like a short eternity.)
The visual effects are poor. Mainly comprised of terrible CGI "sand" that looks like early area 3D-video-game graphics. It doesn't feel organic or even remotely real-to-life.
And the mummy itself is probably going to make you laugh out loud whenever it's on screen. It looks like any cheap "zombie" costume you could find in a Halloween shop, that's been wrapped up in nice, new clean gauze from a CVS pharmacy. You know you're in trouble when your 2014 film's mummy looks objectively worse than the creature from the original 1932 Boris Karloff film. Evidently, 80+ years of development in makeup effects don't mean squat if your design team is completely incompetent.
"The Mummy Resurrected" is one of the most painful entries in the "mockbuster" genre I've seen in quite some time. It's so cheap and padded, it's virtually unwatchable, and it can't even be bothered to give us even a remotely interesting mummy to look at.
This one easily earns it's 1 out of 10 rating. Are we sure this wasn't meant to be a parody or something? Because it certainly doesn't work as a serious film, and supplies more unintentional chuckles than thrills...
I don't even know where to begin there was no storyline, no plot, all the actresses in it were pretty and young just to get young boys hormones going, it made no sense and by the end of the movie your sitting there thinking wow even Brendan Frasier would be sad right now. Don't WASTE YOUR TIME OR MONEY ITS TERRIBLE AND LOOKS LIKE SOMEONE WAS JUST Extremely BORED AND THOUGHT IT WOULD BE FUNNY TO TRY AND MAKE THE WORST RIPOFF EVER MISSION ACCOMPLISHED. I would rather watch the original mummy a hundred times before ever considering watching this again. I loved the mummy with Brendan Frasier and own all of them but this makes me sad someone tried to tie this movie with those.
This horribly written script only left out one thing that might have saved it from bankrupting the producers and those that were foolish enough to bankroll this epic flop - Teen Heart Throbs with pretty faces, 6-packs, big busted low-cut honey's with tight butts in short-shorts, like all the moronic vampire and zombie films and TV shows aimed at the addle-brained adolescents that flock to them.
Trying very hard to look and smell like a Brandon Frasier "Mummy" epic, this is a very poor rip-off. Perhaps the producers should have taken a "slap-stick" approach, rather than attempt a feeble serious guffaw that this turns out to be.
OMG, where to start? The Script, acting, "cinema" photography, plot and probably even the food table for the actors and hands was horrible! You'll be more entertained if you go and rent (buy it) one of the original 1932 B&W Boris Karloff "Mummy" films. This one gave me a whole roll of Tums case of indigestion!
Trying very hard to look and smell like a Brandon Frasier "Mummy" epic, this is a very poor rip-off. Perhaps the producers should have taken a "slap-stick" approach, rather than attempt a feeble serious guffaw that this turns out to be.
OMG, where to start? The Script, acting, "cinema" photography, plot and probably even the food table for the actors and hands was horrible! You'll be more entertained if you go and rent (buy it) one of the original 1932 B&W Boris Karloff "Mummy" films. This one gave me a whole roll of Tums case of indigestion!
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesNot a sequel to the Brendan Fraser La momie (1999) franchise.
- ConnexionsReferences Titanic (1997)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is The Mummy Resurrected?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Resurrection of the Mummy
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 3 000 000 $ US (estimation)
- Durée
- 1h 20m(80 min)
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 1.78 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant