IMDb रेटिंग
1.8/10
1.5 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंA 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.
Marwan Naji
- Arab Guide 3
- (as Mark Naji)
Sevan Hovsepian
- Lybian Soldier 3
- (as Sevan Hovseplan)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
Before I began watching The Mummy Resurrected, I wondered how anyone could make a mummy movie with a budget of only $750,000. Then, as I watched the film I understood. Most of the money was spend on special effects (they were reasonably good and a few were very good) but there really wasn't anything left to pay for a good script or actors or a director. And, speaking of director and script, it is very odd that when I looked up this film on IMDb, I noticed that although the cast and producers were listed for the film, this is NOT the case for the director or writer. Perhaps they didn't want to have their names associated with the film—all I know is that it makes no sense to omit these two very important credits.
The film is the story of six cute co-eds who are inexplicably in Egypt and are invited along on a mummy hunt. Now considering that these young ladies don't seem to know the first thing about archeology and seem like extras from a college sorority film, I felt perplexed. Yet, somehow we are expected to believe that one of them has a long-lost archaeologist father and instead of mounting a proper expedition with SUPPLIES, appropriate clothing and Egyptologists, for instance, he takes these six cute undergraduates into the desert to look for some ancient burial site. Once there, the three guides he brought are murdered (by whom we never have any idea—as it looks like the writer forgot about this plot thread) and he and the girls just ignore this and go exploring!
Later, the girls start dying—one by one. Does the girl whose father brought them there care? Not particularly—she just wants to hang out with daddy. Nor, unfortunately, does the audience care as it took so long for these deaths to occur that you'll find your attention sadly waning. Much of it is because the ladies' reactions were so muted. I've seen women break fingernails and act more upset than these actresses when one of their friends dies. I also had to laugh because one of these well-trained and well outfitted ladies had to use her smart phone as a flashlight inside the tomb because you can only assume they forgot to bring enough flashlights for everyone! So how does it all end? Who cares?!
Let's cut to the chase--the film is quite poor. The dialog was often atrocious ('it's like I totally blacked out'), the story was often dull, the edits were occasionally poor (scenes would go from full sun to dusk and back within the same scene) and the film never really made a lot of sense. These folks also didn't really seem like actresses—more like ladies who showed up for a campus kegger and on the way got invited to appear in the film because they had nice hair and looked kinda cute.
The bottom line is that the 1932 version with Boris Karloff is a classic. See that instead.
The film is the story of six cute co-eds who are inexplicably in Egypt and are invited along on a mummy hunt. Now considering that these young ladies don't seem to know the first thing about archeology and seem like extras from a college sorority film, I felt perplexed. Yet, somehow we are expected to believe that one of them has a long-lost archaeologist father and instead of mounting a proper expedition with SUPPLIES, appropriate clothing and Egyptologists, for instance, he takes these six cute undergraduates into the desert to look for some ancient burial site. Once there, the three guides he brought are murdered (by whom we never have any idea—as it looks like the writer forgot about this plot thread) and he and the girls just ignore this and go exploring!
Later, the girls start dying—one by one. Does the girl whose father brought them there care? Not particularly—she just wants to hang out with daddy. Nor, unfortunately, does the audience care as it took so long for these deaths to occur that you'll find your attention sadly waning. Much of it is because the ladies' reactions were so muted. I've seen women break fingernails and act more upset than these actresses when one of their friends dies. I also had to laugh because one of these well-trained and well outfitted ladies had to use her smart phone as a flashlight inside the tomb because you can only assume they forgot to bring enough flashlights for everyone! So how does it all end? Who cares?!
Let's cut to the chase--the film is quite poor. The dialog was often atrocious ('it's like I totally blacked out'), the story was often dull, the edits were occasionally poor (scenes would go from full sun to dusk and back within the same scene) and the film never really made a lot of sense. These folks also didn't really seem like actresses—more like ladies who showed up for a campus kegger and on the way got invited to appear in the film because they had nice hair and looked kinda cute.
The bottom line is that the 1932 version with Boris Karloff is a classic. See that instead.
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!
This movie's gift to the world is a whole new definition to the word "Pathetic". Typing 10 lines for this review is a Herculean task. This movie (really???) is a new landmark to the fact that how low and degraded a plot, an actor, and a director can go trying to thrive on reputation of previous Mummy trilogy. A couple of special effects were kinda okay but can be completely ignored. One can give credit for that to cheap CGI effect agencies available now days. Within five minutes into the movie then skipping and fast-forwarding till the end in another 5 minutes seemed eternity. Do yourself a favor... stay away from this movie, it is so infectious it will ruin your whole day. I am running out of patience to end this ten line policy of IMDb. In fact this movie needs and can be defined in one word... Horrendous!
Unfortunately the characters are totally unconvincing and unbelievable. the plot is unfathomable. I don't blame the cast or directors but will not in future trust my service provider. They are clearly not interested in providing value for money to their customers being happy to charge me four pounds to watch the film (the same as inbetweeners 2,lucy, left behind, all advertised on the same page).Lesson learned for me in future, always check the reviews before handing over your cash. I don't want to be unfair to the people who made the film, work is work, and there were some fairly sophisticated special effects. Based how entertaining the Mummy Resurrected was forty pence would be a generous rental price. Seriously.
As an Egyptian, I always find it really unpleasant when a movie, that is supposed to be taking place in Egypt, contains "Egyptians" who neither dress as Egyptians nor speak in the language that Egyptians speak. And who live in a land that doesn't quite look like it could be anywhere in Egypt. The makers of this movie, obviously think that all Arabs are the same. Quite as foolish as thinking all Europeans are the same. We actually do feel really insulted by this kind of attitude. And while in other movies that contained some of the same mistakes, such as the Mummy, or Raiders of The Lost Ark, actually had a real fun movie to compensate, with good acting, plot, and special effects. So, we'd still find them worthy enough to overlook such silly mistakes, and we actually do like them despite of that. This film has none of the above that could be considered a compensation to this sort of crap. Bad acting, bad everything. The plot is... well, is there a plot?! The only good thing, if there's any, is that the all girl crew going to the tomb are kinda pretty. So, I give it one star. And my opinion is: Simply awful!
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाNot a sequel to the Brendan Fraser The Mummy (1999) franchise.
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is The Mummy Resurrected?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइट
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Resurrection of the Mummy
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $30,00,000(अनुमानित)
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 20 मिनट
- रंग
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.78 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें