User reviews

I wasn't expecting much from this film, especially with the title "Talos the Mummy", to be honest I was quite surprised at how enjoyable the first 20mins or so were. Christopher Lee was as good as always and the rest of the cast fine. When the story went to England, things kind of lost focus a little and the story underwent a radical change. Unfortunately though it was the last 10 minutes that ruined the film completely. Do we really want to watch a film where every single character who utters one line is killed ? - Just what was the deal with the ending anyway, I couldn't half understand it at the pace the ending went!!!

It started strong, then became average and ended poorly. Sadly it's usually the ending of the films you remember most.

3/10

I don't even know where to start. I was looking forward to seeing this, but I was terribly disappointed. Pretty much everything about it is either wrong (like casting Jason Scott Lee in the main role) or simply bad (abysmal writing). Laughably wooden acting and cheap CGI. And worst of all, this movie takes itself so seriously. It's two hours long, it has Christopher Lee and it takes about 30 minutes to establish the story. If they had gone for B-movie cheese-fest, it would have been great. But this approach killed the film. And what was with the ending? Were they really hoping for a sequel? I found it boring and will not watch it again.

Oddly enough, then "Tale of the Mummy" had fully evaded me and slipped past my radar. And it wasn't before 2017 that I happened to find it as I was browsing through the horror section. Being a movie that includes a mummy and being a horror movie, I naturally found it interesting and immediately decided to give it a chance, without reading the synopsis or taking notice of who starred in it.

The movie does start out in an adequate pace, and does establish some characters pretty early on, which was good for the movie.

"Tale of the Mummy" has an adequate storyline, although parts of it seemed a bit forced. The storyline is simplistic and very easy to follow, making it feel like writers Keith Williams, John Esposito, Russell Mulcahy and writer/director Russell Mulcahy were followed a generic blueprint of 'how-to-make-a-mummy-movie'.

I must admit that I was more than genuinely impressed with the ensemble of cast that had been hired for this movie, because there are some rather good names on the cast list here. It was a nice surprise to see the likes of Christopher Lee, Gerard Butler, Lysette Anthony, Sean Pertwee, Shelley Duvall, Jon Polito, Jason Scott Lee and Michael Lerner in a movie such as this.

The effects in "Tale of the Mummy" were quite good and actually do, to some extend, still hold their ground even today. So thumbs up for the special effects team that worked on the movie.

It was kind of funny how adept the awakened mummy was at speaking English and speaking it flawlessly.

The movie does let off some of its momentum once it makes it past the halfway marker. Which is a bit of a shame. The movie in whole doesn't really stand out and is not a particularly memorable addition to the mummy movie genre.

And the ending of the movie? Wow, seriously? That had to be one of the most ridiculous endings in the history of mummy movies. It was so phenomenally bad that it has to be seen to believe.

I took a chance on this, based on the cast (Christopher Lee, Honor Blackman, Sean Pertwee, Lysette Anthony, etc.) and because I liked some of the director's previous films (HIGHLANDER, THE SHADOW). But this was definitely a film where the parts were greater than the whole. It had some good moments (and, like many mummy movies, the early scenes in Egypt were among the highlights), but overall the film's plot unraveled faster than the mummy's wrappings. (I would recommend one of Hammer's classics, be it the 1959 MUMMY or 1971's BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY'S TOMB, over this.) I have to admit I have only seen the version released here in the U.S., which is 88 minutes compared to other running times of 115 and even 122 minutes, so maybe the longer cut would help. Would like to point out something, however: Throughout many of the reviewer comments made about the film on IMDB, it is repeatedly stated that writer/director Russell Mulcahy must be an American because of all the mistakes the movie made when it comes to London lifestyles...sorry, folks, but Mulcahy is from Melbourne, Australia.

I understand the reason behind the low rating of this movie but on top, we talk about 1999 where the Egyptians look las if they are in the 1800 and also they require foreign archeologists to come and dig, and then to take the mummy to London free of charge !!

This movie includes many historical inaccuracies and cultural insensitivity. It's true that the portrayal of ancient Egyptians and their culture in the film is often stereotypical and outdated. The idea of foreigners easily excavating and removing artifacts from Egypt without any significant resistance or cultural understanding is also problematic.

I wish one day to see an American movie with more realistic plot about the Middle East particularly Egypt.

This movie follows the old mummy formula of "archaeologist unearths cursed tomb whose occupant proceeds to emerge to slaughter many horribly".

Its largely British cast fails to rise to the major movie performance required and the most brilliant star amongst them, master of the horror genre Christopher Lee, plays too small a role to support them through the action. That being said, Sean Pertwee and Louise Lombard produce solid performances as psychotic and English rose respectively.

My major criticism goes to the lead actor whose Chinese-American accent renders a good half of his character's dialogue inaudible to all but the keenest ears.

If credulity is a feature of horror films, then it is stretched by the profusion of firearms - even a newspaper vendor has his own 9mm automatic!

Special effects vary from the laughable (parcel tape as "mummy wrappings"?!) to competent but lack the competence of those we see in The Mummy to which Talos has the misfortune to be compared. We might look on this latter venture with kinder and less critical eyes if it was a sole attempt to bring to the screen something horrible, gripping and terrifying.

Don't look for impressive scenery or outdoor camera work - when not in the studios, the director chose uninspiring London sets such as a tube station.

It has minor entertainment value - if watching on DVD however ensure you have subtitles switched on!

This somewhat unknown mummy movie starts excellent, with a great mysterious touch and some nice special effects. There is also some wonderful acting by Christopher Lee (as usual). But after the main titles (with a strong piece of music by Stefano Mainetti) this movie fails to maintain the great atmosphere. Some locations just aren't interesting. That is the biggest problem of the film. The rest of the cast isn't bad at all (Jack Davenport does a great job). Talos is not your usual mummy, but he's quiet original. The film has a great plot with some surprising moments. Do not confuse this with The Mummy (1999) by Stephen Sommers, while that one is more adventure than thriller, this one is more thriller than adventure. Overall an entertaining film, the prologue is really worth the effort. I strongly recommend this film to fans of the Hammer horror films.

this is a very good and unique mummy movie. why so many put it down is beyond me. the thing that makes this so good is that the mummy is mainly his wrappings that come and kill people etc. i find that very different and refreshing from all the other mummy films that are basically the same. its time for a change from the old mummy moving sludgishly about and in reality could never catch anyone, more or less kill them. ohhh thats so scary! lol. anyway i rate this an 8 for the originality and the movie in general is good and not to mention Lysette Anthony. she is one piece of eye candy! for those who have not seen it do not go by most of the reviews here. give it a try. i have seen tons of movies in my life and i am 60 years old and i know my movies. :-)

I actually erm....well eh....enjoyed this movie. I was suprised to find all of the negativity about it here on imdb. I agree some of the voice audio was difficult to hear but that's about the only criticism I agree with. Story was fairly typical of this genre but the ending was brave - not copping out to another 'all is well' happy ending. If I have a problem with the ending it would be that it is not all that clear what actually happens - but I think I got the gist. I score it 7.5 out of 10.

The first half of the film is great fun, with some original special effects and good B-grade horror-film setups. Unfortunately, the second half of the film quickly degenerates into a tired, uninteresting plodding mess. Still fun for a few hours, but ultimately disappointing.

"Talos the Mummy" isn't a masterpiece but it's OK if you want a good entertainment. Of course I can't compare it with "Star Gate" or other similar movies but still "Talos" is for fans of Russell Mulcahy who directed it. Russell Mulcahy also directed "The Shadow" and "The Ricochet" and this movie isn't his best one (I think "The Shadow" is his best). But if you want to spend 2 hours of your free time with a good special effects, action and sometimes horror you should see "Talos the Mummy"

Well, it started quite well (although the special effects are clearly computer generated from the start) but, as others have said, quickly went downhill. You can find no compassion for any of the characters and rapidly give up trying to follow a plot which, you suspect, is being made up as it goes along. All the bit-part characters seem ludicrous and unbelievable - take the London newspaper salesman who carries a handgun in his jacket for an example!

And back to the 'special' effects. The mummy at the end looks like a man in a rubber-suit - that's when he doesn't look like a badly-drawn computer image. Unfortunately, the film's attempt to use lots of effects is to it's detriment - rather it should have put some more time into plotting a coherent story.

Oh, and there are at least two scenes blatantly ripped out of Aliens...

Miss it.

Russell Mulcahy (Resident Evil Extinction) of the criminally underrated Razorback wrote and directed this big dud. Packed with alot of silly late 90s CGI. Basically it's a simple setup as an Ancient Egyptian Princes tomb is opened and his curse begins. Most of which involves him flying around as goofy mummy wraps attacking people. It's a very dumb movie but it's somewhat fun and funny in an unintentional way. In the end it's not really worth your time but if you must you should at least know what you're in for. Jason Scott Lee (Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story), Lysette Anthony (Krull), Sean Pertwee (Event Horizon), Jack Davenport (Pirates of the Caribbean), Michael Lerner (Elf), Christopher Lee (Howling II), Shelley Duvall (Shining) and Gerard Butler (Dracula 2000/300) star.

Budget: $8m

2.5/5

Great opening sequences featuring Christopher Lee, quickly fade to standard gore and over used CGI effects. Mediocre performances abound and drag what might have been a good idea into a simply dull routine affair. The worst offender is the usually interesting Jason Scott Lee. He was simply miss-cast for this film and seemed eager to move onto something else. Don't waste your time on this flick, instead go back and watch Hammer's Mummy or the recent remake of Universal's classic Mummy with Brendan Fraser.

About a week ago, I said that I didn't believe that a movie could be "so bad it's good." Then I saw Russell Mulcahy's "Tale of the Mummy." The special effects are terrible, the lead actor is more wooden than a fencepost, and the movie is edited down so much that the storyline struggles to remain coherent. Yet, I still enjoyed it like I enjoy many movies; not because of it's badness (although that helped), but because it's still entertaining.

Admittedly, the storyline is not original at all (then again, this is a monster movie, and movies of this ilk generally have to follow a relatively rigid formula). An archaeologist, Sir Richard Turkel (Christopher Lee) has just discovered a mummy's tomb. Not heeding an ominous warning, he and his crew perish. Fifty years later, his grand daughter, Sam (Louise Lombard) follows in his footsteps, determined to find out what happened. Unwittingly, she and her associates unleash the spirit of an evil prince seeking to return to human form.

Like I said, the storyline isn't going to be associated with the word "original." But the details are different, which makes it less boring. In fact, it's actually moderately engaging.

When I put the DVD in the player, I was expecting a movie that I would regret watching, filled with bad acting and no plot coherency, and so on (I love Ancient Egypt, so I sort of had to see it). Actually, though, the acting is pretty good. Louise Lombard may have been a last minute casting replacement, but she's good in the role of Sam. She's comfortable in the role of the heroine, and makes a Sam in to a surprisingly believable character. Her co-star, Jason Scott Lee, isn't as successful. In fact, he's pretty bad. Riley is supposed to be the hard-boiled detective, but Lee is about as malleable as concrete. Fortunately, the actors with the smaller parts are better. Sean Pertwee is good as Sam's co-worker on the expedition, who after seeing visions when entering the tomb, is now on the edge of a nervous breakdown (you'll understand if you see the movie). Better known actors Michael Lerner, Shelly Duvall are solid as the modern day archaeologist and the fortune teller, respectively. Jack Davenport and Gerard Butler (who, sorry to his fans, is only on screen for about 5 minutes), are good as well. And Christopher Lee is good in the film's top-billed cameo.

However, the special effects are hideously bad. They are so bad that they make the graphics on my N64 look good. I realize that this was made eleven years ago, and I'm sure no one will disagree that special effects have improved by lightyears, but "The Matrix" was made only a year later. Still, the effects are so bad that they become unintentionally funny, and they turn the movie into a cheesily enjoyable experience. That being said, I have to admit, that there are a few mildly chilling moments in the film.

The only real problem that actually hurts the movie is that it's been edited down to its bare bones. The foreign versions have an additional 30 minutes, and that's obvious here. Many characters are undeveloped (one of the main characters had none at all), and some important plot points are missing, making the storyline (which, as I said, is somewhat interesting) borderline incoherent. And I never thought I'd say this, but for a movie that's rated R for "violence and gore," there's really no blood to speak of. A little more blood (and nudity, which was once a staple of these kinds of movies) could have given the movie a little more edge.

"Tale of the Mummy" surprised me. It's both entertaining because of its badness, and also because it's reasonably entertaining regardless. Do I recommend it? I liked it, although having a few beers in you before you start wouldn't hurt. It could be fun watch and laugh at the bad special effects (this could make a great drinking game), but it's also a decently made movie. It could be hard to find (I got it on Netflix), and although it's not for everyone (certainly if you're expecting something that's actually scary), it's worth a shot.

The only saving grace of this film is that the plot itself wasn't all that bad. The dialoge and acting could have used some help though. God...so bad. It was nice to see Jason Scott Lee again though. He doesn't get enough work.

This is My second comment on the film.

Tale of the Mummy is really decent and yet one of the most different of all mummy films.Christopher Lee has a short but very good part in the film.He actually shows a side of himself that is rarely seen on screen.Jason Scott Lee performed well and his relationship with Louise Lombard was good but it didn't go to the distance it could have because of the situation.Sean Pertwee put on a very act in the film.A very troubled but serious character.Shelley Duvall,Michael Lerner,007's Honor Blackman,Jon Polito,and Gerard Butler was in this as well!As for the movie itself it is very interesting from start to finish.The Mummy is very different and I like the way he changed into many forms in the film and when he came into formation at the end it is really scary.The music in the film is excellent.I really don't know what else to say.Tale of the Mummy is a good mummy movie that doesn't disappoint and if you have a chance check it out!

"Tale of the Mummy" is a better than expected though somewhat problematic entry.

**SPOILERS**

Discovering a long-lost Egyptian tomb, Samantha Turkel, (Louise Lombard) and her team, Bradley Cortese, (Sean Pertwee) Burke, (Gerald Butler) and Claire Mulrooney, (Lysette Anthony) bring the contents back to the British Museum. Putting it on display, a strange series of deaths around London being in Detective Riley, (Jason Scott Lee) from the US Embassy to help solve the case, as each victim was found to have a specific organ removed after death. Discovering that it is the work of Prince Talos, (Enzo) claimed to be one of the most ravenous men in Egyptian history, trying to collect the body parts required to resurrect himself, they race to stop him and put an end to his plans.

The Good News: this wasn't all that bad and had some good moments to it. One of the good things here is that the mummy is pretty interesting. Rather than being the slowly lumbering type, as this one can move about fairly quickly, it has two additional powers that are fun and really sets him apart. This one can fly about, which is a clever concept and visually impressive since it's something new. The other new factor is the ability to use it's bandages as tentacles, using them to ensnare it's victims and trap them like a cocoon. Even more impressive is the ability to unravel itself and reform using the tentacles to do that. It's a fun trick that looks impressive and is a real treat to watch. Another big plus is that there's a couple of rather well-done attacks in here, as the sequence at the police station is really nice, a pretty decent chase comes out of an encounter in the motel as the mummy really shows off some nice powers and there's a couple kills as well. Even the encounters in the subway and parking garage are really good and much better than expected. The best, though, is the film's opening, with there being a couple great things about it. The atmosphere is great, the setting is perfect and creepy with the usual business about a curse and the decorations used around the chamber. Once the curse is mentioned, it's all pretty fun watching the brutality emerge. Then, segueing into the recovery scenes of the later expedition being just as creepy is a big plus. The last positive here is the rather sizable body count. While there's only a few that are worthwhile, there's a lot that actually do get knocked off, and it does deliver the gore nicely on some of them. These here are what make the film somewhat entertaining and enjoyable.

The Bad News: This one didn't have a whole lot of problems going for it. The main one here is that there's a decided lack of gore to many of the kills. Despite the big body count, not a whole lot of the kills are all that graphic, mainly by design since it oddly uses the off-screen method for a lot of the kills or just dragged the victim away and leaving the sounds as the only clue that something is happening. There's a few of them which are done on-screen, which is enough to get them over but it really could've had much more in here by simply using it's kills a little better. The other area that this doesn't work is the rather odd and confusing ending. There's hardly anything about it that makes any sense, between the twist that doesn't seem logical or even makes sense, to the actions of the ceremony and the specific guidelines which are required, the whole thing is just confusing and doesn't really have anything all that logical about it. These here are what lower the film and keep it down.

The Final Verdict: Some good stuff in here and a couple of somewhat troubling flaws lower this one somewhat but not all that much. Give it a shot if you're into the genre or have an interest in the film, while those who aren't that big on the genre will probably find this one to be more problematic.

Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language and Brief Nudity

This movie was a waste of the 88 minutes that it lasted. It was full of poor acting, poor special effects, and a plot that could potentially have been good, but was not delivered well. So, this movie was not good, but could have been good with the right cast and director. Unfortunately, much of the movie was not believable as a result of the way that things were portrayed by special effects, etc. Also, the tagline states that "The curse is legend. The terror is real." There was a curse that was legend (and in my opinion, should have stayed a legend), but there was no terror. This movie did not really make much sense, mainly because their was not much explanation of what was going on (especially at the end). Overall, I would give this movie a 2 out of 10.

This movie starts off like a salute to the Hammer Mummy films of yore with a prologue that even features Christopher Lee and a young but easily recognizable Gerard Butler. Russell Mulcahy (of HIGHLANDER fame) has crafted his own take on the Mummy mythos that incorporates ideas from several other films.

While some CGI is used, this is primarily a story driven as opposed to an effects driven film. The performances are solid (even Jason Scott Lee fits his role especially when you see the flashbacks and the surprising finale) with a wonderful OTT turn from Sean Pertwee as a haunted member of the expedition and a sympathetic one from Shelley Duvall as a medium who helps him.

Much has been made of the concept of Talos, the mummy as it's his bandages that come to life but it's original and creative and shows what can be done on a small budget. Partially financed but abandoned by Disney, this film was made at the same time as Stephen Sommers' big budgeted Brendan Fraser epic and consequently never got an American release until much later when it was cut from 115 minutes to 88 minutes.

Although I would be curious to see the full length International version, longer is not always better for I can't imagine this film being much longer than it already is. If you're looking for gore and high tech special effects then you won't find them here (although a scene in a Men's room qualifies in both regards) but the widescreen transfer looks great and the sound is loud and clear. Uneven overall but TALE OF THE MUMMY deserves credit for trying something different...For more reviews visit The Capsule Critic.