Talos

Well. The reason that I saw this was I like the director's previous work, and the movie sounded cool on the box. Plus I was renting it from my library for free so I wouldn't lose anything. The movie wasn't that bad. I wouldn't say that it was a waste of time. The movie had some good points; the story kept me interested and the movie as a whole was good until the end. The end made sense, but it didn't seem right. Now I think that many people didn't like the movie, because they have seen the US version. From what I see on this site is that there are two versions of this movie; the international version and the US version. the US version is 88 minutes while the international version is almost 120 minutes! That is a little over 30 minutes of movie that is gone. I am sure that the international version is much better, because it probably explains more. I would really like to see this version. Does anyone know how to get it? If so, e-mail me at Dvdmrp@aol.com. Anyway, if you are a fan of the director or if you like these kind of movies then go see it. Just don't pay too much or expect too much. It is not great, but it doesn't suck either. It is in between. 5/10

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've seen lots of mummy movies and this one has the distinction of not having a mummy but instead a self-propelled bunch of bandages. The movie has a great beginning with Christopher Lee but then never delivers. About halfway through it looses steam and then craps out. I don't know what disturbs me most: the fact that this movie was made or that the ending left open the possibility of a sequel.

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 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.