28 reviews
Next time, don't blow the entire budget on special effects.
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.
- planktonrules
- May 6, 2014
- Permalink
New heights of the low!
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!
- vkasthakur
- May 6, 2014
- Permalink
My Opinion
I just saw the full movie and it looked like it was made in the early 2000's horrible acting, to say the least it was no where near what I was expecting out of a 2014 movie. It made the Earlier ones look like a masterpiece. Very disappointed. Was hoping it would have much better graphics and somewhat realistic. The mummy movies were awesome, I grew up watching the movies and it had a realistic plot and a good climax. This new one just didn't meet any expectations. It was not worth the hour movie it was. I hope some of the other viewers do enjoy this but i'm sorry the movie had no climaxes and not much of an interesting plot. Sorry for dumping on this movie.
"The Mummy Resurrected"- A cheap, soulless, lazy "mockbuster" that inspires more unintentional laughs than scares. Avoid.
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...
- TedStixonAKAMaximumMadness
- Jan 23, 2015
- Permalink
Worst ripoff ever
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.
- james_s_girl17-29-61747
- Jun 15, 2014
- Permalink
They should have left the stupid premise BURIED!
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!
- keithbenicek
- May 31, 2014
- Permalink
Just plain awful
- ganteder000
- May 7, 2014
- Permalink
An abomination
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
- TheLittleSongbird
- Jul 20, 2014
- Permalink
save your money
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.
- chrisyarwood-215-349914
- Jan 16, 2015
- Permalink
Boredom resurrected...
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.
- paul_haakonsen
- Jun 21, 2014
- Permalink
Avoid......
- drew-962-366474
- May 19, 2014
- Permalink
Terrible movie
- jd-langschied
- May 13, 2014
- Permalink
Awful!
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!
Do not watch
- blaketyrka
- May 25, 2014
- Permalink
Just make Mummy 4
What a piece of sh*t movie! This is just so terrible! Why would they do this? Why? Someone answer me This movie is a catastrophe that takes a dump all over the original Mummy movie, and on the remake trilogy. I can't believe I watched this all the way through. Give me back my time! If you come into this movie expecting the thrills of the original movie, adventure of the remake, jokes of the Mummy Returns, and mythology of Tomb of the Dragon Emperor, you will be heavily disappointed. Here is what you will get: Poorly paced movie with bad acting and terrible camera controls. And the CGI is just horrible. The Mummy from 1990's had better CGI. In conclusion, don't watch this, you will deeply regret it.
They should have just made The Mummy 4.
They should have just made The Mummy 4.
- sylvos-12423
- Aug 8, 2015
- Permalink
Calling this movie lousy is far too kind (Spoiler)(Spoiler)
Which they kept with the original stories
This movie was nothing like the others and confused me a lot. It was really hard to fully focus on the movie and the story behind it.
I had high hopes for this movie loving all the movies similar but this one was just ridiculous. The Graphics were all over the place and its really hard for me to say anything good about it.
At the start of the movie it gives almost the whole story away and every step is almost as predictable as the last.
I really wish they would have branched somehow of the original mummy movies. it was even hard to connect to the characters. This movie went really fast for me and when it finished i felt like i had only been watching it for ten minutes.
Don't think this would be a movie i would ever watch again.
I had high hopes for this movie loving all the movies similar but this one was just ridiculous. The Graphics were all over the place and its really hard for me to say anything good about it.
At the start of the movie it gives almost the whole story away and every step is almost as predictable as the last.
I really wish they would have branched somehow of the original mummy movies. it was even hard to connect to the characters. This movie went really fast for me and when it finished i felt like i had only been watching it for ten minutes.
Don't think this would be a movie i would ever watch again.
- brittneysaid-787-572711
- Apr 22, 2015
- Permalink
Just terrible...
First of the reason why I watched the movie, was because of the title and the cover picture. I remember when I first saw "The Mummy" (1999). I couldn't get enough of it. And I thought: Oh! Another Mummy movie! *-* I need to watch it! And when I watched it then I was like....What...?
For my luck I watched it on the internet so I could skip most of the scenes. Thanks God we can do it. The be honest by good movies I am not doing this. First of all I didn't like the actors. They couldn't act! When I saw they act then I thought: Okay....Are we back in the early 2000's?? And second the storyline was just horrible...In the end I was like: THAT'S IT!? ARE YOU KIDDING ME!? I can't believe what I just did watch....The only thing what good about the movie was, were the effects. Those were well made.
I would recommend you not to watch it. It is just waste of time....
For my luck I watched it on the internet so I could skip most of the scenes. Thanks God we can do it. The be honest by good movies I am not doing this. First of all I didn't like the actors. They couldn't act! When I saw they act then I thought: Okay....Are we back in the early 2000's?? And second the storyline was just horrible...In the end I was like: THAT'S IT!? ARE YOU KIDDING ME!? I can't believe what I just did watch....The only thing what good about the movie was, were the effects. Those were well made.
I would recommend you not to watch it. It is just waste of time....
- karennuilcoco
- Nov 29, 2015
- Permalink
So sad...
...that this movie even exists. For years I am totally in love with Egyptian mythology, just came accross this movie and... wow! This is so bad, that I almost have no words to describe it. The acting: terrible! The dialogues: terrible! The plot: Was there even one? The effects: Some were acceptable. The mummy itself: I actually liked the look of it. After all it was still a total waste of time. Stay away from this movie. Save your time and/or money for something better. Gosh, even The Pyramid was way better, even though I can't stand most of this "Found Footage" stuff. But now that I have seen this... Maybe I should rewatch The Pyramid soon!
- HK_Key-Si_HK
- Mar 10, 2018
- Permalink
The Mummy Resurrected
The vast majority of reviewers to date have given this film 1 point; one suspects this is because -1 is not permitted. Having said that, it has two things going for it. The first is that although it is rubbish, it is short rubbish, around an hour and ten minutes. The second is that the soundtrack is truly excellent, there is bundles of music at the end. Unfortunately, music of this quality belongs in a film that will do it justice, so its composers are unlikely to receive the critical acclaim they deserve.
What is so bad about this film apart from everything? Let's just mention the acting; if you were in a group of friends and one of your number was struck dead, wouldn't somebody shed a tear? Best not to mention the plot, if you can understand it.
What is so bad about this film apart from everything? Let's just mention the acting; if you were in a group of friends and one of your number was struck dead, wouldn't somebody shed a tear? Best not to mention the plot, if you can understand it.
IT'S LIKE I TOTALLY BLACKED OUT.
- nogodnomasters
- Oct 8, 2018
- Permalink
Zero reason
- Leofwine_draca
- Apr 2, 2021
- Permalink
Completely Stupid
This is the worst mummy movie I have ever seen. Saw this on red box and rented it. Terrible choice. The acting was terrible and so was the script. The Mummy Movies with Brenden Fraiser were so much better. This does not compete with The Mummy Movies of the early 2000's. I really enjoyed those ones. This however is not what it seems advertised in the preview for the movie. I would not recommend this to anyone period. Please do not watch it. I was really disappointed with the way this movie was made. There could have been so much more done to make it better. A complete waste of time and money.There wasn't any comedy to the movies and it was not scary as was advertised.
- ross-bryant
- Jun 22, 2014
- Permalink
It is so bad that it is good
This will definitely give tough fight to whoever plans to make the most ridiculous horror/mummy movie in the future. The acting, the plot, the CGI, the direction and even the music are so rank pathetic that 15 minutes into the movie you start wondering if it is a spoof of the original Mummy series. Nothing, I repeat, nothing is worth a word of praise in this ill conceived effort. The director should have left a warning slide during the credits that this movie is an assault on your senses and that serious movie watchers need to get out of harms way for serious sensory damage are on the cards should one chooses to see this abomination to its full length.
- moviedovie
- Nov 25, 2015
- Permalink
I wish they gave that 3.000.000,= to me. I would put it in a much better use
- mlwitvliet
- Jan 18, 2017
- Permalink