1/10
Not worth anyone's time. Title is misleading too.
7 August 2006
Gosh! I wished I had never seen that movie, and that's the first time ever I feel this way towards a bad movie. The acting was non-existent, there was no special effects to speak of, and, the director being an ex-porn film director, I would have expected a minimum more fun as teenage actors go. My bad. The whole "it's so bad, it's good" doesn't even come into the equation. I suspect the director should also be sued for misleading its public by claiming that:

a) it's something to do with Bram Stoker b) that this title doesn't have anything to do with the more successful "The Mummy" and "The Mummy Returns", with Rachel Weisz et al.

Definitely wasted time and money. I wouldn't even want it for free. Sigh. I long for my favourite Hammer horror flicks now. At least the special effects were more advanced at the time.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed