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.
Tale of the Mummy
1998
Action / Adventure / Fantasy / Horror / Sci-Fi
Tale of the Mummy
1998
Action / Adventure / Fantasy / Horror / Sci-Fi
Keywords: mummy
Plot summary
An archaeologist crew, headed by prof. Turkel discovers the tomb of Talos in Egypt, once a sinister and horrific prince during the reign of the pharaohs. They realize too late that they are releasing a gruesome and evil force, but Turkel manages to seal the tomb by blowing up his party. Decades later his granddaughter Sam follows her grandfathers footsteps and leads an expedition to find out what really happened. They discover the tomb and after some disturbing incidents, head back to London. At the time when a prestigious exhibition on Talos opens in the national museum, London is terrorized by mysterious murders, investigated by a young police officer. And then the real trouble still has to start...
Uploaded by: OTTO
Director
Top cast
Movie Reviews
Can a movie be so bad its good and still a good movie in the normal way?
I want my mummy to get a wrap on it
I'm agreeing with at least one reviewer who liked the small prologue with Christopher Lee who was an archaeologist who entered a cursed tomb on a dig. But after that prologue and after Lee's character dies off and the film flash forwards thirty years the rest of it is an awful let down.
Jason Scott Lee plays an American detective over in London where the mummy has gotten loose and he's trying to resurrect himself. Back when he was a living human being he was a Greek exile in the Pharoah's court who dabbled in black arts. He got killed and cursed at the same time and archaeologist Sean Pertwee's got a psychic pipeline to him.
What should be suspenseful gets downright laughable. Tale Of The Mummy has some elements of the classic Boris Karloff film, The Mummy, but it ain't a patch on the original.
A flaccid mummy movie...
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.