The Curse of the Mummy's Tomb Reviews

  • Jul 14, 2019

    Hammer Horror...such a British institution for so many years. It may be a shadow of its former self nowadays but the films from its heyday are still revered as classic horror movies. Even if most wouldn't scare an infant (The Curse of the Mummy's Tomb only has a 12-age rating) now. British archaeologists and their American investor ship an Egyptian mummy's sarcophagus to London but someone has the amulet to revive the mummy that will then kill all those who disturbed its tomb. It's a slow burner of a movie spending large chunks dealing with the history of the mummy. These moments aren't exactly thrilling .All of that aside though, The Curse of the Mummy's Tomb does still have a bit of charm about it. It's certainly not a boring flick & the mummy itself looks pretty damn cool. Not the best that Hammer Horror has to offer but certainly not the worst.

    Hammer Horror...such a British institution for so many years. It may be a shadow of its former self nowadays but the films from its heyday are still revered as classic horror movies. Even if most wouldn't scare an infant (The Curse of the Mummy's Tomb only has a 12-age rating) now. British archaeologists and their American investor ship an Egyptian mummy's sarcophagus to London but someone has the amulet to revive the mummy that will then kill all those who disturbed its tomb. It's a slow burner of a movie spending large chunks dealing with the history of the mummy. These moments aren't exactly thrilling .All of that aside though, The Curse of the Mummy's Tomb does still have a bit of charm about it. It's certainly not a boring flick & the mummy itself looks pretty damn cool. Not the best that Hammer Horror has to offer but certainly not the worst.

  • Jul 13, 2019

    Great campy fun for the old die hard.

    Great campy fun for the old die hard.

  • Mar 05, 2017

    This Hammer production takes a while to get going and even when it does it doesn't really get on fire. The mummy looks good though!

    This Hammer production takes a while to get going and even when it does it doesn't really get on fire. The mummy looks good though!

  • Sep 10, 2016

    It's a good looking movie, but none of the leads have the charisma that Christopher Lee or Peter Cushing had. The plot is actually well done, with a solid twist near the ending. The actual Mummy in this has a decent presence, but he's overly made up and has very little expressiveness. Not a terrible film. Just not up to the standards of what to expect from Hammer.

    It's a good looking movie, but none of the leads have the charisma that Christopher Lee or Peter Cushing had. The plot is actually well done, with a solid twist near the ending. The actual Mummy in this has a decent presence, but he's overly made up and has very little expressiveness. Not a terrible film. Just not up to the standards of what to expect from Hammer.

  • May 17, 2015

    More slow-walking eerie but dull Mummy moments, in technicolor. The characters are decent, The Mummy is still rather cool, and there are some fun jumps and creepy moments. Otherwise, there isn''t much here to remember.

    More slow-walking eerie but dull Mummy moments, in technicolor. The characters are decent, The Mummy is still rather cool, and there are some fun jumps and creepy moments. Otherwise, there isn''t much here to remember.

  • Oct 31, 2014

    Handsomely photographed, but rather routine Hammer Horror film. A mummy if found. An American exploits the mummy in a crass show. The mummy then comes to life and kills lots of people. Worth watching for Hammer fans, but it's nothing all that special.

    Handsomely photographed, but rather routine Hammer Horror film. A mummy if found. An American exploits the mummy in a crass show. The mummy then comes to life and kills lots of people. Worth watching for Hammer fans, but it's nothing all that special.

  • Oct 27, 2014

    Members of an expedition that uncovered the mummy of Ra-Antef find themselves under a curse that results in their deaths. This follow-up to Hammer Films' "The Mummy" starring Peer Cushing and Christopher Lee is mostly a disappointment. With a title like The Curse of the Mummy's Tomb, you would reasonably expect the promise of a mummy on the loose killing people. Ultimately, that's what occurs, but it takes too long for the main plot to get going. The mummy does not appear until well into the movie, and other than a gruesome opening murder, the first half of the movie is one of inaction and mostly annoying dialogue. However, when the mummy appears, he doesso with vengeance. Director Michael Carreras' handling of the film's horror sequences were excellent. The mummy here comes off as something more than a walking prop, as was portrayed in the Universal films of the 1930s. It comes off as much more ominous, menacing. Its several scenes of violent murders of several expedition members, especially one scene where a skull is crushed under the weight of the mummy's foot, are notably gruesome for the time, if graphically tame by current standards. The cast is a little uneven. While Terence Morgan and Ronald Howard could not equal the screen presence of Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee, they're perfectly adequate. Jeanne Roland, whose sole talent apparently was as horror film eye candy was cast as the requisite damsel in distress. Fred Clark lends the film a bit of comedic relief as an amoral overbearing American businessman looking to profit from the mummy's discovery. On the plus side, the film looked and sounded great, with its widescreen, full-color cinematography highlighting the Egyptian tombs and artifacts. The musical score by Carlo Martinelli was dramatic. The reuse of Franz Reizenstein's score for the 1959 Mummy didn't hurt the film. This followup to "The "Mummy" is a disappointment that could have used a rewrite of the first half of the movie.

    Members of an expedition that uncovered the mummy of Ra-Antef find themselves under a curse that results in their deaths. This follow-up to Hammer Films' "The Mummy" starring Peer Cushing and Christopher Lee is mostly a disappointment. With a title like The Curse of the Mummy's Tomb, you would reasonably expect the promise of a mummy on the loose killing people. Ultimately, that's what occurs, but it takes too long for the main plot to get going. The mummy does not appear until well into the movie, and other than a gruesome opening murder, the first half of the movie is one of inaction and mostly annoying dialogue. However, when the mummy appears, he doesso with vengeance. Director Michael Carreras' handling of the film's horror sequences were excellent. The mummy here comes off as something more than a walking prop, as was portrayed in the Universal films of the 1930s. It comes off as much more ominous, menacing. Its several scenes of violent murders of several expedition members, especially one scene where a skull is crushed under the weight of the mummy's foot, are notably gruesome for the time, if graphically tame by current standards. The cast is a little uneven. While Terence Morgan and Ronald Howard could not equal the screen presence of Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee, they're perfectly adequate. Jeanne Roland, whose sole talent apparently was as horror film eye candy was cast as the requisite damsel in distress. Fred Clark lends the film a bit of comedic relief as an amoral overbearing American businessman looking to profit from the mummy's discovery. On the plus side, the film looked and sounded great, with its widescreen, full-color cinematography highlighting the Egyptian tombs and artifacts. The musical score by Carlo Martinelli was dramatic. The reuse of Franz Reizenstein's score for the 1959 Mummy didn't hurt the film. This followup to "The "Mummy" is a disappointment that could have used a rewrite of the first half of the movie.

  • Oct 18, 2014

    Worst ending ever. Dumbest climax ever. Everything was slow but okay till the end.

    Worst ending ever. Dumbest climax ever. Everything was slow but okay till the end.

  • Oct 11, 2014

    the sequel to The Mummy(1959) is a bad follow-up to such a good film but it don't stop this film from being a classic Hammer film.

    the sequel to The Mummy(1959) is a bad follow-up to such a good film but it don't stop this film from being a classic Hammer film.

  • Jan 22, 2014

    The small handful of unrelated sequels made by Hammer to its 1959 original are not thought of very highly at all, and at this point I have not seen them all, but I can say with great passion that I think this one gets an unfairly bad rap. In fact, the absence of Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee aside, I think this is a far more entertaining and interesting movie than its predecessor, which was often quite stiff. Here is a film that is unabashedly fun, utilizing to the fullest extent its widescreen scope and technicolor palette. Michael Carreras, known best for his role as producer to just about everything Hammer put out in its most illustrious period, wrote and directed the film, and not only does he do a fine job taking over for previous MUMMY director Terence Fisher, but he directs with great artistry and a knowing for the movement of cinema, resulting in a picture full of life and energy. His camera makes big movements here, tracking and craning to string relatively complex shots together. Even more impressive is the movie's cast, full of actors who nail both the film's dramatic scenes and its comic ones. The triangular dynamic between Terence Morgan, Ronald Howard and Jeanne Roland is one that could have easily choked the picture in lesser actor's hands, but they keep it alive and tense for the film's brief running time. I was very, very pleasantly surprised by this picture- a thrilling and humorous if less weighty stop for those on the journey through Hammer's storied filmography.

    The small handful of unrelated sequels made by Hammer to its 1959 original are not thought of very highly at all, and at this point I have not seen them all, but I can say with great passion that I think this one gets an unfairly bad rap. In fact, the absence of Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee aside, I think this is a far more entertaining and interesting movie than its predecessor, which was often quite stiff. Here is a film that is unabashedly fun, utilizing to the fullest extent its widescreen scope and technicolor palette. Michael Carreras, known best for his role as producer to just about everything Hammer put out in its most illustrious period, wrote and directed the film, and not only does he do a fine job taking over for previous MUMMY director Terence Fisher, but he directs with great artistry and a knowing for the movement of cinema, resulting in a picture full of life and energy. His camera makes big movements here, tracking and craning to string relatively complex shots together. Even more impressive is the movie's cast, full of actors who nail both the film's dramatic scenes and its comic ones. The triangular dynamic between Terence Morgan, Ronald Howard and Jeanne Roland is one that could have easily choked the picture in lesser actor's hands, but they keep it alive and tense for the film's brief running time. I was very, very pleasantly surprised by this picture- a thrilling and humorous if less weighty stop for those on the journey through Hammer's storied filmography.