User reviews

The Legend of the Mummy is so bad, I would rather have my brain removed through my nose and my innards scooped out and placed in jars than watch it again. A turgid, muddled and totally inept movie, this lame horror stumbles awkwardly from one awful scene to another even slower than its titular creature.

Based on the Bram Stoker novel about the resurrection of a 7-fingered Egyptian queen (which was made into the almost as awful Blood from the Mummy's Tomb by Hammer in 1971), this film is poorly scripted, acted, directed and edited and the result is totally confusing and lacking in any suspense or shocks whatsoever.

Pretty Amy Locane (from John Water's Cry-Baby) plays Margaret Trelawny, the heroine of the tale whose father is attacked by a mysterious assailant whilst examining an old artifact from the cursed tomb of Queen Tera. Margaret's boyfriend Robert Wyatt (a totally bland Eric Lutes) tries to solve the mystery, along with dodgy treasure hunter Corbeck (Louis Gossett Jr., who still sounds and acts like the Drac he played in Enemy Mine) and ex-copper Daw (Mark Lindsay Chapman).

The film boasts bargain basement effects and features a barely seen (and probably for good reason) manky mummy. Enlivening proceedings (but only slightly) are some gratuitous sex scenes: sexy maid Lily (Laura Otis) imagines herself having sex in a bath, pudgy museum curator Brice Renard (Richard Karn) inexplicably beds a massive-jugged blonde hottie, and Margaret does a brief full-frontal flash towards the end (although this is more than likely a body double for Amy Locane).

When rating a horror film, I always take into consideration any inclusion of unnecessary scenes of quality female nudity (there's always room for some nekkid flesh); thus The Legend of the Mummy saves itself from the shame of receiving the lowest possible score by the (wrinkled) skin of its (decayed) teeth!

Okay, first, I'll make it clear that I am not a Mummy fan. This is not my monster of choice to begin with, but barring that fact I know a bad flick when I see one. I won't insult your intelligence by referring to this as a "film." This was a movie that had the audacity to tie Bram Stoker's name to it in hopes of saving it I assume. If you saw Bram Stoker's Dracula and liked it, don't let this one fool you, it doesn't compare.

Now, if you're that is not to say I hated this, but rather I expected lots more here. First of all, it seemed to remind me way too much of a very lame Sherlock Holmes or Agatha Christie meets the mummy sort of story and is written, directed and performed pretty much in that tone. If you're a Hammer film fan you may LIKE it, but you won't LOVE it.

The effects are just that, effects. Way too theatrical for this simplistically performed story. The characters are not only unbelievably portrayed and cast but not even exceptionally interesting. Louis Gossett Jr. is of course excellent as always, but even his excellent talents could not save this poor movie. Some of the other cast members were what actually saved this film for me at all.

The plot and story is so predictable. The ending is so over-used it shames the finer points of the whole movie -- What few there were. The seven fingered mummy bit is not only obviously awkward but pathetically prosthetized. The mummy herself is indeed disappointing enough without the bad hand effects. Some of the scenes seem to exist solely as fillers and I wonder if they were ever in Mr. Stoker's original story at all.

Over starved fans of horror, and Hammer films especially, will likely find this some what entertaining at least. Not much quality horror has been produced over the last 20 years or so therefore many will at the least find it watchable or of interest. Being a horror fan, that's pretty much how I found it to be though I would not actively seek out the video to add to my collection especially if paying money is involved. But if you can catch it on cable and have a spare VHS tape it might be fun to add to your collection in jest. Though if you're really looking for a good horror film, with a great story and excellent FX look for and buy The Mummy starring Brendan Frasier, you won't be disappointed.

This was one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Absolutely no suspense. A lot of really bad acting. Very poor special effects. Avoid wasting your time with this one. Nothing more to say, but here's the required minimum 4th line anyway.

This film is another low budget version of Bram Stoker's Jewel of the Seven Stars previously filmed as Blood From The Mummy's Tomb by Hammer in 1971. Trivia fans will care to note that deranged character actor Aubrey Morris, who appears as the doctor, played exactly the same role in the Hammer version.

It's pretty poorly acted and scripted and Amy Locaine can't hold a handle to the wonderful Valerie Leon in terms of physical presence. The ending is extremely confused and very bathetic - just as you are waiting for a climax, it finishes and we fast forward to a limp postscript. Generally, the second half of the film is a mess.

Don't even think about watching this movie. I did and I would find it very difficult to find a worse film than this. It was long, drawn out, poorly acted (even by Louis Gossett Jr) and the special effects were laughable. Unfortunately, a lot of people will buy this by mistake (my wife included). Just don't...

The acting in this film is so hilariously atrocious and the mummy so cheesy that you just might have to rent this the next time you have one of those 'bad movie nights' with your friends. Last but not least, let's not forget the Oscar-worthy acting of Al Borland of "Home Improvement" fame. Who would have thought his film career would never take off? (shocking)! With no actual scares, this film becomes a campfest from the very first minutes. This is a script even Paulie SHore would have thrown out. If you like watching bad movies for pure fun, I also recommend 'R.O.T.O.R.', which is quite possibly the worst film ever made. All in all, this is one great waste of time.

I had to struggle to get through this one. Louis Gossett Jr. (An Officer and a Gentleman) was the only reason I tuned in. he usually does a great job, and he really wasn't all that bad in a poor vehicle such as this.

This is one of those films that you need a bucket and a gun before you watch. That is to either throw up or shoot yourself if you can't escape.

The mummy was pathetic, there was little horror, and the ending was a mess.

Stay away - far away.

_Legend of the Mummy_ was long and tedious... a few mildly suspenseful scenes and not much else. Al from _Home Improvement_ provided a little comic relief, but there was nothing at all in this flick which so much as made me want to stop it before going for a snack. And the mummy is incredibly cheesy, looking rather like Eddie, Iron Maiden's concert mascot.

There are some films which are so bad that they are actually watchable, such as "The Grim Reaper", but this is not one of them. It sags dejectedly between two stools - neither good enough to watch nor bad enough to be fun.

This would have been good if it had been done in the greatest traditions of Hammer Horror with oh-so-obviously-a-set locations and the nearest modern equivalent to Peter Cushing et al. The actors try to act, they really do try and some should have known better, but they would have had more success if they had hammed it up in glorious fashion along the lines of "Psychomania" or other can't-hear-the-dialogue-for-the-creaking-of-wooden-acting horror films.

I love unashamedly bad movies but everything about this film is just poor. It is best watched while drunk at 3am after the clubs have shut and you just want something on in the background while you and your mates finish your pizzas or you want something to fill the awkward smoochable pauses in the conversation between yourself and the latest bit of skirt/trouser you picked up.

This film is utterly forgettable.

This movie reminded me of a lower budget version of the Nicole Kidman film 'The Others'. The performances are good,(sometimes very good) and the spirit of Bram Stoker's tale is well created. The sound mix is excellent and though this is a very different movie from the wonderful Brendan Fraser / The Rock Egyptian tales, set your expectations accordingly and I feel you will not be disappointed. There is a difference between the pace of a stageplay and a twenty-first century movie, and whilst 'Bram Stoker's Legend of The Mummy' could not be described as 'brisk' or 'energetic', it is a well told story worthy of the £1 I got it for at Poundland!

Wow, this is a bad film. I think this may be the first flick with some passable production values (you can hear dialogue, they know how to do lighting, etc.) that I've scored a 1. Others have mentioned many of the problems, but some bear repeating as a forewarning:

* Every character seems to be in a separate story/different film. Maybe this was an experimental work wherein each actor was told to write their own Mummy story/script and act out (in whatever style of their choosing, no matter how incongruous) their self-penned part while others did the same.

* Despite the multitude of actor/writers, the film primarily works as a sleep aid. Not much happens. I was starting to wonder if this wasn't really a low-budget 1970s BBC attempt to make a "relatively" boring drama.

*Actors are sometimes attacked by nothing. Maybe they were told that effects shots would be added later. That didn't happen. So most of these scenes are amusingly ridiculous.

* The various scenes of the simultaneous separate stories seem to be edited by throwing a hundred randomly selected pieces of film in the air and putting them together however they landed.

* It's not clear how many mummies are supposed to be involved in the story. There seem to be a few different ones . . . you never get to see most of them very well though. It's a mystery who most of them are, where they came from, and what they're trying to do.

* Because there are twenty different sketchy stories occurring at the same time, the film makes less and less sense as it progresses. Like another viewer, I got to a point where I started looking for more interesting things to do--like brushing my teeth--without caring if I hit pause or not . . . the movie wasn't going to make sense no matter what I did. There's a strong "everything including the kitchen sink" approach evident. I primarily entertained myself from the halfway mark by making fun of the film and writing/reciting my own dialogue, MST3K-style. For example, when they decide they all need to go downstairs for some ceremony, I'd add, "Now, we all need to do the hokey pokey." It made just as much sense as the actual dialogue.

One of the worst movies I have ever seen, ranks with trash like "The Chilling" and "The Lurking Fear". I am a big fan of Louis Gossett Jr. and I have no idea why he starred in this movie. The plot, I think, concerns the resurrecting of a mummy who begins killing people while hiding out in a basement. The last half hour of this movie doesn't make any sense. Al from "Home Improvement" has a pointless cameo. The twist ending is terrible I give it 1.5/10 and that is only because of Louis Gossett Jr.

Not to make myself out to be conceited, but I think of myself as a Film Connoisseur. I am also a fan of Louis Gosset Jr. Anyhow I believe this script does not do him any justice. As far as Amy Locane goes. The only movie i found her remotely good in was airheads. I would only recommend this film to anyone who has those Summer Repeat blues and there is nothing else on.

Bram Stoker's 1903 novel, JEWEL OF THE SEVEN STARS, was a tale of ancient Egypt and a present-day horror story about a young woman finding herself possessed by the spirit of an Egyptian queen. It's a book that doesn't seem to translate well to the screen, with the previous two adaptations - Hammer's BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY'S TOMB and Hollywood's THE AWAKENING - coming across as fun but deeply flawed. Still, they're masterful in comparison to this atrocious B-movie version of the tale.

The source material is chopped and mutilated into madness and what we're left with is a muddled wannabe horror flick in which a sorry-looking mummy stumbles around and kills off a bunch of badly-acting characters. Looking for similarities to the source material is an impossible job, as is watching this film; the narrative is disjointed and unsatisfactory, and the last half an hour in particular makes you scratch your head and wonder what's supposed to be happening. Mostly it's a series of random scenes of people being attacked in dark rooms with really bad direction. You feel for poor old Louis Gossett Jr. and Aubrey Morris, two actors who should really know better. Incredibly, an equally poor sequel (BRAM STOKER'S LEGEND OF THE MUMMY 2) was to follow.

This film is pretty pathetic. In fact, there are only 2 good reasons for taking the time to watch it so you won't feel your time is completely wasted. The first is that you feel a moral obligation to see any and all Mummy related movies -- good, bad or indifferent. The second is that you are a great fan of all work of Louis Gossett, Jr. To see this master at work in film completely unworthy of his great talent still provides a real fan the joy of watching him.

You also get a few other quality actors Lloyd Bochner, Mary Jo Catlett, and Aubrey Morris with Richard Karn bringing some delightful humor sequences. So if you can appreciate these snippets, you won't have your time totally wasted. Not ... totally.

This incredibly inept (supposed) horror film is so badly done that one might think that everyone involved (cast & crew) created this mess just to upset the general movie-going public and to sit back and laugh at us for trying to watch it! ...either that or it was created as some sort of tax dodge... Please don't waste your time on this 0 out-of 10 trash...(a.k.a.

"Bram Stoker's The Mummy")

This movie is bad. This movie is awful. I was lured in to watching it without doing any research first and was under the illusion that it may in some form be related to Francis Ford Coppola's classic, "Bram Stoker's Dracula." It isn't. These false pretenses lead to a great deal of disappointment. But as I was watching, it occurred to me that there is one format in which this movie could be improved. That would be if Mystery Science Theater 3000 were to take on this movie as a project and were to work their magic and at least make this over-the-top, cheesy B-grade movie into something that is laughable for reasons other than the predictable dialog and ridiculously melodramatic acting. The highlight of this film comes when the mummy that the story revolves around is being depicted . The camera pans down the arm of the cloth-wrapped creature and when it focuses on the hand, one notices that something doesn't seem quite right. Apparently the special effects and make-up flunkies got together and decided to pull a prank. For some reason, this un-believable depiction of an ancient Egyptian queen has seven fingers on one hand. Curious.

What was the point on making this film, all which i like about it is the mummy, the acting's crap and so is the movie, its worse than Legend of the Mummy 2, anyway whats the connection, i bought it thinking something good would come out of it, instead i was treated to total Crap, DONT BUY IT!!!

This isn't bad for direct to video fare. The ending kind of falls apart a bit. It's not as good as Shadow Builders though...

Man! A horror movie with Lou Gossett Jr. (THE Lou Gossett Jr.) and Richard Karn (Al from Home Improvement)! Must be great - or at least good.

I think not. There's some terribly annoying ex Scotland Yard detective who seems bent on pissing OFF everyone involved (audience included).

NOT a real good movie. I actually had to watch this one in two shifts. Far too much bad movie crammed into one movie slot. It is honestly a not-real-good movie.

Many times when there's a good deal of activity on screen, the camera work is such that you can't see much of anything going on. Almost, not quite. But it doesn't add to the suspense at all. Just frustration.

Finally, why are there so many people with different type of accents. Why is it that when you could MAYBE understand what one of them was saying, the volume dropped so low that it wouldn't matter anyway.

If they'd have just done what was required earlier, I wouldn't have wasted slightly better than an hour and a half of my life.