The Mummy's Tomb

Audience Reviews

View All (55) audience reviews

Andrew L The worse of The Universal Studios Mummy movies. For starters, the first 30 minutes of the movie are nothing but scenes and a retelling of what happened in the film THE MUMMY'S HAND. Then, the film does its best to set the scene 30 years after THE MUMMY'S HAND but other than the actors from THE MUMMY'S HAND wearing makeup, it doesn't do much to convince us. They should have also reshot the backstory scenes with Lon Chaney Jr instead of just using THE MUMMY'S HAND footage with Tom Tyler as The Mummy because it is obvious the two actors (Chaney and Tyler) look nothing alike. Rated 0.5/5 Stars •  Rated 0.5 out of 5 stars 07/16/24 Full Review Blu B The worst Classic Universal Monster Movie I've seen. The actual sequel is really only 48 minutes or so and it feels longer than that because it drags somehow at certain points which is crazy. Even though this has more mood, atmosphere, and some great scenes with the angry mob at the end it only goes so far masking the major issues. Subpar pacing, acting, and editing are all rampant here. The characters from the original get no development, are used to just explain plot most of the time, and blend in so much so that I genuinely could'nt tell who was who at almost any given point. The villian is boring and the new Mummy isn't that good looking as the other 2 (especially Karloff). It's kind of surreal as this is basically a Pre-Psycho slasher just without stabbing but it also comes with a lot of the pitfalls as well. There really is no plot besides kills just happen for really no explained reason besides the new villian wants to bring back the Queen again but never explains why the others need to die. They all blend in like Friday the 13th teens (maybe even worse dare I say). And again this feels like it drags somehow which is mind boggling. It basically is a reason to bring the Slasher villian back to kill people. If your really curious about seeing what a crappy slasher would be like from the Golden Era give it a try. Otherwise skip this. Rated 2.5/5 Stars •  Rated 2.5 out of 5 stars 11/29/23 Full Review Joel H The Mummy's Tomb is a bit confusing for me. This sequel was made two years after The Mummy's Hand, and yet it's set 30 years in the future, for some reason. And aside from some old-age makeup, it feels like it's basically set during the same era. In addition, this movie spends a quarter of its already short runtime showing full-length scenes from the previous movie, and then it basically copies the plot of the original. Plus, even though it's only an hour long, the story still seems threadbare. The presence of Lon Chaney Jr. gave me hope for The Mummy's Tomb, but this creature feature really drags. Rated 2/5 Stars •  Rated 2 out of 5 stars 11/05/23 Full Review Steve D A mess that is more interested in re-showing you what you saw sucking all the humor out, and dispatching old characters to develop anything else. Rated 0.5/5 Stars •  Rated 0.5 out of 5 stars 04/08/23 Full Review Liam D Despite being an hour long this movie is a quick and lazy retread of what came before and feels more like an Frankenstein story than a Mummy story especially with the climax Rated 1/5 Stars •  Rated 1 out of 5 stars 08/06/22 Full Review Audience Member An exercise in tedium. This is the first one that Lon Chaney took over as the Mummy, but it just blandly recycles most of the elements from the previous film. Only it's missing the likeable leads to banter with one another. Rated 2/5 Stars •  Rated 2 out of 5 stars 11/06/20 Full Review Read all reviews

The Mummy's Tomb

My Rating

Read More Read Less POST RATING WRITE A REVIEW EDIT REVIEW

Most Popular at Home Now