Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

Don't listen to the negative reviews

It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

Somebody, please, for the love of Christ Possessed, give David DeCoteau one of those "Worst Director Ever" awards. Or at least have the world know about this through other means. A moronic idiot should never be allowed to play with a camera and a strobe lightning effect device. I'm not laughing.A bunch of teenagers on a location that looks like a mansion with some dorm rooms. They're supposed to be taking some extra geology or history classes (during summer, is my guess). There's a dried-up mummy stored on a table in the mansion, and some nerd awakens it with some ancient evil plastic scepter thing (or whatever). The mummy looks like some dude with a Halloween mask, wrapped in dusty toilet paper. Some teenagers get killed, and I can't even remember how (I saw this flick a few weeks ago and I don't have Alzheimer, so go figure...). And then this movie ends at some point.The most fascinating thing about this film, is director David DeCoteau's idea of suspense. Building up tension, to him, equals having someone walk around in the house, while the mummy is shuffling through the frame in the background of the shot, like some stoned dude who got lost on his way to the toilet. While that sounds more like comedy to me, it's not even funny.

Having sat through Legend of the Mummy 1, I thought this couldn't be any worse and I was right. It's equally terrible, though for different reasons. Once again we have a mummy on the loose, this time pursuing a group of archaeology students, and I hope they really are archaeology students, because they're certainly not actors, judging by the number of over the top and under the top performances given here. The mummy itself is marginally more horrific than in LOTM 1, though all the budget seems to have been spent on a scary face. It walks like it's advertising adult diapers and his is full. Does the story make sense? No. Some mumbo-jumbo about rain gods and bullying. Are the characters likable? No. Most are interchangeable cyphers, typical of most stalk and slash horror but not as well written. Plus points: one guy looks good in his tighty whities and the final heroine is not your typical busty blonde. But the horror (apart from the script) is generally off-screen. The mummy has a very large curved knife that is put to good use on wiping out the general population, but never gets a bloodstain on it. You hear a lot, but don't see much - perhaps something more visceral would have helped to take your mind off the tedium. A truly dreadful attempt at film-making.

Why the hell does it say Bram Stoker on it? I can't believe i watched this it is stupid, ridiculous shite that i might just use as a doorstop!It really is that bad, the acting is a complete joke, the so called "scary bits" are just people wandering around a room saying "hey would you stop that.This joke isn't funny" the mummy is just a person covered in brown paper and made to roar and groan and walk like a zombie. I actually can't think of one good thing to say about it as it is all awful and I will never sit through it again, that's for sure! If you are gonna watch a decent mummy horror film, then try 'the mummy' or 'the mummy returns' but don't get those classic titles confused with this trash!

I've seen better film on a bath tub. The producer/director may have worked in Hollywood for over 20 years and started out with a fright master, but he must have cribbed pages from the Ed Wood Book of Terrible Movie Making! No, that's a spiteful statement, isn't it. Sorry, Ed! At least your movies were fun! Don't waste your time on this movie. The acting is not much better than a junior high production and the cliché mood-setting storm is annoying instead of scary. Stilted dialog, ham reactions, and staid camera work create a boring experience. The mummy in profile looks more like Homer Simpson wrapped in day-old diapers.In fact, the only positive things I can say about this movie is the mummy's makeup is spot on (not his costume!) and the packaging is top quality. Whoever designed the DVD packaging should have written and directed the movie as it appears more time and thought went into the cover instead of the movie.You can't sue to get back the 96 minutes wasted on this "film". You'd get more out of making your own version of Scream of the Mummy, and it would probably be much better than this.This movie proves that you really can't judge a movie by its DVD packaging, and there ought to be a law about delusional and false self-promotion on DVD covers of what amounts to something that is not much better than a frat-boy weekend home-made video.