Truly Dreadful Film

Brilliant and touching

n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.

Blistering performances.

Events behind the scenes during the production of this Hammer project contain enough tragedy and intrigue to make a film of their own. Andrew Keir plays a role originally written (and partially recorded) for Peter Cushing, who had to abandon the project when his wife's health took a turn for the worst. Director Seth Holt died on set mid-way through production and Hammer bigwig Michael Carreras took the helm for the remainder (although Holt was still singularly credited).The result is sadly a bit of a mess, frankly. Much of the initial running time is filled with a flurry of characters experiencing strange and deadly events/coincidences often vaguely connected with a singular star system ('The Jewel of the Seven Stars' is the Bram Stoker story on which this is based). A pout-some, voluptuous and fully made-up Margaret is in bed dreaming of a pout-some, voluptuous and fully made-up Egyptian queen Tera (both played by Valerie Leon) having her hand removed by a group of priests. In more wakeful times, Margaret has a father (Keir) and a boyfriend, charmless Tod (Browning, believe it or not - namesake of the man who directed 1931's 'Dracula' and 1932's notorious 'Freaks' among others - played by Mark Edwards). There's creepy Corbeck (James Villiers), mad old Berigan (George Coulouris) and even madder Doctor Putman (Aubrey Woods). The least interesting Browning commands much of the running time leaving much of the rest of the cast under-written.'Blood from the Mummy's Tomb' eschews much blood and gore (and a traditional mummy) in favour of a more supernatural tale. That it is rather dull and talky doesn't help anyone: the most gruesome thing we see is Princess Tera's disembodied hand creeping around. It is admirable to see Hammer attempting a different telling of the story, but sadly this fails to deliver much in the way of horror.

Hammer's fourth and final outing into Egyptian territory is a hit-and miss-affair which is still worthwhile for the wonderful atmosphere it casts in places. The reason for the film's disjointed feel is that the production was beset by tragedy - almost as if a real life curse was at work. First off, star Peter Cushing's wife died and the actor had to be replaced by Andrew Keir. Secondly, the director of the film, Seth Holt, who had made the wonderful TASTE OF FEAR some ten years before this, suffered a heart attack, leaving Hammer regular Michael Carreras to take over the directorial duties. Thus the film seems to jump from scene to scene sometimes without any warning and there are definite issues with the pacing and general cohesion despite what should be a relatively simple plot. On the plus side, it's a lot different to the typical mummy film which involves a bandage-wrapped corpse seeking revenge, and it deserves kudos for trying something different. The film is based on Bram Stoker's novel THE JEWEL OF THE SEVEN STARS, as was 1980s horror 'epic' THE AWAKENING and the low budget '90s feature BRAM STOKER'S LEGEND OF THE MUMMY.The actors certainly aren't at fault. Andrew Keir makes the most of his bed-ridden role although he doesn't have a great deal to work with here, while James Villiers is a memorable villain. Valerie Leon, a stunning actress familiar from her roles in numerous CARRY ON films is easy on the eye and equips herself well with the dual personae. Really, I think she's one of the most beautiful of all British actresses alongside Hazel Court and the film is almost a love letter to her sheer physical perfection. It helps that she's often dressed in little more than jewels or a negligee (depending on whether she's playing the mummy or her reincarnate victim) that ably show off her quite stunning figure.The special effects budget is obviously low, with set-bound locales, but the gore is quite plentiful with lots of torn throats dripping blood. The budget, or lack thereof, is a sore remainder of the constrained budgets that Hammer faced at this time. There is a memorable scene involving a patient in an asylum who is attacked by mysterious forces (the best scene of the film actually) but the film suffers from an abrupt downbeat ending; it feels like this could have been expanded upon while some of the early scenes could have been excised. BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY'S TOMB isn't one of Hammer's best, but if you are looking for an Egyptian curse story that's a little different then I would recommend it as it's quite unusual compared to the rest of the company's work.

Of all the 'classic' movie monsters, the mummy is my least favourite: shambling along like a lone zombie on Prozac, the vengeful ancient Egyptian just doesn't have what it takes to give me the chills. Which is why I thought I'd give 'Blood From The Mummy's Tomb a watch.Hammer's final stab at the genre dispenses with the traditional, crumbly, bandage-clad creature of legend, replacing it with a voluptuous vixen, played by buxom beauty Valerie Leon. Surely a good old-fashioned dose of gratuitous eye-candy (plus a bit of equally gratuitous gore) would make this effort enjoyable.Well.... no, actually. Leon's spectacular body is certainly a magnificent sight, but even her sexy curves cannot detract one from the fact that this movie is one helluva muddled mess.Based on the Bram Stoker story 'The Jewel of Seven Stars', Blood From The Mummy's Tomb sees Leon as Margaret, a young woman whose (hot, hot, hot) body is destined to become the vessel for the spirit of Tera, an ancient and evil Egyptian queen. Her boyfriend Tod (Mark Edwards) and archaeologist father (Andrew Keir) do their best to save her from this dreadful fate, but with the villainous power-hungry Corbeck (James Villiers) orchestrating Tera's return, will their efforts be in vain?To be honest, who cares?Suffering from a noticeable lack of star-power (none of Hammer's more familiar faces are present), and cursed with a dreadfully constructed script, hackneyed direction, and very cheap-looking sets and props, this is one of the (if not THE) poorest Hammer movies I have seen.

It appears I am in the minority as I thought this film was just plain boring and pretty awful. It is easily the worst of Hammer's four Mummy entries and has all the bad trademarks of Hammer's seventies film cycles: a greater reliance on sex and violence then on story, mid-range acting talents as leads and virtual unknowns as leads, lesser directorial talents, a dubious urge to try the most ridiculous story plots conceived. In point of fact - to move away from what worked for the previous two decades. I understand that the studio was losing money and trying to compete with lots of competition, but it didn't need to churn this kind of stuff or most of its seventies films did it? (I don't expect YOU to answer.) What is wrong with Blood from the Mummy's Tomb? Well, for starters the story makes very little sense and even is executed in a more intangible way. I know that some out there will say that they understand it perfectly and that it takes a higher level of thinking, etc... to fully understand this mishmash of a script. These are the same folks that think James Joyce's Ulysses IS the greatest book ever written too! A female mummy looks exactly as she did at death and all we get for explanation is astral plane bunk - I can't hurdle that leap of faith and still have two legs left. Or how about missing relics(that look brand new)which mysteriously are needed in order for this malevolent mummy to return to life just pop up on shelves in Andrew Keir's cellar? How about the deaths of the Mummy's wrath - what wrath? All we see is her laying in a tomb with her hand cut off and blood recirculating somehow in the severed arm. All the while the Mummy is practically naked and her breast bottoms conspicuously framed. I am sure the crew had a tough time concentrating on having her keep still and not breathe to avoid having her ample bosom heave. The rest of the film is riddled with such inconsistencies of logic. Director Seth Holt died while filming and was replaced by Michael Carreras. This DOES explain some of the inherent problems of the fluidity of the film and coherence of the story and actor motivations. The acting is pretty poor as well. Sure, character actors like Aubrey Morris, James Villiers(as the "real" villain I suppose), and George Coulouris are serviceable and workmanlike, but Andrew Keir is very weak by his standards and the two young leads are horrible actors. Mark Edwards as Tod Browning(I liked that touch!) has no range and Valerie Leon is void of any acting talent whatsoever. She is; however, a treat to see for her voyeuristic charms. Her breasts are so big and bouncy that they are hardly contained in the sexy black negligee she wears throughout much of the film. They are the focal points of virtually all of her screen time, and though I appreciate the aesthetic qualities of such pulchritude - large, heaving bosoms do not a good horror film make. Not even close. It is as if this film were made by a couple of boobs! Did I like anything about the film? The flashbacks used were effectively shot and the scenes with Coulouris in an asylum were quite chilling. Beyond that nothing really juts out other than Valerie's bosom buddies.