SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

Gurlyndrobb While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Jakoba True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

Logan By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

bkoganbing The happenings depicted in The Curse Of King Tut's Tomb somehow didn't make it into the history books. If you're looking for the story of how Lord Carnarvon and Howard Carter found the tomb than you'll be disappointed.Instead we find Casper Van Dien doing a pale imitation of Indiana Jones as archaeologist, right down to the fedora. Van Dien knows he's in a Thanksgiving special and he overacts accordingly.That of course is nothing compared to what Jonathan Hyde does as the master villain of the film. Hyde runs the gamut of villainy from Snidely Whiplash to Darth Vader with a lot else thrown in. Hyde in his villainy is backed by the Hellfire Club headed by Malcolm McDowell. But Hyde's ambitions extend far beyond just ruling this world. Tut's tomb is a passageway to the demon world and Hyde's working with them.A lot of talented people get wasted in this Hallmark TV movie which is downright mediocre. And the end switches from Indiana Jones to Stargate.As for Carnarvon and Carter that's covered too, but you'll have to sit through almost three hours to find out.

funkyfry If you're in the target audience for this kind of thing -- basically you enjoy movies like "Indiana Jones" and "The Mummy" -- then you're not going to feel particularly ripped off by this film. It satisfies all the basic requirements of its genre and even includes a few nice touches I haven't seen anywhere else; for example it's the first movie I've seen that makes its supernatural mummy (Francisco Bosch) into a hero.Casper Van Dien dons Indiana Jones' hat and Rick O'Connell's hair to fill in the archaeologist/adventurer role as best he can. I didn't think he did half a bad job; he has an easy charm that suits this kind of material, and his face reminds me of John Agar's. His buddies, played by Patrick Toomey, Tat Whalley and others are an appealing bunch and they have good comedic chemistry together. Despite the fact that Malcolm McDowell is in the film, Jonathan Hyde plays the main villain. He's OK, basically a poor man's version of David Warner. I would have liked for McDowell to have more to do though.This is basically a very simplistic story and a pretty shopworn script, given some life by a group of enthusiastic actors and a pretty good director, Russell Mulcahy (who used to be a very "hot" director in the early 80s when he directed videos for "Duran/Duran" and made the film "Highlander."). The whole thing holds together well enough that you overlook some of its rough edges, although some things that happen are just too stupid to be taken seriously even on the level the film seems to demand. For instance, why would the hero and his love interest (Leonor Varela) go back to the tomb only to decide they need to go back to get more help? Did they imagine there would only be one or two villains there? There are some lazy mechanical aspects of the plot that could have been fixed.I found myself enjoying this film and having affection for the characters despite all its obvious flaws.

c38clark The only thing that kept me watching this turkey was the belief (fervent dream) that this sucker was going to improve, hopefully, dramatically. But...no..it..did..not...There were some approaches to good action but they all fell short of Indiana Jones which the movie obviously impersonated, at least at times.There was the usual Computer Generated Imagery made famous by the Mummy movies but that was impersonation on an amateurish level. This entire movie was like that - copycat and poorly made.It makes me wonder how it got financial backing. Did someone lose a bet? Was blackmail employed in order to get funding? Extortion with a 9 millimeter to someone's head?

Viorica8957 This is a B-movie, in all its glory, a ripoff of both Indiana Jones AND The Mummy. The dialogue? Horrible. The plot? Even more so. The special effects? Not to be believed. But that's what made it fun to watch. Just for the sake of a good laugh. It's obvious where the characterizations were pulled from (the studly archaeologist/treasure hunter, the studious librarian, etc) and the storyline was cliché as they come. The opening lines between the hero and the villain were cheesy to the max. And of course, the history- well, it wasn't. It was whatever the film makers picked up from other action/adventure stories, or just thought would be cool to throw in. The only people who'd claim this was an actually good film would be eight-year-olds going through a "Indiana Jones" phase. So if you're in the mood for some light entertainment (or want to get your kids out of your hair for a few hours) rent this.