Blood from the Mummy's Tomb 4K 1971 Ultra HD 2160p

Story Movie

Margaret Fuchs has been having strange dreams. They feature a captivating Egyptian queen who cuts off her own wrist. Just then, a terrible wind sweeps in, and the queen’s hand begins to kill the priests and priests gathered around her, after which it sets off on its own journey. Margaret pays no attention to these dreams. But on her birthday, her father, an archaeologist, gives his daughter a massive antique ruby ring. Soon, the people around Margaret begin to die one by one...

Review 4K Movie

I’ve always wondered one thing: why, when you have a wonderful original book, would you try to pass yourself off as a genius smarter than the author and make things up out of thin air? Sometimes to such an extent that little of the book remains. The source material is only hinted at by the names, a few plot twists, perhaps the atmosphere, and the writer’s name in the credits—but the result is a completely original story. Of course, there are times when the changes don’t spoil the finished film at all—but for that to happen, you need a genius screenwriter, and the director must possess real talent, so that the viewer doesn’t think, “What kind of nonsense was in that book they based this on?” and the reader doesn’t wrinkle their nose or bang their head in frustration.

Unfortunately, in today’s film I’m reviewing, neither the screenwriter nor the directors were geniuses by any stretch. What’s more—it actually seemed as though they disliked Bram Stoker’s novel so much that they went out of their way to distance themselves from it, coming up with all sorts of nonsense. And here’s the question—why? Actually, several questions at once. Why did they have to move the action to the 1970s instead of using the setting of the early 20th century? Or at least the 1930s. Why did they have to mock the literary characters so much, turning them into either fanatics or empty shells? Why add so many bloody murders? Why turn an original and unique story into something that looks more like a mass-produced cliché featuring yet another damned ancient Egyptian mummy? This isn’t a film adaptation anymore; it’s a mockery.

So, the main character has flashes of what happened in ancient and not-so-ancient times—these flashbacks turned out to be the best scenes, because when the action shifts to the present, it’s easy at first to get confused about who all these characters are and what will happen to them. Or won’t happen to them. Or maybe they’re not needed at all and just drag out the plot. Or something else—you can even let your imagination run wild and try to guess how important all these characters are to the story. Yes, you guessed it, my dear readers—so let’s move on. True, analogies with the book keep swirling in my head—um, what’s that, who’s that, and why is that there? The question, unsurprisingly, remains rhetorical, and thus doesn’t require an answer.

But if you try to forget what was written in the credits or pretend you haven’t read the book—what impression might the film leave? And, oddly enough, a quite positive one—for this level of quality, of course. All the elements are in place—plenty of creepy, not jump-scare, moments; actors who, while not exactly brimming with talent, are pleasant to look at; and an atmosphere that holds up until the very end. Of course, the whole thing sometimes looks a bit silly and rather naive—but we remember perfectly well which studio made this, so it would be strange to expect it to be nominated for an Oscar for Best Picture.

But here’s the thing: I just can’t seem to forget it. They should have been honest—there’s nothing left of Stoker, so don’t throw tomatoes at us for such a wild, off-the-cuff remark. Although, Stoker is no stranger to this—just remember how his Dracula was mocked and will continue to be mocked. Still, it’s a shame—was it really that hard? After watching it, yours truly was left feeling disheartened and had even decided to reflect that in the rating, but then I thought—it could have been much worse, since there’s plenty to compare it to, not this specific novel, but film adaptations in general.