The DVD


I was pretty critical of the historic inaccuracy of the TV version of this film. The DVD version, while not correcting those problems, is nevertheless a much better film. (It has a different title, though -- did you notice?) The additional footage strengthens the characters and weaves the story into a more coherent whole. It did seem a lot like The Mummy, which I recently saw for the first time (especially since Jonathan Hyde was in both films). To give Russell Mulcahey credit, he was working with a much smaller budget, but he still managed to get a lush look with the locations and set design. I'm a fan of Rachel Weisz, but I generally preferred the cast of The Curse of King Tut.

reply

what was the original title? i didn't see it on TV i just got the DVD for christmas. so what the title before the DVD?

AT LAST MY ARM IS COMPLETE AGAIN!
OFFICIAL BLEEDER

reply

It was called "The curse of King Tut" I believe. Why they changed it for the DVD I don't know. There was a movie made in 1980 with the same title(i.e.The Curse of King Tut's Tomb) but which was more accurate to history. Raymond Burr was in it as I recall.

reply