Reviews (2)

1982 U.S. slasher movie, that says it all
Another 80's college film in which all the "students" look older than expected. College girl Joanne Murray takes on the unenviable job of readying the student housing building to become apartments, which includes selling the unneeded furniture, etc. This takes place during a break, so a mysterious psycho is stalking the nearly-empty premises on campus. Need more?

Who's the killer? Is it weirdo John Hemmit from Room 25, an older resident of the dorm with a fuzzy Bozo-the clown balding head? He's played by "Woody Roll," by the way. Or is it jeans-jacket wearing redneck Bobby Lee, who hits on our heroine? Watch it and see.

As you can imagine, this is typical slasher stuff, with overly dramatic music that sounds ripped off from "Psycho." Don't expect anything earth-shattering; you do get a cheapie, yet solid release for fans of 80's slasher/horror. No real extras on the DVD, however, save a biography of supporting actress Daphne Zuniga in her film debut, amazingly she went on to 80's moneymakers like The Sure Thing, VisionQuest and Spaceballs. After that...Toxic Avenger 3, anyone???

It's not like the grainy print is retouched or anything...who's gonna bother? 80's horror fanatics will still love this cheesefest that was like a poor man's "Pieces??" I don't know, it's not as gory and weird as Pieces, but it's in that same mindless yet fun stalk n' slash vein....

Expect a low budget, some bad acting, and if those are things you are able to tolerate then Pranks ain't half bad. Best served with lots of beer and a roomful of friends.

Carpenter & Obrow's The Dorm That Dripped Blood
In this dorky slasher hooey, half a dozen students must clean out an old college dormitory before it is demolished. One reviewer must clean out his eyes and ears before they are demolished by this film.

All the stock characters are here: heroine Joanne (Laurie Lipinski), smartass Craig (Stephen Sachs), hunk Brian (David Snow), insecure Patti (Pamela Holland), and red herring suspects Bobby Lee (Dennis Ely) and John Hemmit (Woody Roll).

Debbie (Daphne Zuniga, they all had to start somewhere) and her parents are the first victims of the unseen killer. The killer then plays hide and seek, cat and mouse, etc, with the cast. One by one, they end up missing until the killer's identity is revealed in a stunning moment that will ring through the ages as a pinnacle point in the art of film...or you know whodunnit if you pay mild disinterested attention to the movie.

Obrow and Carpenter even go through the old device of having the killer explain their motives for the spree, as if anyone but the surviving cast member cared.

The one plus I could find was the pretty good gore effects. The killings have a mean quality to them, from Debbie's death by being run over a few times, to the bloody climactic fight. Sex is kept to a minimum, we get to see a topless girlfriend of Bobby Lee's, but that's it. The film cannot even get exploitation elements down correctly. Another plus is that the killing does start almost immediately, as if the film makers were in a rush to grab the audience's attention. Holding the audience's attention should have been a concern.

"The Dorm That Dripped Blood" is so typical, and so bad, it is no wonder the makers of the "Scream" and "Scary Movie" series had such an easy time skewering the genre. ... Read more

Reviews (10)

DID NOT SEE IT BUT LOOKS LIKE A GOOD MOVIE
THIS MOVIE LOOKS LIKE A VARY GOOD MOVIE AND I KNOW THAT OTHER PEOPLE THINK THAT IT IS NOT A GOOD MOVIE BUT IT IS BESIDES I HAVE MANY OTHER STARANGE MOVIES THAT PEOPLE THINK THAT THIS MOVIE IS A GOOD MOVIE I THIN THAT THE BOOK AND THE MOVIE IS GOOD IT REALY DOES NO MATER AT ALL WHAAT PEOPLE SAY ABOUT THIS MOVE IT LOOKS INTRUSTING AND THAT WHY I AM BUYING THIS MOVIE SO READ THE BOOK AND SEE THE MOVIE I GIVE THIS MOVIE 5 STARS AND ALSO THE BOOK TOO SO WHO EVER READS THIS THE MOVIE AND BOOK ARE GOOD.

Hollywoods misfortunes
It is unfortunate that Hollywood cannnot do a writer justice, they usually change the script so repetively that the author's true genius is lost. If Midnight or Lightning had been made into movies Hollywood would have botch them.This movie comes dangerously close to it. Thank God it is only fictional or they would have totally castrated it, as they did with Black Hawk Down and We were soldiers once and young. With the exception of Pixar Studios and a few select films Hollywood castrates everthing they touch. My advice read the books, and carefully choose your movies. I mean how many times have you said aloud, whether you have cable or satelite there is nothing on worth watching. My god look at horrible the news is done, no more true hardball reporting, just reporting for couch potatoes to damn lazy to read the news and get an in depth report.

Ending Rather Freaky
Okay, I thought Jarrett Lennon (who portrayed "Joey") was extraordinarily REAL and natural. Wish he'd get more acting jobs! I hated that the ending wasn't true to the book's ending... but it wasn't bad. I greatly appreciated Grace Zabriskie's contribution to this movie. The special effects were also surprisingly good.

Not too shabby
I've read the book, as well as seen the movie, and I don't think they did too bad a job with it. The only thing that leaves me curious is the fact that the movie came to the conclusion that Joey was the Antichrist after all. The book was far more ambiguous about it, and left it totally up in the air as to whether Joey was who the church loonies claimed him to be, or whether he was, in fact, a child of light.
Still, not too bad an effort at all.

Very loyal to the book!
A lot of the movies coming out claiming to be based on or adapted from a book. They just take the general premise and go off into left field.

This movie adheres to the book with far more loyalty than Jurassik Park, Interview with a Vampire, and Starship Troopers do combined. If you liked the book, you'll like the movie.

There is one major difference right at the end, but you'll have to watch the movie and judge it for yourself. ... Read more

Reviews (18)

MUMMY NEEDS A MAKEOVER
Lou Gossett, Jr.----didn't he win an Academy award for OFFICER AND A GENTLEMAN? Hmmm...think of F. Murray Abraham, Ben Kingsley, and others who after winning their awards ended up second bananas in rather trifling movies. Lou joins the lot, and overacts so badly, he should really be ashamed of himself. But, he's not the only bad thing in this movie. Based on a Bram Stoker story, this version is handsomely mounted, but at times is so confusing, one never really knows what's going on. Eric Lutes is an engaging hero, but sometimes he looks like he doesn't know what he's supposed to be doing; Amy Locane is luscious, but doesn't possess the range to go from the darling daughter to the vindictive mummy; Mark Lindsay Chapman who used to claim "Dallas" as his home, is laughably agreeable as the private investigator who gets bugged to death. Lloyd Bochner is wasted in his small role, and the whole movie seems thrown together, rather than orchestrated. Not a truly bad movie, but not a truly good one, either.

Third Time's (Almost) A Charm
Faithful third film adaptation of Bram Stoker's The Jewel Of Seven Stars (following Blood From the Mummy's Tomb and The Awakening) doesn't deliver all it promises, but it delivers enough to be worth watching.

Archaeologist Lloyd Bochner is attacked in his locked study, and has left very specific instructions about how he is to be guarded while unconscious - the attack plainly did not surprise him too much, and police inspector Mark Lindsey Chapman wants to know why. Chapman thinks Bochner's estranged daughter, Amy Locane, had something to do with it. His suspicions aren't helped any when other people in the household begin suffering accidents, and Locane always just happens to be the only one nearby.

Locane and her Egyptology student boyfriend seek out Bochner's old colleague Louis Gosset, Jr., presently an outpatient at the local asylum. Gosset was with Bochner when he made his most stupendous find in Egypt, the tomb of Tara, a sorceress queen so feared that her name was erased from history. He knows - as does Bochner - that the attack was somehow engineered by Tara's ancient black magic, and that there's more where that came from...

The production on this movie is really quite handsome. It's dark and rich and colorful, with a wonderfully atmospheric music score. The sets and set pieces seem more authentic than usual for this kind of film. The performances range from good to adequate. The script is actually pretty decent, and the style refreshingly low-key (though there are a couple of splashy special-effects lapses). It's rather slow, and stretches credibility a bit, but you have to expect that in a movie with dusty mummies walking around strangling people - and the mummy is pretty creepy, at that.

All three versions of this story are pretty good. This isn't the best, but it's imminently watchable and attractively packaged throughout.

Terrible!
First, I would like to say to who ever said that Bram Stoker did not write The Mummy is wrong! Bram Stoker did write the Mummy, I finished reading it in January of 1997! And this, although faithful to the book, is lame, and violent, with bad acting. Whoever made this was trying to copy the brilliance of Bram Stoker's Dracula (which is indeed "brilliant"), but did a poor job. If they wanted a good movie, the director should have been Francis-Ford Coppola, the director of Bram Stoker's Dracula.

Bad Movie, never again
first and for-most Bram Stocker did not write the mummy, so this is not his story. This is just a ploy to get you to watch this if you liked the Dracula title. This is a crappy way to get people to watch a movie. Maybe they should have called the move, "A Crappy Ploy to Rip Off the Ignorant" Bad movie, nothing origional. Donot waste your money.

"Who's your Mummy?"
Unless you can laugh along at horror schlock, are a huge fan of Louis Gossett Jr., or are a fan of Richard Karn (Al from "Home Improvement"), you probably will not like this movie at all. It drags along at a pace slower than a snail in hibernation. The dialogue is really, really, bad. This is one of those movies that you know that the only reason the actors, directors, producers, and anyone else associated with the film did it was because of the money. Richard Karn provides a few laughs as a swinging, single, archeologist and LG Jr is a bit frightening at times (not because of his character, but because of his over-emoting). However, most of the time everyone in the film have these "how did I end up here" or "I can't wait until I'm done with this" looks on their faces. By the way, did I mention there really isn't much plot until half-way through the film? What makes this film worse is that it actually portrays itself as a serious scary movie. Give me a break! Roger Corman knew he was making schlock and Ed Wood really did believe he was making good movies. The makers of this film can't plead either case. All in all don't waste your time with this film, rent some other mummy movie. ... Read more

Reviews (18)

MUMMY NEEDS A MAKEOVER
Lou Gossett, Jr.----didn't he win an Academy award for OFFICER AND A GENTLEMAN? Hmmm...think of F. Murray Abraham, Ben Kingsley, and others who after winning their awards ended up second bananas in rather trifling movies. Lou joins the lot, and overacts so badly, he should really be ashamed of himself. But, he's not the only bad thing in this movie. Based on a Bram Stoker story, this version is handsomely mounted, but at times is so confusing, one never really knows what's going on. Eric Lutes is an engaging hero, but sometimes he looks like he doesn't know what he's supposed to be doing; Amy Locane is luscious, but doesn't possess the range to go from the darling daughter to the vindictive mummy; Mark Lindsay Chapman who used to claim "Dallas" as his home, is laughably agreeable as the private investigator who gets bugged to death. Lloyd Bochner is wasted in his small role, and the whole movie seems thrown together, rather than orchestrated. Not a truly bad movie, but not a truly good one, either.

Third Time's (Almost) A Charm
Faithful third film adaptation of Bram Stoker's The Jewel Of Seven Stars (following Blood From the Mummy's Tomb and The Awakening) doesn't deliver all it promises, but it delivers enough to be worth watching.

Archaeologist Lloyd Bochner is attacked in his locked study, and has left very specific instructions about how he is to be guarded while unconscious - the attack plainly did not surprise him too much, and police inspector Mark Lindsey Chapman wants to know why. Chapman thinks Bochner's estranged daughter, Amy Locane, had something to do with it. His suspicions aren't helped any when other people in the household begin suffering accidents, and Locane always just happens to be the only one nearby.

Locane and her Egyptology student boyfriend seek out Bochner's old colleague Louis Gosset, Jr., presently an outpatient at the local asylum. Gosset was with Bochner when he made his most stupendous find in Egypt, the tomb of Tara, a sorceress queen so feared that her name was erased from history. He knows - as does Bochner - that the attack was somehow engineered by Tara's ancient black magic, and that there's more where that came from...

The production on this movie is really quite handsome. It's dark and rich and colorful, with a wonderfully atmospheric music score. The sets and set pieces seem more authentic than usual for this kind of film. The performances range from good to adequate. The script is actually pretty decent, and the style refreshingly low-key (though there are a couple of splashy special-effects lapses). It's rather slow, and stretches credibility a bit, but you have to expect that in a movie with dusty mummies walking around strangling people - and the mummy is pretty creepy, at that.

All three versions of this story are pretty good. This isn't the best, but it's imminently watchable and attractively packaged throughout.

Terrible!
First, I would like to say to who ever said that Bram Stoker did not write The Mummy is wrong! Bram Stoker did write the Mummy, I finished reading it in January of 1997! And this, although faithful to the book, is lame, and violent, with bad acting. Whoever made this was trying to copy the brilliance of Bram Stoker's Dracula (which is indeed "brilliant"), but did a poor job. If they wanted a good movie, the director should have been Francis-Ford Coppola, the director of Bram Stoker's Dracula.

Bad Movie, never again
first and for-most Bram Stocker did not write the mummy, so this is not his story. This is just a ploy to get you to watch this if you liked the Dracula title. This is a crappy way to get people to watch a movie. Maybe they should have called the move, "A Crappy Ploy to Rip Off the Ignorant" Bad movie, nothing origional. Donot waste your money.

"Who's your Mummy?"
Unless you can laugh along at horror schlock, are a huge fan of Louis Gossett Jr., or are a fan of Richard Karn (Al from "Home Improvement"), you probably will not like this movie at all. It drags along at a pace slower than a snail in hibernation. The dialogue is really, really, bad. This is one of those movies that you know that the only reason the actors, directors, producers, and anyone else associated with the film did it was because of the money. Richard Karn provides a few laughs as a swinging, single, archeologist and LG Jr is a bit frightening at times (not because of his character, but because of his over-emoting). However, most of the time everyone in the film have these "how did I end up here" or "I can't wait until I'm done with this" looks on their faces. By the way, did I mention there really isn't much plot until half-way through the film? What makes this film worse is that it actually portrays itself as a serious scary movie. Give me a break! Roger Corman knew he was making schlock and Ed Wood really did believe he was making good movies. The makers of this film can't plead either case. All in all don't waste your time with this film, rent some other mummy movie. ... Read more

Reviews (10)

DID NOT SEE IT BUT LOOKS LIKE A GOOD MOVIE
THIS MOVIE LOOKS LIKE A VARY GOOD MOVIE AND I KNOW THAT OTHER PEOPLE THINK THAT IT IS NOT A GOOD MOVIE BUT IT IS BESIDES I HAVE MANY OTHER STARANGE MOVIES THAT PEOPLE THINK THAT THIS MOVIE IS A GOOD MOVIE I THIN THAT THE BOOK AND THE MOVIE IS GOOD IT REALY DOES NO MATER AT ALL WHAAT PEOPLE SAY ABOUT THIS MOVE IT LOOKS INTRUSTING AND THAT WHY I AM BUYING THIS MOVIE SO READ THE BOOK AND SEE THE MOVIE I GIVE THIS MOVIE 5 STARS AND ALSO THE BOOK TOO SO WHO EVER READS THIS THE MOVIE AND BOOK ARE GOOD.

Hollywoods misfortunes
It is unfortunate that Hollywood cannnot do a writer justice, they usually change the script so repetively that the author's true genius is lost. If Midnight or Lightning had been made into movies Hollywood would have botch them.This movie comes dangerously close to it. Thank God it is only fictional or they would have totally castrated it, as they did with Black Hawk Down and We were soldiers once and young. With the exception of Pixar Studios and a few select films Hollywood castrates everthing they touch. My advice read the books, and carefully choose your movies. I mean how many times have you said aloud, whether you have cable or satelite there is nothing on worth watching. My god look at horrible the news is done, no more true hardball reporting, just reporting for couch potatoes to damn lazy to read the news and get an in depth report.

Ending Rather Freaky
Okay, I thought Jarrett Lennon (who portrayed "Joey") was extraordinarily REAL and natural. Wish he'd get more acting jobs! I hated that the ending wasn't true to the book's ending... but it wasn't bad. I greatly appreciated Grace Zabriskie's contribution to this movie. The special effects were also surprisingly good.

Not too shabby
I've read the book, as well as seen the movie, and I don't think they did too bad a job with it. The only thing that leaves me curious is the fact that the movie came to the conclusion that Joey was the Antichrist after all. The book was far more ambiguous about it, and left it totally up in the air as to whether Joey was who the church loonies claimed him to be, or whether he was, in fact, a child of light.
Still, not too bad an effort at all.

Very loyal to the book!
A lot of the movies coming out claiming to be based on or adapted from a book. They just take the general premise and go off into left field.

This movie adheres to the book with far more loyalty than Jurassik Park, Interview with a Vampire, and Starship Troopers do combined. If you liked the book, you'll like the movie.

There is one major difference right at the end, but you'll have to watch the movie and judge it for yourself. ... Read more