StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Roy Hart If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

Marva-nova Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Allissa .Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

blumdeluxe "For love or mummy", in a remake of the old series, tells the story of an ancient Egyptian Pharaoh in search for his eternal wife and how the two are trying to save the innocent woman from her curse, causing all kinds of trouble and chaos on their way, of course.I was a bit skeptical about a remake of such a famous series, because it always has a touch of making money with it. After giving this one a try, though, I have to it that a lot of love and effort was put into the movie and some of the slapstick elements indeed match the humour the series is famous for. The movie certainly doesn't have a strong plot or very sophisticated jokes. The special effects bear the smell of the 90s and in general you have to cope with a lot of nonsense. Nevertheless I really had fun with it and if you don't go into the movie with all too high expectations, I think you can have a good time.All in all this is something especially for slapstick fans. If you can accept new films of this series and liked the humor and style of the older titles, you can at least see this as a nice bonus.

Leofwine_draca This attempt to update the classic comedy partnership for a new generation simply isn't very funny due to the weak writing and lacklustre material. It takes two Laurel & Hardy imitators and throws them in the middle of a frankly puerile story involving evil foreigners, a re-animated mummy, and even a random CGI snake at the climax. Whether you find all this funny or not depends on your taste for comedy, but I'm afraid I thought it was pretty awful.The good thing about this is that Bronson Pinchot and Gailard Sartain do able imitations of the famous duo, with Pinchot capturing Stan's voice and mannerisms remarkably well. What a pity, then, that they don't get to go through many of the classic slapstick routines. Most of the jokes consist of them bumbling around or falling over, and there's none of the wittiness of the old 1930s version. The poor writing is particularly noticeable in the dialogue scenes between the pair. Most of all you just feel sorry for F. Murray Abraham for appearing in this.

The_Movie_Cat That's the sound of Stan and Ollie spinning in their graves. I won't bother listing the fundamental flaws of this movie as they're so obvious they go without saying. Small things, like this being "The All New Adventures of Laurel and Hardy" despite the stars being dead for over thirty years when it was made. Little things like that. A bad idea would be to have actors playing buffoons whom just happen to be called Laurel and Hardy. As bad as that is, it might have worked. For a really bad idea, try casting two actors to impersonate the duo. Okay, they might claim to be nephews, but the end result is the same. Bronson Pinchot can be funny. Okay, forget his wacky foreigner "Cousin Larry" schtick in Perfect Strangers, and look at him in True Romance. Here though, he stinks. It's probably not all his fault, and, like the director and the cast - all of who are better than the material - he was probably just desperate for money. There are those who claim Americans find it difficult to master an effective English accent. This cause is not helped here by Pinchot. What is Stan? Welsh? Iranian? Pakistani? Only in Stan's trademark yelp does he come close, though as the yelp is overdone to the point of tedium that's nothing to write home about. Gailard Sartain does slightly better as Ollie, though it's like saying what's worse - stepping in dog dirt or a kick in the knackers? the originals with their split-second timing, intuitive teamwork and innate loveability? Well that's absent altogether, replaced with two stupid old men and jokes so mistimed you could park a bus through the gaps. Whereas the originals had plots that could be summed up in a couple of s, this one has some long-winded Mummy hokum (and what a lousy title!) that's mixed in with the boys' fraternity scenario. I can't claim to have seen every single one of Laurel and Hardy's 108 movies, but I think it's a safe bet that even their nadir was leagues ahead of this. Maybe the major problem is that the originals were sort-of playing themselves, or at least using their own accents. It at least felt natural and unforced, as opposed to the contrived caricatures Pinchot and Sartain are given. And since when did Stan do malapropisms, and so many at that? "I was gonna give you a standing cremation"; "I would like to marinate my friend." Stop it! Only notable moment is a reference to Bozo the Clown, the cartoon character who shared Larry Harmon's L & H comic. Harmon of course bought the name copyright (how disconcerting to see a ® after Laurel and Hardy) and was co-director and producer of this travesty. Questions abound. Would Stan and Ollie do fart gags if they were alive today? Would they glass mummies with broken bottles? Have Stan being smacked in the genitals with a spear and end on a big CGI-finale? Let's hope not.I did laugh once, but I think that was just in disbelief at how terrible it all is. Why was this film made in the first place? Who did the makers think would like it? Possibly the worst movie I've ever seen, an absolute abhorrence I grew sick of watching after just the first five minutes. About as much fun as having your head trapped in a vice while a red-hot poker and stinging nettles are forcibly inserted up your back age.

fordprefect42-0 However, perhaps I'm nitpicking, but in my opinion the "modern day" setting doesn't really seem to work in some respects. For a start, Stan and Ollie still wear their 30s/40s style attire - how many people do you catch wearing bowler hats in this day and age? At times, they seemed almost to be living in a bizarre time warp, which didn't really make sense.Overall though, this is good, old-fashioned slapstick comedy, well in the spirit of the real Stan and Ollie. It's nice to see such innocent laughs for a change, with the kinds of films we're seeing most of the time today, this is a rare treat for the family!