The Tomb

German director Ulli Lommel randomly emerged into the direct to video horror genre in the mid 2000's and has since then delivered the worst films anyone could ever lay their sorry eyes on. They are actually literally painful to watch where no one gains a thing from them – not even unintentional so-bad-its-good comedy. However, there is a chance that in the distant future his films will become iconic with a cult film formula growing from nothing-but-trash to weird-that-it-was-made, though it's a little unlikely for now as he is making fans of the Horror genre puzzled and confused as to how anyone can create such atrocities of cinema.

If H.P. Lovecraft were still around and saw Lommel's adaptation of The Tomb he would probably be a very sad man and never write ever again; there are just one too many directors who take his well structured stories and utterly destroy them in a demeaning manner through their saddening execution and lack of cinematic talent -- Lommel is a very unoriginal man once again he goes to prove it by creating The Tomb. An unoriginal story is fine granted successful execution, art direction, style, acting, pace – whatever works as long as it isn't in-your-face done before tripe which is exactly what The Tomb is. A major comparison one cannot pass up is the 2004 hit "Saw" with The Tomb having one too many similarities that helps this film fall into the category of either rip-off or cash-in. People are very well aware of Saw by now, the seriousness of their lives, the fact anyone can fall into the trap at any time and you can even wind up dead – whilst The Tomb is an adaptation of another medium its unoriginality is shocking in terms of cinema. Yes The Tomb is quite a seen before pile of crap with many terrible aspects about it like no other.

On top of the films unoriginality is its astonishingly terrible special effects, poor casting and acting, mind numbingly boring music, poor editing, ugly cinematography, shaky camera work that at times is as though the cameraman was drunk and oh how the list just goes on. The Tomb is so much like a home video that someone without a clue about film making could quite possibly pull off a better film that is more watchable. Even a home video can be interesting if it has something to it, something bizarre, appealing and unnatural. An example would be John Waters' Pink Flamingos – its borderline home video and has next to nothing of a budget yet still has international appeal as it's like no other movie out there. The Tomb doesn't have that. It's a prime example of just out right bad horror that hopefully will be forgotten as time goes by as it is just another shot on a camcorder horror film released straight to DVD. This film will make you psychically sad or angry – or hey, even both!

Though Ulli Lommel is a very interesting cinema figure; how anyone can make such terrible, terrible films confuses me, yet draws me to them. He is notorious, a criminal against film and yet still manages to release more than one film at least every year. As the saying goes "It's hideous, yet I cannot turn away" which somewhat summarises Lommel's work – he is so terrible yet sometimes I feel myself renting his movies just to be gobsmacked over how terrible they are. I mean, why has he directed two films based on the Zodiac Killer and released them the same year? It's so bizarre that it almost alienates me from my entire understanding and knowledge of cinema. Still, Lommel is a very bad film director and its movies like The Tomb that make this a fact more than an opinion.

I have to say this is the worst movie I've ever seen. Im in the military and we watched a lot of movies in IRAQ. I watched some pretty dumb stuff over there, but this movie by far is the worse my eyes have ever seen. The movie looks like it was shot with a personal camcorder. The sound is horrible, and it is not on key at times. To all out there who thinks about renting this movie, think again and don't make the mistake I made. I know you may think that not all reviews are the same and not everyone thinks the same about movies but believe me this movie is definitely dumb. Instead of renting this movie, send me the money. Afterall, you are going to waste money anyways, so you should at least send it too me and let me enjoy it.

Wow...OK. So, after reading the little feud on here, I decided I had to see this movie for myself. This movie is HORRIBLE. I stopped watching it. I strongly recommend cleaning a closet instead of watching this movie, you'll be more spooked/entertained.

It's low budget with bad acting.

Whoever is giving this "movie" (because this is totally garbage) 10s is completely incorrect and should be disregarded.

I am in no way connected to any of the other reviewers.

Simply put, this garbage is not worth watching.

Very, very, very, very BAD "MOVIE".

I never thought that I could see a horrible movie until i saw this one.

Let me first start off by saying that the cover art is false advertising and is nothing compared to the movie. The cover actually looks half decent compared to the actual movie. The back cover shows a couple of tombs lying on the floor in a warehouse, with chains hanging from the ceiling. Going into the movie, I was expecting some tombs, a warehouse, and some chains. What I got was newly furnished inexpensive tombs (not scary), a back of a grocery market, and assorted objects that are supposed to scare us.

This movie is horrible. The camera work looks like a student from high school was assigned a film directing project. The props look like they were bought at a dollar store (ripped off baby doll heads are NOT scary anymore). The sound was just really bad and I had to put subtitles just to understand what they were saying. I have never seen such bad camera-work. Let's just say that there is a actor FAKE JOGGING. He is not even trying to look as if he was jogging, he is just simply FAKE Jogging. Just plain out BAD! I hate that I actually watched this film. I was so annoyed and irritated that I felt like I was going to die after watching this movie.

I am a huge fan of Lovecraft and recently decided to re-read his works in chronological order.

"The Tomb" was the first piece of short fiction H.P. Lovecraft wrote as an adult. I would not say that the Lovecraft story is especially scary. The written work is mostly psychological horror, a ghost story with no violence to speak of. but I was furious to learn that this low-budget shlockfest was allowed to bill this film as Lovecraft's work, when it has nothing to do with the story. I mean NOTHING.

On top of that, "The Tomb" is hardly well-known to begin with, so why choose it? For me, it dishonors the memory of Lovecraft for these awful filmmakers to get away with it.

Was this because Lovecraft's works are now in the public domain, because they are? Why not just call the film "Phantom of the Opera" or "Frankenstein?" It would make just as much sense.