Like others have said, this is a horror/zombie B-movie with a number of faults. However, it also has its likable points. I watched it twice in a row, first with standard English soundtrack, then with the director's audio comment - and that was quite an interesting experience. Less commenting on the scene of the moment, he rather explains the production conditions, as well as film-making and a bit of life in Egypt in general. The contrast gets specifically strong when the director explains how Egyptian medical students do part of their training in London, in the same moment that the head of the archaeologist drops from above... Quite a different experience with this audio comment! The film itself is very Egyptian - except for a few NYC street shots, most locations and sets, as well as many actors, and of course the director, were Egyptian.The other thing I really liked were the scenes in the tomb - whenever something gory happened, the camera went to the painted clay statues of goddesses, full face, and those faces seemed to express indignation or sometimes pity for the unseen horrors. I thought that was remarkably subtle, and provided me with lasting images.But in comparison with Karloff's 1932 Mummy, I found this one lacked empathy with the horrible - the mummy here is just evil and dangerous, while the 1932 precedent was at least ambiguous, where one could understand his point of view at least a little bit...

One of the worst horror movies I've ever seen. During the first few minutes everybody who didn't read the credits and rather smooched with his girlfriend would recognize this movie as Italian-made. Poor atmosphere, poor effects, and lots of talking. Despite other Italian horror movies there are no scenes of nudity, the beautiful actresses even get to take a moonlight bath clad with bikinis - maybe the director didn't want to shock the mummy with the view of naked girls? Well, as soon as the mummy awakes and goes on a rampage strangling its victims to death, its long-dead servants awake as well and go on a rampage eating people in a zombie-style manner. Now, why would they feast on their victims and the mummy wouldn't? The special effects are poor, the showdown is poor (a burning shed and a mummy that wouldn't burn...) and the acting is poor. Shy away from it, folks, as you would from an ancient Egyptian tomb! This movie gives you nightmares - but not about the mummy but about the money you wasted renting or buying it and the time you wasted watching it. Jasper P. Morgan

"Dawn of the Mummy" is easily the goriest Mummy movie ever made.**SPOILERS**An ancient Egyptian king is locked inside a sacred tomb and it's protected by an evil curse, which Rick, (John Salvo) ignores and opens it anyway. Later on, Gary, (Barry Sattels) and his photography group, photographer Bill (George Peck) and models Lisa, (Brenda King) Jenny, (Joan Levy) Melinda, (Ellen Faison) and Joan, (Dianne Betty) arrive at the burial ground to perform a fashion shoot. While wandering around the pyramids, they stumble upon Rick and his excavation site. Exploring the tomb, they find the Mummies burial ground and Gary decides it's the best place to shoot his series of photos. Being inside the tomb sparks the curse, and the mummy is revived to seek revenge for his burial. The revived Mummy stalks the group one by one, who is unaware and continues the photo shoot.The Good News: As far as Mummy movies go, this one takes the cake as far as goriest one made. We get a large amount of blood and gore in here, so much more than any other mummy movie. We get a meat-cleaver to the head, a decapitation, and tons of people are killed by zombified mummies. This also brings up the fact that it's one of the cleverest Mummy movies out there by incorporating the traditional Mummy mythology with zombies. That's a pretty great idea by mixing the two genres the way this one does. It's a great way to up the value of the film by having two different genres mixed together into one cohesive unit. Neither storyline is really put above the other one, so it's pretty easy to follow along and not get confused over what it happening. It's a pretty sweet idea that really takes some creative thought to hold those two from coming up with a cliché-ridden storyline and combines the best aspects of both genres into one great story. Almost as impressive is the look of the mummies/zombies in this film. They look accurately decayed and rotten, dirty bandages dripping off their bodies and Mummified looks from behind their rotten faces, and this makes for a grand monster which captures and frightens your imaginations. It's quite effective.The Bad News: This one takes a while to get going, so it can be a boring beginning if you're not prepared to sit through some character and situation set-up before the action kicks in. Granted, this has happened before, but it's a bit longer than normal before the action starts up, and since none of the characters are all that spectacular to begin with, it makes for a hard opening to sit trough. Beyond that, it's not all that bad.The Final Verdict: I liked this one a lot, but if you can forgive a slow opening, you'll like this one as well. It's pretty gory, so it's not for the weak-stomach. Gorehounds, check it out, those who love Mummy movies will also find a lot to love in this one. Be careful, others, as this one is pretty cheesy.Rated R: Graphic Violence and some mild drug use

Dawn of the Mummy (1980) represents one of the only Egyptian produced films to feature Egypt's most famous character. Filmed on actual Egyptian locations, director Farouk (Frank) Agrama directs his cast of Calender models as they shoot in an ancient tomb! Man, they're just asking for it! Sure, Dawn of the Mummy draws many of it's themes from the popular Zombie films of the 70's/80's. The title is more than a tad similar to George Romero's 1978 classic, and the film itself more than borrows from the Italian films being produced on the Zombie subject. But, I must say that I can't help but like this film. It is ludicrous, boring and unavoidably bad - but so what? It's a Mummy film! This was one of the films to suffer cuts in the UK at that hands of Margaret Thatcher and the BBFC (hate...so...much!) and remained butchered in the UK until the good folks at Anchor Bay re-visited it with a cleaned up picture and all of the gratuitous scenes back in. Or so I thought.Where is the gore? Where is the violence? Not here. This film is in no way worthy of it's "video nasty" trophy. In fact, I can't say this film isn't suitable for a five year old. The only gore scene I can remember is when a guy is decapitate. Yuck, I hear you say. Not really. You hear a scream and then see a Papier Mache ball roll down the sand dune.So what is my conclusion? I like it. It's good, clean, hokey fun which you will keep going back to. Want a white knuckle video nasty? Buy Cannibal Holocaust. I really doubt that anyone from the BBFC actually watched this film during the onslaught of the video nasties in 1980 - I expect they looked at the genre; Zombie film. This is a funny film suitable for the entire family - take it for what it is!