ada the leading man is my tpye

SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

Solidrariol Am I Missing Something?

Ortiz Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

Historian-3 Why do film makers always feel the need to re-write history as they wish it to have been. rather than leaving it as it was? This series is replete with historical inaccuracies, geographic inaccuracies, and all manner of other errors. Absolute rubbish. Even the very simplest of historical facts, such as Carter's first opening of and entry into the tomb, are completely erroneous. The impression I have is of writers, directors, and producers who assume or hope that most viewers are too stupid to know the difference ... a total disregard for their audience.

Michael Ledo This is a four part mini-series docu-drama about the discovery of the tomb of King Tut, the pharaoh who made Steve Martin famous. The film has lots of drama from the backdrop of WWI and civil unrest to internal conflicts. Howard Carter, the discovery had a balancing act and two women who desire him, one brains and the other beauty with money. Not much of a mystery there.This film was remarkably made without Ben Kingsley, John Rhys-Davies, Brendan Fraser, or Nicolas Cage. It's length felt shortened by the episodes and is worth a watch even though we know the ending. Good performances.Guide: No nudity. Implied sex. 1 F-word.

phd_travel Despite the inaccuracies, this miniseries is still watchable fascinating and well made. The story of the greatest discovery is so good that it makes up for the faults. The discovery itself is quite thrilling and one can really feel the joy. One of the best points is the detail shown. There are lots of details about the financial, political difficulties regarding the dig. It does give some historical context to the time of the discovery. The question over what Egypt gets to keep and what the discoverer gets as a reward is interesting. It's not right that foreigners take away the historical treasures of any country yet the discoverer needs some compensation for their expenses.Dealing with the faults: It wasn't filmed in Egypt and the sand and valley are darker and don't look like Egypt. It would have been tough to film in Egypt with all the instability since 2011 anyway. The romances with a Met Museum woman and Lady Evelyn Herbert are a little distracting but I guess if they didn't blow these up it would have been kind of like a documentary. There are some bad American accents of a few characters. Also Max Irons is too young looking at the time of the discovery - bit like Jonathan Rhys Meyers in the Tudors. But so what - he is watchable and actually is quite good here if you ignore the age thing - I can't think of another young actor who could have done a better job. A little more of the factual elements of the curse could have been shown besides Lord Carnarvon's death. Some strange things did happen. Better than showing the romances.If you enjoyed this - highly recommend a 1980 TV movie "The Curse of King Tut's Tomb", an excellent and exciting movie about the discovery and the curse. Forget about the more recent one with Casper Van Dien.Quite a pleasure to watch despite it's faults.

mywildimagination Lots of the other reviews here are quite critical of this show for some of its liberties with the details to the point of one criticising the colour of the stone!! Not being someone who intimately knows about this subject I wont pretend to question their reasons for so much hate but I will say that I found it both interesting and entertaining as did my 10 year old son who is very excited to see the final episode when it airs. I found the acting acceptable, but not exceptional, I have certainly seen far worse in some other recent prime time shows. I think the show hit the balance between the history lesson and entertainment so that all ages could be drawn into the story and learn something in the process. Isn't that the sign of a good show? No hate here, I thoroughly enjoyed watching this.