SoftInloveRox Horrible, fascist and poorly acted

Glucedee It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

WillSushyMedia This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

CornanTheIowan Without giving away any specifics of the plot per se, I be making some comparisons between the fictionalized account and historical information and the overall scope of the story.For example, Howard Carter was born in 1874 and was therefore 49 at the time of the opening of King Tutankamun's tomb. He already had a significant career behind him at that time. Carter was cast as a younger man for this series.As for the story line, the overall flow of events was similar to what many people know about historical events, but with more color than a simple statement of facts. Artistic license was taken, given that this four-part series was meant as entertainment, not documentary.In fact, this show led me to read up on some of the events, fictional or otherwise, and it seems that the writer did immerse himself in a number of personal journals and diaries and clearly knew much about the story.I wondered if Evelyn, daughter of Lord Carnarvon, was a real person, and she was indeed quite real and did spent time at the dig site. She was born in 1901 and was therefore 22 at the time of the discovery.I would have liked to have seen more of Howard Carter's life after the discovery, and more about the journey's of the artifacts themselves. As I've already mentioned Carter's earlier life, you can gather that "Tutankhamum" focuses on the years immediately before and after the great discovery.In the end, just as Amadeus wasn't a documentary about Mozart, and this is not a documentary about the discovery of King Tutankamun's tomb, both stories were engaging and thought-provoking.

lcoffing77 I am going to disagree with a number of the reviews posted. I honestly didn't find this "drama" as bad as most. I might be more forgiving than others, but I thought it was a good show. I am not a fan of how the "reality" played out and they didn't come close to "reality" on the archaeology done during this time period, but they did capture the human passion aspect of the players/time. When they discovered the tomb it was not a good time in archaeology:they tore apart mummies/sold them and everything had a price. The science wasn't as important as funding the next dig. So- if you want accurate on that part- find a documentary. If you just want a decent show to watch and learn a bit more about the people involved- this is a reasonable start. It was created as entertainment and for me the ending was week, but I don't regret watching it.

mallaverack It is sometimes understandable why historical dramas based on long-ago events are tampered with in order to add a love story or whatever. But to present the story of Carter's discovery which fascinated the world in such an inaccurate way is inexcusable. It is pathetic. The producers and writers should be ashamed. There is no evidence of the love affair between Carter and Carnarvon's daughter. Carter was 48 yrs old at time of Tut's discovery not some stud in 20s or thereabouts as depicted in this fantasy plot. Carnarvon and his daughter were not in Egypt at the time. They had to travel from England before Carter was prepared to investigate his discovery further - a situation entirely contrary to the warped plot of this TV series. The point is that the incredible story of Carter's discovery already has the ingredients for a spectacular cinematic portrayal. Shame on those responsible for this butchered presentation of the facts.

nematoad I have to agree with the other critics. This is a poor offering. I don't know if finance played a part but the casting just does not fit, and why both Carnarvon and Davis were shown wearing beards mystifies me. They both wore a moustache. I have the photographs to prove it. The location is wrong, trees and bushes in the Valley? Not when I've been there and as others have said the rocks are the wrong colour. They are in fact a creamy white, appearing golden in the sun, not nasty brown. As to where the domestic scenes have been set, true Davis did have a dig house in the West Valley, but as Carnarvon and Davis did not get on I suspect that any visits were brief and they would not have been house mates.The "romantic interest" looks like an afterthought and although the affair between Carter and Evelyn has been described as "speculative" a more accurate description should be "fantasy".No, a missed opportunity to give this fascinating affair the exposure it deserves. There are so many other things wrong with this production I would surely run out of space to describe them. The historical facts are there, it's just ruined by all the false, made up stuff, though I did appreciate the Flinders Petrie sketch, that did point to the eccentricity of the man even if it was a burlesque.Oh, a last observation. It is only a fleeting glimpse but did I detect the modern Egyptian flag being flown in the "Valley? If it was this series is in good company as David Suchet's Poirot also got it wrong in the "Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb" where they also misplaced the Valley of the Kings, this time in Morocco if my memory serves me correctly. Though "Death on the Nile" was filmed in Luxor.