Lot No. 249
- El episodio se transmitió el 24 dic 2023
- 29min
CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
5.9/10
1.1 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Un grupo de estudiantes de Oxford, realiza un estudio sobre los misterios del Antiguo Egipto. ¿Podrá el horrible saco de huesos conocido como Lote nº 249 cobrar vida gracias a estos experime... Leer todoUn grupo de estudiantes de Oxford, realiza un estudio sobre los misterios del Antiguo Egipto. ¿Podrá el horrible saco de huesos conocido como Lote nº 249 cobrar vida gracias a estos experimentos?Un grupo de estudiantes de Oxford, realiza un estudio sobre los misterios del Antiguo Egipto. ¿Podrá el horrible saco de huesos conocido como Lote nº 249 cobrar vida gracias a estos experimentos?
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
I prefer ghost stories to horror films, there again, I have a soft spot for Frankenstein and Dracula, they'd have made a great gay couple, had there been different social mores and literary convergence when they were written.
This relatively short piece, from the pen and lens of Mark Gatiss is suitably dark and scary, it contains significant Sherlock Holmes associations and unsurprisingly originated from the quill pen of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
Kit Harrington (Smith) a very Victorian pre-Raiders of the Lost Ark hero, with no significant buckle to swash, bangs on the door (supposedly of Holmes before Baker Street), scared stiff, having apparently been followed by an Egyptian Mummy - Lot 249 in an auction - which Bellingham, a foppish student played by Freddie Fox as well as a modest suburb in Lewisham, London, seems intent on bringing to life.
We see the prequel from several weeks before, depicting how this arose.
The scaredy-cat student living in adjacent rooms in the Hallowed Courtyards of Oxford almost drowned, apparently pushed into the river by the Mummy, who does seem intent on causing havoc - primarily at the instigation of Bellingham. Why he should be so obsessed by Egyptology or wish to bring a 40 century old Mummy to life is not made clear, but Conan Doyle was writing at a time of heightened interest in Sphinxes, Pyramids and Mummies.
Gatiss creates a great atmosphere with several dark (both visual and narrative) scenes.
My one objection is the lack of character in the Mummy. King Kong - as different to this as chalk and cheese - nevertheless, a figure who caused fear and panic, did show emotion, bathos, pathos - even affection. With the long history of Egypt, this Mummy might have shown some character, not necessarily doing The Times crossword, but at least discovering the intricacies of Rubik's cube. Why he wanted to terrorise upstanding students in Oxford is unclear.
Ghosts do not have to be bad, although, like politicians and realtors, they generally get a bad press.
This was a charming, scary enjoyable vignette - but I suggest Mummy's form a Union to protect their reputations. They can't all be bad.
This relatively short piece, from the pen and lens of Mark Gatiss is suitably dark and scary, it contains significant Sherlock Holmes associations and unsurprisingly originated from the quill pen of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
Kit Harrington (Smith) a very Victorian pre-Raiders of the Lost Ark hero, with no significant buckle to swash, bangs on the door (supposedly of Holmes before Baker Street), scared stiff, having apparently been followed by an Egyptian Mummy - Lot 249 in an auction - which Bellingham, a foppish student played by Freddie Fox as well as a modest suburb in Lewisham, London, seems intent on bringing to life.
We see the prequel from several weeks before, depicting how this arose.
The scaredy-cat student living in adjacent rooms in the Hallowed Courtyards of Oxford almost drowned, apparently pushed into the river by the Mummy, who does seem intent on causing havoc - primarily at the instigation of Bellingham. Why he should be so obsessed by Egyptology or wish to bring a 40 century old Mummy to life is not made clear, but Conan Doyle was writing at a time of heightened interest in Sphinxes, Pyramids and Mummies.
Gatiss creates a great atmosphere with several dark (both visual and narrative) scenes.
My one objection is the lack of character in the Mummy. King Kong - as different to this as chalk and cheese - nevertheless, a figure who caused fear and panic, did show emotion, bathos, pathos - even affection. With the long history of Egypt, this Mummy might have shown some character, not necessarily doing The Times crossword, but at least discovering the intricacies of Rubik's cube. Why he wanted to terrorise upstanding students in Oxford is unclear.
Ghosts do not have to be bad, although, like politicians and realtors, they generally get a bad press.
This was a charming, scary enjoyable vignette - but I suggest Mummy's form a Union to protect their reputations. They can't all be bad.
Is it possible that a mummy, known only as lot number 249, is responsible for a series of misdemeanors at an Oxford College.
They chose a great story, suitably macabre, Conan Doyle perhaps inspired by Britain's fascination with Ancient Egypt, and all of the discoveries. Who knows what films and stories were inspired by this.
This was pretty good, more a ghost story, less of a horror, the latter could have been ramped up a little bit. Atmospheric enough, and considering the thirty minute run time, they managed to tell the story
I've read that this may well be the final Ghost story from Mark Gatiss, which is a shame, when they've been good, they've been enjoyable, this was one of the better recent offerings.
As you'd expect from this series, it looks great, and was well acted, Kit Harrington was excellent, great actor, Freddie Fox also impressed.
7/10.
They chose a great story, suitably macabre, Conan Doyle perhaps inspired by Britain's fascination with Ancient Egypt, and all of the discoveries. Who knows what films and stories were inspired by this.
This was pretty good, more a ghost story, less of a horror, the latter could have been ramped up a little bit. Atmospheric enough, and considering the thirty minute run time, they managed to tell the story
I've read that this may well be the final Ghost story from Mark Gatiss, which is a shame, when they've been good, they've been enjoyable, this was one of the better recent offerings.
As you'd expect from this series, it looks great, and was well acted, Kit Harrington was excellent, great actor, Freddie Fox also impressed.
7/10.
Mark Gatiss should be applauded for keeping the BBC Christmas ghost story tradition going in a time of budget cuts. I fear that this might be the last for some years by the BBC.
At least Gatiss has skated around the low budget by gathering a classy guest cast in this short story by Arthur Conan Doyle.
Medical student Smith (Kit Harington) gets involved with unearthly happenings at his Oxford college.
A foreign student Monkhouse Lee nearly ended up dead. He had fallen out with fellow student Bellingham (Freddie Fox.) The louche Bellingham is an expert on Egyptology. He is in possession of a creepy mummified body and a strange Egyptian manuscript that he obtained from an auction.
Smith decides to confront Bellingham and get him to end his revenge on those who have crossed him.
It is not quite a mummy story, although a shadowy mummy coming to life is heavily implied.
It really harks back to the 1970s BBC ghost stories strand. There is plenty of atmosphere, although Gatiss cannot avoid putty a naughty easter egg with a teasing Sherlock Holmes mash up.
At least Gatiss has skated around the low budget by gathering a classy guest cast in this short story by Arthur Conan Doyle.
Medical student Smith (Kit Harington) gets involved with unearthly happenings at his Oxford college.
A foreign student Monkhouse Lee nearly ended up dead. He had fallen out with fellow student Bellingham (Freddie Fox.) The louche Bellingham is an expert on Egyptology. He is in possession of a creepy mummified body and a strange Egyptian manuscript that he obtained from an auction.
Smith decides to confront Bellingham and get him to end his revenge on those who have crossed him.
It is not quite a mummy story, although a shadowy mummy coming to life is heavily implied.
It really harks back to the 1970s BBC ghost stories strand. There is plenty of atmosphere, although Gatiss cannot avoid putty a naughty easter egg with a teasing Sherlock Holmes mash up.
This is my least favourite of the revival 21st century BBC 'Ghost Story for Christmas' TV specials with very few admirable qualities but a range of unsatisfactory elements.
Characters are boorishly two dimensional and played with an according simplicity by the small cast. The production fails to generate a sense of authenticity which leaves it unable to function as a ghost story of a personal experience of the intrusion into the world of a malignant "other" force.
It is written in a way that suggests that initial on paper cleverness did not translate to the finished screenplay with ideas that should have been jettisoned after writing them up to a complete script being retained into production.
The mangling of a Sherlock Holmes cameo where Holmes fails dreadfully, indeed completely, at aiding a friend in need, unable to meet this request in any way leaves an odd smell behind. This is due to writing that should have not gone past a first draft.
This series seems to be running out of steam and this installment was so close to unwatchable that I couldn't imagine ever making a repeat viewing whereas some of its stablemates could sustain a second watch.
There are signs to me that the BBC can only make drama by rote, or by checklist, and that it is now a defacto Sunday School whereby the plebs can receive positive reinforcement from their social betters in the form of social morality parables delivered as inane TV programming. There is little other explanation for the writing and production decisions made in this adaptation that I can fathom, or speculatively guess at.
Certainly there is no sign of a ghost story motif in this: no sufficient effort is made to establish the normal, or natural, tempo for the world on view, as such inauthentic invasions don't seem weird and unsettling, we are just told that they are by explicit character exclamatory expositional dialogue. Without this sense of creeping weirdness into a hitherto normalcy there is no sense of growing fear, threat, menace for the suffering characters to endure in their mental experiences until the monster is finally made manifest to them and causes their ultimate dred and possibly expiry.
There is however sign aplenty that this has been put together to satisfy production criterias instigated in order to create a morally satisfactory cumulative effect on the audience: cognitive reinforcement of good and bad values. Sunday Schooling by TV drama.
As such it is both dim and dreary.
I rate at 2.5/10 because there were a handful of moments when the actors did enough with the dreck they were playing to hold my interest and suspend my disbelief enough to anticipate what will happen next in a scene. This seemed to me to be an occasional virtue of the actors rather than the writing or direction.
Characters are boorishly two dimensional and played with an according simplicity by the small cast. The production fails to generate a sense of authenticity which leaves it unable to function as a ghost story of a personal experience of the intrusion into the world of a malignant "other" force.
It is written in a way that suggests that initial on paper cleverness did not translate to the finished screenplay with ideas that should have been jettisoned after writing them up to a complete script being retained into production.
The mangling of a Sherlock Holmes cameo where Holmes fails dreadfully, indeed completely, at aiding a friend in need, unable to meet this request in any way leaves an odd smell behind. This is due to writing that should have not gone past a first draft.
This series seems to be running out of steam and this installment was so close to unwatchable that I couldn't imagine ever making a repeat viewing whereas some of its stablemates could sustain a second watch.
There are signs to me that the BBC can only make drama by rote, or by checklist, and that it is now a defacto Sunday School whereby the plebs can receive positive reinforcement from their social betters in the form of social morality parables delivered as inane TV programming. There is little other explanation for the writing and production decisions made in this adaptation that I can fathom, or speculatively guess at.
Certainly there is no sign of a ghost story motif in this: no sufficient effort is made to establish the normal, or natural, tempo for the world on view, as such inauthentic invasions don't seem weird and unsettling, we are just told that they are by explicit character exclamatory expositional dialogue. Without this sense of creeping weirdness into a hitherto normalcy there is no sense of growing fear, threat, menace for the suffering characters to endure in their mental experiences until the monster is finally made manifest to them and causes their ultimate dred and possibly expiry.
There is however sign aplenty that this has been put together to satisfy production criterias instigated in order to create a morally satisfactory cumulative effect on the audience: cognitive reinforcement of good and bad values. Sunday Schooling by TV drama.
As such it is both dim and dreary.
I rate at 2.5/10 because there were a handful of moments when the actors did enough with the dreck they were playing to hold my interest and suspend my disbelief enough to anticipate what will happen next in a scene. This seemed to me to be an occasional virtue of the actors rather than the writing or direction.
A young college student buys a mummy that he brings to life to do his bidding.
I haven't read the short story, but I had seen this adapted before as a segment of "Tales from the Darkside: The Movie" with Christian Slater and then-unknowns Steve Buscemi and Julianne Moore. I'm guessing Hollywood took some creative liberties -- but the BBC version did too, dragging in Sherlock Holmes and making a lead character gay.
Harrington is way too old to be playing a college student (I thought he was a professor at first), the characters are all utterly one-dimensional, the motivation for the mummy-attacks are murky at best, and most importantly, there were zero scares. The performances weren't bad given what they had to work with, and there's a nice British atmosphere, but generally it was flat and unmemorable. Plus, the Holmes cameo was absolutely pointless. That's a shame, I really wanted to like this.
As soon as I finished, I rewatched the "Darkside" segment, which I hadn't seen in over 30 years (it left a lasting impression though). The story is a little different, being relocated to the USA circa 1990, but it has everything that this version is lacking: strong characterizations, a clear motive, tension, and scares. The twist ending is equally corny, but at least it's logical, and it even runs a few minutes shorter than the BBC's adaptation.
I haven't read the short story, but I had seen this adapted before as a segment of "Tales from the Darkside: The Movie" with Christian Slater and then-unknowns Steve Buscemi and Julianne Moore. I'm guessing Hollywood took some creative liberties -- but the BBC version did too, dragging in Sherlock Holmes and making a lead character gay.
Harrington is way too old to be playing a college student (I thought he was a professor at first), the characters are all utterly one-dimensional, the motivation for the mummy-attacks are murky at best, and most importantly, there were zero scares. The performances weren't bad given what they had to work with, and there's a nice British atmosphere, but generally it was flat and unmemorable. Plus, the Holmes cameo was absolutely pointless. That's a shame, I really wanted to like this.
As soon as I finished, I rewatched the "Darkside" segment, which I hadn't seen in over 30 years (it left a lasting impression though). The story is a little different, being relocated to the USA circa 1990, but it has everything that this version is lacking: strong characterizations, a clear motive, tension, and scares. The twist ending is equally corny, but at least it's logical, and it even runs a few minutes shorter than the BBC's adaptation.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaWhen 'The Friend' says, "I stand flat-footed upon the ground... No ghosts need apply," this refers to what Sherlock Holmes said in the story The Adventure of the Sussex Vampire, where a man consults Holmes because he fears his own wife may be a vampire, and Holmes endeavours to show that there is a natural explanation for the wife's behaviour.
- ConexionesVersion of Sueño satánico (1990)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- Номер 249
- Locaciones de filmación
- Rothamsted Manor, West Common, Harpenden, Hertfordshire, Inglaterra, Reino Unido(Old College, Oxford)
- Productora
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta