Lot No. 249

Why does Mark Gatiss have the monopoly on doing these Ghost Stories for Christmas? Surely someone else should be given a chance to show what they can do?

I haven't particularly enjoyed any of his, and I really don't think they should be associated with the classic Ghost Stories for Christmas. The only thing of his I rated was Crooked House and that's some time ago.

This latest one seemed very obvious and ham fisted with no tension built up at all, plus the added campness didn't work at all.

Perhaps it's the stories chosen that are part of the problem, maybe opening the net to other authors might help?

Another failure from the unenterprising pen of Mark Gatiss, whose monopoly of the whole 'Ghost Stories for Christmas' brand has long outstayed its welcome. This one eschews the usual M. R. James for an adaptation of one of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's horror stories about a marauding mummy. I've read the story and loved it, but this is a pitiful attempt at an adaptation: there's no atmosphere, no depth and no workable scares at all, just a guy in bandages popping up to go boo. You can't fault the cast members, who work really hard at giving it their all, but you can fault the man response for writing and directing this tiresome nonsense.

Now, I haven't read the Conan Doyle story, but I am familiar with the story from "Tales from the Darkside: The Movie" anthology. And thus, of course I had to sit down and watch this 2023 take on the story and see what writer and directors Mark Gatiss had to offer here with this short film.

Again, while I am not familiar with the original Conan Doyle story, I don't know how true Mark Gatiss stayed to the source material, or how much liberty of rewriting he took here. Regardless, sitting down to watch "Lot No. 249" for the purpose of being entertained, I will say that writer and director Mark Gatiss succeeded in doing so.

I was only familiar with Kit Harington on the cast list in "Lot No. 249", but I have to say that the entire cast ensemble put on good performances. It was a small cast ensemble, but they carried the film well. I was also particularly impressed with actor Colin Ryan's performance.

Visually then "Lot No. 249" was good. The special effects were simplistic, but to the point and very functional. And that certainly spoke well in favor of the overall impression of the short film.

My rating of "Lot No. 249" lands on a six out of ten stars.

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.

Another of Gatiss's flaccid christmas chills from a bygone age. Here you have Conan Doyle's short story about a mummy's curse and stretched out to half an hour it definitely feels like a case of "more is less". There's even a clumsy nod to one of Doyle's more obscure characters. Some... detective chap... which feels rum and misjudged. Up there with his "Thomas Thomas" reference from Doctor Who. These specials are only really worth a hoot because of the casting and the strange plummy dialogue. Always period accurate, but rather stiff sounding. Perhaps he should go back into the old comedy or do a Lucifer Box show instead.