The Mummy (1932)
3/4
Starring: Boris Karloff, Zita Johann, David Manners, Arthur Byron, Edward Van Sloan, Bramwell Fletcher
Not Rated (probably PG for Some Scary Moments)
Ancient Egypt fascinates me. I don't know why. There's just something so alluring and mysterious about the time of the pharaohs that piques my interest. Maybe it's that underneath the fascinating culture and history, there is an element of spooky weirdness that appeals to me. Like reading scary stories under the covers when I should be in bed.
I think that fascination rings true for a lot of people. I mean, to those raised in the Judaeo-Christian tradition, does it get any more strange than removing the organs from the dead and then wrapping them in bandages before burial? Probably, but that's only one of the rituals from Ancient Egypt. In any event, the best movies about mummies tap into that. It's true of the 1932 version as well as the remake from 1999 (don't get me started on that dud of a reboot from a few years ago).
In 1922, British archaeologist Sir Joseph Whemple (Byron) found a well-preserved mummy. But as his colleagues Dr. Muller (Van Sloan) and Ralph Norton (Fletcher) point out, it's an unusual one. His organs have not been removed, and the traditional spells have been scratched out. Only one telling clue remains: Imhotep, the name of the dead man. Also found with the mummy is a big box that Whemple believes may hold the legendary Scroll of Thoth. Muller cautions against opening the box, believing that Ancient Egyptian curses still hold sway. While they argue, the impulsive Ralph opens it up, and what do you know? The mummy comes alive and escapes.
Ten years later, Whemple has left Egypt and sworn never to return. That leaves his son Frank (Manners) to carry on the search for history. But he doesn't have any luck. Just when he is about to return home, a mysterious man named Ardeth Bay points him in the direction of a tomb he claims to be that of an Egyptian princess. Lo and behold, the man was right. But after excavating it, the Whemples believe that there is more to Bay than meets the eye. It soon becomes apparent that Ardeth Bay is the resurrected Imhotep (Karloff), and he has designs on the local beauty, Helen Grosvenor (Johann). Imhotep believes that Helen is the reincarnation of his dead lover, and intends to bring her back.
Anyone who loves the 1999 Indiana Jones homage will recognize a lot of that synopsis. Clearly Stephen Sommers drew plenty of inspiration from this version into his. But Sommers elected to recast all of it according to his own ideas. While names and concepts might be familiar, Sommers used them differently. Here, the tone leads more towards horror. And lacks any special effects whatsoever.
If there's any reason to see this version of "The Mummy," it's Boris Karloff. The screenplay doesn't afford him much latitude, but the English gentleman gives depth and presence to what little he has. He's the most interesting character in the movie, and is solely responsible for the film's spookiest moments (watch his eyes in close-up). Zita Johann gives some spunk and fire to the role of the damsel in distress. Arthur Byron and Edward Van Zan add class as the older intellectuals. David Manners is miscast; he's charming, but he feels like he belongs in a traditional romantic comedy.
The first half of the film is by far the strongest. We don't know the answer to the mystery and Karloff is at his creepiest. Unfortunately, the majority of the second half is delegated to the obligatory romance between Helen and Frank, which is DOA. Not only does it take too long, there's no chemistry between Johann and Manners. And since their romance is a huge underpinning of the second half, it's a big problem.
But at 73 minutes, it's hard to be too critical of this movie's faults. It's not that big of a time commitment and it moves fast (too fast, if you ask me). It's well-made, effectively shot (for the most part) and contains some moments that will give you the heebie-jeebies. It's not "scary" in the traditional sense, but for a horror movie about a mummy, you could do a lot worse. Like the one with Tom Cruise.
Starring: Boris Karloff, Zita Johann, David Manners, Arthur Byron, Edward Van Sloan, Bramwell Fletcher
Not Rated (probably PG for Some Scary Moments)
Ancient Egypt fascinates me. I don't know why. There's just something so alluring and mysterious about the time of the pharaohs that piques my interest. Maybe it's that underneath the fascinating culture and history, there is an element of spooky weirdness that appeals to me. Like reading scary stories under the covers when I should be in bed.
I think that fascination rings true for a lot of people. I mean, to those raised in the Judaeo-Christian tradition, does it get any more strange than removing the organs from the dead and then wrapping them in bandages before burial? Probably, but that's only one of the rituals from Ancient Egypt. In any event, the best movies about mummies tap into that. It's true of the 1932 version as well as the remake from 1999 (don't get me started on that dud of a reboot from a few years ago).
In 1922, British archaeologist Sir Joseph Whemple (Byron) found a well-preserved mummy. But as his colleagues Dr. Muller (Van Sloan) and Ralph Norton (Fletcher) point out, it's an unusual one. His organs have not been removed, and the traditional spells have been scratched out. Only one telling clue remains: Imhotep, the name of the dead man. Also found with the mummy is a big box that Whemple believes may hold the legendary Scroll of Thoth. Muller cautions against opening the box, believing that Ancient Egyptian curses still hold sway. While they argue, the impulsive Ralph opens it up, and what do you know? The mummy comes alive and escapes.
Ten years later, Whemple has left Egypt and sworn never to return. That leaves his son Frank (Manners) to carry on the search for history. But he doesn't have any luck. Just when he is about to return home, a mysterious man named Ardeth Bay points him in the direction of a tomb he claims to be that of an Egyptian princess. Lo and behold, the man was right. But after excavating it, the Whemples believe that there is more to Bay than meets the eye. It soon becomes apparent that Ardeth Bay is the resurrected Imhotep (Karloff), and he has designs on the local beauty, Helen Grosvenor (Johann). Imhotep believes that Helen is the reincarnation of his dead lover, and intends to bring her back.
Anyone who loves the 1999 Indiana Jones homage will recognize a lot of that synopsis. Clearly Stephen Sommers drew plenty of inspiration from this version into his. But Sommers elected to recast all of it according to his own ideas. While names and concepts might be familiar, Sommers used them differently. Here, the tone leads more towards horror. And lacks any special effects whatsoever.
If there's any reason to see this version of "The Mummy," it's Boris Karloff. The screenplay doesn't afford him much latitude, but the English gentleman gives depth and presence to what little he has. He's the most interesting character in the movie, and is solely responsible for the film's spookiest moments (watch his eyes in close-up). Zita Johann gives some spunk and fire to the role of the damsel in distress. Arthur Byron and Edward Van Zan add class as the older intellectuals. David Manners is miscast; he's charming, but he feels like he belongs in a traditional romantic comedy.
The first half of the film is by far the strongest. We don't know the answer to the mystery and Karloff is at his creepiest. Unfortunately, the majority of the second half is delegated to the obligatory romance between Helen and Frank, which is DOA. Not only does it take too long, there's no chemistry between Johann and Manners. And since their romance is a huge underpinning of the second half, it's a big problem.
But at 73 minutes, it's hard to be too critical of this movie's faults. It's not that big of a time commitment and it moves fast (too fast, if you ask me). It's well-made, effectively shot (for the most part) and contains some moments that will give you the heebie-jeebies. It's not "scary" in the traditional sense, but for a horror movie about a mummy, you could do a lot worse. Like the one with Tom Cruise.
Comments
Post a Comment