Boris Karloff established himself as Hollywood’s King Of Horror with his performance as Imhotep, the undead Egyptian High Priest seeking the reincarnation of his long-lost love, the Princess Anck-es-en-Amon. Romanian stage actress Zita Johann co-stars as Helen Grosvenor, caught in a love triangle between a 3,700-year-old dead man who wants to kill her in order to make her undead like himself, and a young archaeologist drawn to her romantically because she reminds him of the corpse he’s been investigating.
For the record, I find the 3,700-year-old dead guy infinitely the less creepy.
#1 by Dave Causey on November 21, 2008 - 2:49 am
Quote
Awesome review,Lyz! “The Mummy'” is my favorite of the Universal Classics.I was utterly horrified by it as a child,and I still find it both frighting and genuinely moving. “No man EVER suffered as I have for you!”-that line gives me chills.
I’m always impressed with the background you give on the films you review. Could you make a recommendation of some books to read to learn more about films of the era? Thanks!
#2 by MatthewF on November 21, 2008 - 5:37 am
Quote
So which one’s played by Brendan Fraser? I didn’t see him in the photos.
#3 by Blake Matthews on November 21, 2008 - 6:48 am
Quote
I bought the DVD set of all the Universal Mummy films before I set off for Brazil…and then forgot to pack it!!!! Curses!!!
#4 by El Santo on November 21, 2008 - 7:56 am
Quote
“Could you make a recommendation of some books to read to learn more about films of the era?”
I’m not Lyz, but an excellent starting point for students of antique Hollywood horror is The Monster Show, by David Skal. Theoretically, Skal covers the whole history, from the American release of The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari up to the early 1990’s (when the book was originally published), but the farther he gets from 1931– in either direction– the less interested, and thus the less useful and informative, he becomes. Skal also wrote a book just about Dracula, entitled Hollywood Gothic, which I recommend as well.
#5 by Camassia on November 21, 2008 - 8:33 am
Quote
Long-time reader, first-time commenter … great review, as usual. I saw this movie on TV some years back and was pleasantly surprised by how good it was. Excellent cinematography. Also, this wasn’t long after I suffered through Coppola’s version of Dracula, so I thought, “Ah, this is the *correct* way to do that reincarnated-love story!”
#6 by MatthewF on November 21, 2008 - 8:47 am
Quote
Don’t know how available this book is around the world, but it’s very good: American Gothic by Johnathon Rigby (though it does get a little list-y at times). It covers Hollywood horror up to the 60s.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/American-Gothic-Sixty-Horror-Cinema/dp/1905287259/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1227278694&sr=1-5
Actually slightly better is his earlier book ‘English Gothic’ which covers the whole Hammer-esque genre.
#7 by Dave Causey on November 21, 2008 - 2:20 pm
Quote
El Santo,MatthewF,thanks for the recommendations! 😀
#8 by lyzard on November 21, 2008 - 2:48 pm
Quote
Darn time difference! Hi, Dave – thanks very much! There are some good books on that era around now, a number of them available through McFarland Press. Some are just about the films and the people, others are cultural studies. The Skal book that Santo mentioned (also his “Screams Of Reason”, which is about science/mad science), also anything by Gregory Mank (books on the film history of Frankenstein, and on Lugosi and Karloff) or Paul Jensen.
#9 by El Santo on November 21, 2008 - 3:16 pm
Quote
Oh– I should also mention Midnight Marquee Press. They’re a little company based in Baltimore dedicated expressly to publishing books on horror, sci-fi, and fantasy cinema, with a special focus on the 30’s and 40’s. They’ve got biographies of Bela Lugosi, Boris Karloff, Dwight Frye, and a bunch of others, including a composite volume covering Lionel Atwill, Colin Clive, and George Zucco.
#10 by lyzard on November 21, 2008 - 3:34 pm
Quote
Welcome, Camassia!
You are so right! (Oddly enough, I have another version of how to do this wrong in my current ‘to review’ pile…groannn…)
The line between “romantic” and “totally icky” can be a very fine one, of course, and I think The Mummy explores that grey area as well as any film ever did. I must confess, though – and speaking as a woman who has signally failed to find a man reliable enough even to put the garbage out on the right night wthout being reminded – there *is* a little voice inside me that thinks maybe Helen should just lie down on that altar and let Imhotep get on with it…
#11 by El Santo on November 21, 2008 - 3:49 pm
Quote
Believe it or not, I’d like to nominate Blacula as another movie that gets the reincarnated romance thing right. Part of what makes it work is that the movie never really establishes whether there’s any genuine reincarnation going on, or whether it’s just wishful thinking on the vampire’s part. Mostly, though, it works because it’s so hard to imagine any woman not being swept off her feet by William Marshall, who exerts more personal magnetism in that movie than anybody this side of the young Christopher Lee (and possibly more than even Lee himself). And incredibly enough, they don’t blow it in the sequel! The second time around, Mamuwalde remains true to the memory of his dead wife even when he has Pam Grier dangled in front of him.
#12 by Dave Causey on November 21, 2008 - 5:27 pm
Quote
Lyz,thanks for the recommendations! Time to check Amazon………….
#13 by Camassia on November 21, 2008 - 8:34 pm
Quote
Actually I agree with you, El Santo — I thought Blacula was a more successful take on that idea also. That was more on the “romantic” vein, while Imhotep leaned more toward “icky” (for me at least), but in each case that was true to who they were before they became monsters. The problem with Vlad/Dracula was that he was already impaling people alive before he was a vampire, but they still tried to make him a heartthrob.
#14 by supersonic on November 22, 2008 - 8:03 pm
Quote
You don’t take the garbage out on garbage pickup day, you carry it out when the inside can is full. (Or a day or two or five after that.)
Haven’t read the review yet, I’ll just save time by writing “Great review, Lyz!” now.
#15 by KeithA on November 24, 2008 - 4:33 pm
Quote
What Blacula does right — as does The Mummy — is really make you feel for the title monster. The tragedy of their situation in both films is expertly communicated. In contrast, all I really wanted to do to Gary Oldman’s Dracula was punch him in the face. At no point did I empathize with him. Also, it’s hard to believe someone waiting hundreds of years to end up with the whining, bland reward that is Winona Ryder. You waited hundreds of years for THAT??? Dracula, you do realize Monica Bellucci is at home in your castle, naked, right?
#16 by Al Bruno III on November 25, 2008 - 1:32 pm
Quote
Thank you again for another great review. As always I feel a little bit smarter after reading Liz work, but then I go and watch some reality tv and I feel dumber again. At least it all evens out.
Way back in 70’s when people were buy super 8 projectors to watch ‘highlight’ reels fot their favorite films my Dad had all the post Karis era mummy films and I loved watching them. Though I saw the orginal version many times as a kid I never really appreciated it until I was older.
#17 by Dave Causey on December 24, 2008 - 3:06 pm
Quote
Hey Lyz,El Santo-I just finished Skal’s ‘The Monster Show’ last night. Thank you both for recommending it. I learned a lot,and enjoyed reading it. Unfortunately,the Skal you mentioned about movie scientists seems to be out of print….