User reviews

Boris Karloff plays Imhotep, a cursed Egyptian buried alive 3700-years-ago, returns to life to claim the reincarnation of his lost-love in this Universal classic. Moody, understated and succinct, The Mummy is one of the best films from Universal's classic horror period. Although much of the success can be credited to first time director Karl Freund, who normally worked as a top cinematographer, and the brilliant make-up artist Jack P. Pierce, it is Boris Karloff who gives the film its resonance. As he previously did with the Frankenstein monster, Karloff imbues this character with an aching sense of humanity which was completely absent later incarnations of the Mummy character. Credit must also be given to the able supporting cast including Zita Johann and the always reliable Edward Van Sloan. Now here's a question. Is the film scary by today's standards? I guess I'd have to say not really. However, I just watched this film again after seeing the American version of 'The Grudge.' 'The Grudge' certainly had me jumping more, but which film did I enjoy more? It'd have to be 'The Mummy.'

Another film that puts the basic storyline of Dracula to better use. This time, it's the undead Egyptian priest, I'm-ho-tep (Boris Karloff), who puts the beautiful Helen under his spell. David Manners and Edward Van Sloan both reprise their Dracula roles as the young hero, and the wise old mentor respectively. Van Sloan, who is the only actor to appear in Frankenstein, Dracula and The Mummy, gives his best performance here. Karloff is also quite good as the evil villain, I'm-ho-tep. This remains the only mummy movie that can really be called a suspense film or thriller rather than a monster movie. It's not quite as good as Frankenstein, but it's still one of the better classic horror flicks.

This Universal classic (1933)¨The mummy¨ that ahead many follow-ups was finely directed by Karl Freund with Boris Karloff, Edward Van Sloan , David Manners and it results to be the first and classic rendition of the ¨Mummy¨. As a group of archeologists seeking lost tomb of Egyptian kings at an archeological dig , 1921 , examine a sarcophagus from an unmarked grave , then a macabre mummy is revived after thousands of years . An ancient Egyptian mummy is awakened from his centuries-old sleep when a royal tomb is desecrated . Those suffer consequences their acts , to everyone's regret . So Imhotep (Boris Karloff bearing a heavy and masterly made makeup , as we can almost smell the dust and must) , a 4000-year-old who was disgraced and buried alive is now revived . The very deadly mummy takes avenge on some archaeologist and descendants who desecrated the tomb . Then the scary , sinister mummy revenges himself on those who have defiled his tomb and he attempts to get his aim , heroine Helen (Zita Johann) whom the wrapped one believes is the reincarnation of his long-love Anc-kes-en-Amon , his beloved princess . However , the macabre mummy attacks anyways and suddenly stops when meets the reincarnation of ancient sweet heart .

Horror classic based on the novel by John Balderston with effective atmosphere , sense of awe and wonder along with fine performances . Entertaining blend of thrills , chills , drama , terror and visual are most impressive . Remarkable makeup and eerie scenes make it chilling and frightening . Superb atmosphere , flavorful music , make this one of the best terror movies from Universal , using intelligence and interesting dialogue rather than guts and blood to horrify its audience . In spite of its age this all time classic has lost none of its qualities. Boris is terrific as the terrifying mummy and David Manners is good as an obstinate archaeologist , one of the men he frightens , being attacked by the mummy, as well as Zita Johann as the damsel in distress . The Mummy is masterfully incarnated by Boris Karloff , giving one of his best movie portrayals along with Frankenstein . Boris is almost irrecognisable beneath layers of skillful make-up, undergoing 8 hours of top-notch make-up to transform him into the creepy mummy , being layered on his face filament by filament , and actually giving the impression of having been hidden away for centuries . The motion picture excellently photographed by Charles Stumar in tenebrist cinematography plenty of lights and shades , being very well made under the perfect direction of an expert cinematographer : Karl Freund who made too few appearances in the fimmaker's chair . It marked the direction debut of this famed German cameraman and master of expressionist photography . Rating : Better than average , it's high-power entertaining .

Other pictures about Mummy character are the following ones : the main is this one ¨The mummy (1932) ¨ being the initial appearance of the mummy re-awakened after thousands of years and sequels rapidly ran out the ideas as what to do with him once he was on loose , such as : ¨Mummy's hand (1940) by Christy Cabanne with Dick Foran , Wallace Ford and Cecil Kallaway . ¨The mummy's ghost¨ 1944 by Reginald LeBorg with Lon Chaney Jr , John Carradine , Robert Lowery . ¨The mummy's curse¨ 1944 by Leslie Goodwins with Lon Chaney Jr. , Peter Coe . ¨The mummy¨directed by legend from Hammer Productions Terence Fisher with Peter Cushing , Christopher Lee , Felix Aylmer , Eddie Byrne . It's followed by ¨Mummy's shroud¨(1967) also produced by Hammer Films, directed by John Gilling with Andre Morell and Elizabeth Sellars. The Spanish ¨The mummy's revenge¨ 1973 by Carlos Aured with Paul Naschy or Jacinto Molina , Jack Taylor , Helga Line . And modern updating full of computer generator FX as ¨The mummy¨(1999) by Stephen Sommers with Brendan Fraser , Rachel Weisz , John Hanna , Arnold Vosloo and ¨Mummy returns¨ (2001) with similar players and The Rock . And recent ¨The mummy¨ (2017) with Tom Cruise and Sophie Boutella .

With one of Boris Karloff's numerous acting successes and a production done the way that a horror feature should be made, this is a well-crafted classic of the genre. From the first scene, the right atmosphere is established, and the story is told at an implacable pace that slowly builds up the tension and possibilities.

As he does with his characters in so many of his horror features, Karloff makes "The Mummy" a menacing monster, yet one with enough human motivations to keep him from becoming cartoonish. Karloff's approach, as does the movie as a whole, stimulates the imagination rather than the senses, giving this classic version a depth and permanence that cannot be matched by those more recent adaptations that rely on boring "special" effects and contrived "action" sequences instead of a well-told story with solid characters.

Edward Van Sloan, David Manners, and the rest of the supporting cast also help out. The atmosphere and settings are kept relatively simple, but effective. Naturally, the story is far-fetched, but it has a consistency that makes it relatively easy to suspend disbelief. The picture fits together well, and it remains a solid entry in the list of classic horror films.

The Mummy's place with classic monster movies is down several notches from the likes of Dracula, Frankenstein, and The Wolf Man seeing as the film features very little jolts, a surprisingly slow narrative, and some rather hokey acting by everyone involved. But the film deserves praise for Boris Karloff's unsurprisingly strong performance along with the makeup and set design which make the film an immediate, if minor, success.

The story concerns Imhotep (Boris Karloff), an ancient Egyptian priest who is revived on an archaeological expedition conducted by Joseph Whemple (Arthur Byron), who discovers Imhotep's mummy. Imhotep attempted to resurrect his lover Princess Ankh-es-en-amon, and was mummified alive as a result. Joseph, much to the dismay of his friend Dr. Muller (Edward Van Sloan), reads an ancient Egyptian script that brings Imhotep back to life, which leads to the mummy roaming the area of Cairo to find his long-lost love.

Karl Freund's direction here is extremely meticulous - a trait many of these older monster films possessed. Freund's direction is very focused on providing efficient light and specific character placement, which at least shows a distinct level of alertness on part of the filmmaker.

If only director Freund and writer John L. Balderston had realized The Mummy was also a monster film instead of solely a slowburn drama. This is the kind of thriller that remembers it is part of the horror genre almost fifteen minutes before it's over, leading to an identifiable panic to try and include some scares before the entire opportunity is missed. Because of this, The Mummy is redundant and not very frightening or even remotely eerie.

As a drama and a parable about revisiting and tampering with history, I'll say The Mummy succeeds on that level. Universal monster movies seemed to always include some sort of realization or moral and this one in particular kind of keeps the film together and makes its existence as a drama more justifiable. However, marketed and released like a monster film, this poises an odd issue. When we have a film with its title character occupying roughly two minutes in the film, than this is a problem.

However, when we do see the mummy, the film becomes a bit more satisfying. Karloff's makeup job is extraordinary, and his acting, throughout the whole film, is the glue of the film. I don't critique acting much because I feel a good story is made by much more than such a thing, and to waste time by saying "this guy was good, this guy was bad" makes for a lame, overly-subjective, general review. But Karloff works in the regard that he is a natural screen presence. His modesty (such as saying that anyone could've done his job in Frankenstein) only makes him shine more.

The Mummy is an interesting piece of history, well-directed, mostly well-acted, but falls short of monster movie standards due to its lame expository and reliance on drama rather than on tone and exemplified eeriness.

Starring: Boris Karloff, Arthur Byron, and Edward Van Sloan. Directed by: Karl Freund.

Boris Karloff stars in the title role of this well regarded Universal horror favourite. He plays Imhotep, who is resurrected in modern day Egypt and who goes about seeking the reincarnation of his long ago love. That woman is Helen Grosvenor (Zita Johann), a half- English / half-Egyptian woman who is also romantically pursued by Frank Whemple (David Manners), son of archaeologist Sir Joseph Whemple (Arthur Byron).

Stylishly directed by cameraman Karl Freund, "The Mummy" is a master work in under statement. You won't see a bandage clad Karloff slooowly shamble after his intended victims, a cliché originated in subsequent mummy movies. The film is mostly noteworthy for the actors' subtle, chilling villainy, and his excellent makeup by the talented Jack P. Pierce (who goes uncredited). Johanns' exotic beauty is utilized well, and overall the cast is very fine indeed. It's always a treat to see Edward Van Sloan in these Universal horrors; here he plays Sir Josephs' associate Dr. Muller. Young Bramwell Fletcher has the memorable role, and performance, as the foolish, headstrong man who puts into motion the means of resurrecting Imhotep; he also has the films' most memorable line of dialogue. Noble Johnson, as a servant referred to only as The Nubian, has a powerful screen presence.

Solid atmosphere is a heavy asset, as well as some believable sets created by Willy Pogany. And Imhotep is one of those villains whom you can't entirely hate, because everything he's doing, he's doing in the name of love.

Seven out of 10.

A memorable classic that provided a horror icon to join the likes of FRANKENSTEIN. A team of British archaeologists raid an Egyptian tomb in 1921. By way of a curse, a 4000 year old mummified priest comes to life and searches for his equally dead soul mate.

Without all the luxury of million dollar special effects, this piece of black & white film has thrilled and chilled for generations.

The legendary Boris Karloff leads a cast featuring Edward Van Sloan, David Manners, James Crane, Zita Johnson and Arthur Byron.

Although frequently reinterpreted, the original 1932 THE MUMMY remains the most intriguing film version of a story inspired by both 1920s archaeological finds and the 1931 Bela Lugosi Dracula: when an over-eager archaeologist reads an incantation from an ancient scroll, he unexpectedly reanimates a mysterious mummy--who then seeks reunion with the princess for whom he died thousands of years earlier and ultimately finds his ancient love reincarnated in modern-day Egypt.

Less a typical horror film than a Gothic romance with an Egyptian setting, THE MUMMY has few special effects of any kind and relies primarily upon atmosphere for impact--and this it has in abundance: although leisurely told, the film possesses a darkly romantic, dreamlike quality that lingers in mind long after the film is over. With one or two exceptions, the cast plays with remarkable restraint, with Boris Karloff as the resurrected mummy and Zita Johann (a uniquely beautifully actress) standouts in the film. The sets are quite remarkable, and the scenes in which Karloff permits his reincarnated lover to relive the ancient past are particularly effective.

Kids raised on wham-bam action and special effects films will probably find the original THE MUMMY slow and uninteresting, but the film's high quality and disquieting atmosphere will command the respect of both fans of 1930s horror film and the more discerning viewer. Of all the 1930s Universal Studio horror films, THE MUMMY is the most subtle--and the one to which I personally return most often.

Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer

Everyone is familiar with the story of the Mummy. He wants to revive his long lost love. Not nearly as graphic as the modern version, we can enjoy the story with the always interesting Boris Karloff.

The mummy appears only briefly, and Karloff assumes the character Ardath Bey. But , we know he is Imhotep. His goal is to get Helen Grosvenor (Zita Johann), who he believes is the reincarnation of Anck-es-en-Amon.

Now, one may yearn for the beauty of Rachel Weisz in skimpy Egyptian outfits, but this classic is superior overall because of the skill of the actors.

This is probably not the last version we shall see.

I love these Universal horror movies. This one is all atmosphere. The lighting, the focus on Karloff's eyes and his threatening persona carry the film. When I was in elementary school (my kids would say not long after this film was made), I had another kid scare the daylights out of me by describing the internment of the Egyptian rulers. The taking of the body, perfuming it, placing it in a room full of gold, then killing the slaves so that only the priests would know the actual resting place of the body. There was also the bit about being wrapped alive for burial. I'll tell you.

The effect of that story, which is portrayed in the movie, put a bigger scare into me than any movie I've ever seen. Since this one was really the only one we would ever see on television, I watched it every time I could. Isn't it interesting that both the Lugosi "Dracula" use a quotation from "Swan Lake" as a theme song. I've always wondered why that is. It is certainly eerie and as the credits roll, it builds in intensity. I was told once that Tchaikovsky would probably do movie soundtracks if he were alive today. Pardon my digressions. It is interesting that the mummy (as a fully wrapped personage) really doesn't appear after the beginning sequence--we just know that old Boris is in the process of decay and will eventually be sent to his eternal reward. As usual, the scientists and those who should know, carelessly leave the young woman unattended and he makes his move. The threatening suavity of Karloff is the high point of the movie. I feel the world received such a gift when these films were made. It is a delight, full of frightening images and classic moments.

In 1921, an archaeological expedition led by Sir Joseph Whemple (Arthur Byron) finds the mummy of an ancient Egyptian high priest named Imhotep (Boris Karloff). An inspection of the mummy by Whemple's friend Dr. Muller (Edward Van Sloan), reveals that Imhotep was condemned to death not only in this life, but also in the next hinting at some transgression. Along with Imhotep is a casket with a curse engraved upon it, against the warnings of Dr. Muller an over eager assistant opens the casket and reads aloud the scroll inside that causes Imhotep to come to life leaving the assistant in a state of madness. Ten years later, Imhotep has assimilated into a mysterious Egyptian historian named Ardeth Bey. He calls upon Sir Joseph's son Frank (David Manners) and Professor Pearson (Leonard Mudie) and shows them where to dig to find the tomb of the princess Anck-su-namun. After locating the tomb, the archaeologists present its treasures to the Cairo Museum, where Ardeth soon encounters Helen Grosvenor (Zita Johann), a half-Egyptian woman whom Ardeth has nefarious plans for.

Released in 1932, The Mummy was the first incarnation of Universal's ancient Egyptian themed movie monster that inspired four follow-up films as well as an Abbott and Costello send up. While the film received mixed reviews upon initial release, it was a financial success. The movie isn't as strong as its contemporaries like Dracula, Invisible Man, or even Frankenstein, but it does have a certain level of atmosphere as well as a strong performance from Boris Karloff.

Karloff is really good as Ardeth Bey/The Mummy playing the character as a dark romantic figure in line with Dracula in contrast to his previous year's performance as Frankenstein's monster. While Karloff is threatening in the role, he plays Ardeth with a certain level of mystique that makes him simultaneously alluring with so strong chemistry between him and co-star Zita Johann. What isn't as great here is the story. I think there's a lack of a strong protagonist in the film with both Frank and Joseph Whemple being rather underwhelming and Dr. Muller is just kind of there. There's also not much tension in a lot of scenes as modern day (at the time) Cairo is just too bright and busy of a place to elicit any true feelings of isolation or unease. Even the ultimate resolution of the film doesn't really have anything to do with our characters and is a literal Deus Ex Machina.

There's a level of historical curiosity to The Mummy and a lot of films owe a huge debt to its existence, but it's easy to see why reviews were mixed at the time. While Karloff's performance is both threatening and darkly romantic, there's a lack of much in the way of drive or a compelling protagonist for Karloff to square off against. The movie also has trouble figuring out how to tie itself up and relies on a rather underwhelming ending. Not my favorite Universal Monster film, but there's some merit to it.

Having recently seen the 1999 remake, I realized just how powerful Karloff's portrayal of Imhotep/Ardath Bey truly is. Without fancy effects or CGI, without an $80,000,000 budget, with little more than dry-looking make-up, a doleful stare, and that wonderful, lisping voice, Karloff created a monster that will endure long after the rental copies of the remake have shed their metal oxide coatings. Karl Freund, the director, was one of Germany's finest cameramen and this was his first film as a director. Employing the "less is more" theory of film-making, he keeps the mummy a very mysterious and deadly creature. Never does the mummy stroll up to someone, working them into a corner to strangle them. No, he just reaches out with his mind, killing people from miles away. Finally, the flashback scene is one of the best, done in "silent film" style with music and Karloff supplying a morbid voiceover. Sadly, Universal cut the flashback short before the mummy had a chance to tell about chasing the re-incarnated princess throughout time. Some stills survive and Henry Victor still gets credit as "The Saxon Warrior".

Greedy archaeologists in Egypt unearth both a mummified corpse and an ancient scroll which foretells disaster; soon, the mummy has come back to life and wreaks havoc. Deliberately-paced mood piece from Universal hopes to attain the dreamy, surreal qualities attributed to "Dracula" and "Frankenstein", but the script doesn't have much weight to it. The narrative is thin and the pacing is drowsy for a thriller, though Boris Karloff's presence as the monster certainly gives the picture a boost. Directing debut for Karl Freund who, the year before, was the cinematographer on "Dracula"; he knows a great deal about atmosphere, but a livelier touch within the scenario--an offer of suspense for the audience--might have been even more successful. Followed by a slew of unofficial sequels; remade in 1959 and 1999. **1/2 from ****

I'm a big nerd, I find analytics interesting regarding my viewing activity and I noticed that I had nothing at all from 1932 so The Mummy was a welcome addition.

This is where The Mummy franchise truly began and was essentially where The Mummy (1999) came from.

Starring original horror icon Boris Karloff as Imhotep the mummy who returns from the grave seeking the reincarnation of his beloved this is where it all began but did it deliver early on?

For me The Mummy is a mixed bag. Yes it was highly original for it's time and looks surprisingly good but the performances are lacking and the finale is blunt and very poorly constructed.

I'll give it this, it's considerably better than it's 2017 remake which was a true embarassment that took a simple concept and turned it into overblown Hollywood garbage.

A classic, but not overly enjoyable (For me at least)

The Good:

Looks incredible considering its age

The Bad:

Acting has certainly improved since the 1930's

Sudden ending

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

Though the body rots, eyes stay perfectly intact

Even in the humble beginnings of horror cinema, the pets still had to die

Karl Freund, who photographed some of the most memorable silent films made both in this country and Germany, turned director only twice in his career. He directed Peter Lorre in MAD LOVE (1935) and Boris Karloff in this film I am about to discuss. Following FRANKENSTEIN and THE OLD DARK HOUSE the public knew it liked Boris Karloff but he had been silent in his two biggest roles. When this movie was released they flocked to the cinema to hear him speak (evidently they had missed THE MIRACLE MAN, NIGHT WORLD, BUSINESS AND PLEASURE and the other minor roles he appeared in while FRANKENSTEIN was becoming a hit). His voice was no disappointment and neither was his performance in this picture. Director Freund handles many important scenes as if he were directing a silent film . . .and it WORKS! The scene of Im-Ho-Tep returning to life is masterful, as is the flashback sequence where he shows his reincarnated princess just what became of him. David Manners is a far more practical hero in this film than he was in DRACULA (and he is not hampered by having to wear those ridiculous knickerbockers) and Edward van Sloan is fabulous yet again. Watch for Noble Johnson showing off his muscular frame as the Nubian servant. Jack Pierce's makeup is nothing short of fantastic; what he did with gum cotton and collodion was truly masterful. The photography is very well done also. One scene where the camera flashpans away from Im-Ho-Tep and over the rooftops of Cairo coming to rest on Helen Grosvenor is truly Germanic. A similar scene appears in FAUST (1926), and also in SVENGALI (1931). Red Rock Canyon substitutes for ancient Egypt but we always believe we are seeing just what we are supposed to be seeing. This is a very subtle film, and all the more scary because if its subtlety. Now shall we discuss MAD LOVE?

I sincerely recommend that everyone watch a movie from this era every once in a while. It is quite spectacular to see how movies have changed but to also see how much of this era is still visible in the movies of today. The Mummy is, in many ways, a great foray into the movies of the olden days, as well as into the horror genre and its early days.

So far, I have seen Dracula and Frankenstein out of the old Universal Monsters films. Both were better than The Mummy. However, this film still has a lot to offer and has a lot of good things going for it. The best part, by far, is the incredible performance by Boris Karloff. If it weren't for his captivating performance, this movie would be nowhere near as good as it is. The slow and deliberate movements, the carefully chosen words, and that piercing stare he has, make The Mummy a worthwhile watch almost on their own. However, that is not the only good thing. If you happen to be a fan of ancient Egyptian mythology (as I am), this film will be right up your alley. Those themes are heavily covered, as they should be, and really bring an added level of intrigue to the film.

The biggest problem with The Mummy is the lack of tension. Unfortunately the movie never quite manages to create any of it and as such, even the fairly short run time of 73 minutes, does, at times, feel quite long. Another problem I found, is the lack of any scary elements. Although it is an old film, 88 years old to be precise, I would've liked to have seen a bit more horror in it. I think that both Dracula and Frankenstein managed this better. Indeed, the scariest part of this movie is the laughter of Bramwell Fletcher in the very beginning. Also, worth mentioning, is the lack of the actual creature that we would call 'The Mummy'. Apart from one scene in the first minutes of the movie, our linen-wrapped friend is nowhere to be seen.

Perhaps, if the actual monster itself had had a bigger part, or the movie had managed to a bit more frightening or tense, The Mummy might very well be one of the best in the Universal Monsters series. As it stands, though, it is still a fine film if you are looking to enter a completely different world and era of film. Or if you are simply looking to see how the horror genre began.

This is first and original The Mummy, a story where a mummy is brought back to life by a spell and goes on stalking a woman whom he believes is his reincarnated lover. It's not as fast-paced as Dracula and Frankenstein, but the movie does get to the point of the missing mummy and the curse he has placed on several people. Boris Karloff gave a creepy and foreboding portrayal of the creature - his magical powers and his freaky eyes were enough to creep anybody out.

Zita Johann played the female lead and the Mummy's lover Helen Grosvenor very nicely. David Manners gave a little awkward and emotionless performance Frank Whemple, as I thought he tried to force himself to do be more romantic or dramatic in scenes where appropriate.

There is little overall character development and the film would wouldn't be too scary by today's standards; however, it's still a classic horror movie of its own.

Grade B-

I was pleasantly surprised by this old classic. I watched this again for the first time since I was a small boy. Back in the days before cable, one of the three networks would air old monster movies on the weekend near midnight. I still remember The Mummy, and curiosity caused me to revisit this title from 1932. I very much enjoyed Boris Karloff's performance on the Mummy. The majority of his performance was as the embodiment of the Mummy's spirit Im-Ho-Tep in contemporary 1932 Egypt. Ho-Tep had been buried alive for 3700 years before being reanimated by a bumbling archaeologist. It was pretty cool to hear Karloff utilize his voice and a leering stare to intimidate those who stood in his way. I enjoyed the image of his staring directly into the cameras lens, and then a shift in lighting to highlight his hypnotic eyes. The special effect work was pretty clever and I thought an extremely well done job was executed in creating The Mummy's aged face. I enjoyed seeing Karloff's wrinkled visage as the Mummy, but was surprised that the Mummy was only on screen for a very short period. Loved it when he open his eye after the archaeologist read the ancient curse. I had assumed that to be the progenitor of such a classic movie villain, the Mummy would have more menace, more of a important part as a fully realized embodiment of evil and thought that the monster would have much more time on screen.

The disappointment that the monster wasn't more central to the story doesn't really detract from looking back at an early pioneer in scary movies. By my current disposition, this wasn't really scary or creepy, and didn't really create much of a mood or tension, but watching this old title wasn't a bad experience or wasteful of my time. The Mummy was very similar to the original Dracula's storyline. The DVD's extras revealed that they both shared the same screenwriters. The formula seemed to have more effect in the Gothic vampire tale. The extras also discussed the leading lady and her prominence on Broadway, and fights with the director.

I would not recommend that most people would enjoy this. For those with an affinity for early cinema, or those curious about the beginning of an icon like the Mummy, then this will hold an interest. Karloff is an iconic giant in this genre, and this is an interesting opportunity to see him at the height of his abilities as one of films great scary actors. This movie spawned several later versions of what developed into an iconic movie monster. This is what gave life to the monster the Mummy.

THE MUMMY awakened in Egypt by English archeologists goes on a rampage searching for its reincarnated lover.

Boris Karloff dominates this little fright fest, bringing new nightmares to the screen and proving that his Frankenstein's Monster was no mere quirk, but actually the beginning of a distinguished career in shocker films. Helped immensely by makeup master Jack Pierce, who gave the Mummy face & hands like weathered parchment, Karloff uses his own saturnine features and tall thin body to full effect, creating a horror portrait that has stood the test of time.

A sturdy supporting cast gives Karloff good support: exotic Zita Johann is lovely & slightly mysterious as the woman of Imhotep's deathless desires; valiant David Manners as the young hero gives another typically fine performance; Arthur Byron & Edward Van Sloan are enjoyable as the requisite old gentlemen (every horror film must have at least one) who study & stalk the Mummy. African-American silent film star Noble Johnson appears as a sinister Nubian.

The film's best scene, the resuscitation of the Mummy, demonstrates the potential of the medium. The only indication the viewer has that something horrible is about to happen is a flicker of Karloff's eye and a slight movement of his hand as he stands in his casket, bound in bandages. The rest of the scene unfolds in the hysterical reaction of young Bramwell Fletcher (excellent performance) as he watches the undead leave the scientists' tent. All the audience sees is Karloff's hand and the trailing bandages from his feet as they drag across the floor. It is enough.

While I can say for certain that this isn't my favorite Universal Monster movie, I am glad that I watched it. This movie doesn't provide nearly as many thrills as some of the other Universal films, nor is it as interesting in terms of story, but it is still considered a classic by many today, and it does have elements of that old Hollywood charm. I'm glad I saw this film, even though it wasn't as great as I hoped it would be. As this film is just over an hour long, there's really no harm in seeing it- and doing so just flushes out your classic Hollywood knowledge. Also, this film is relatively harmless, and middle school kids and younger might enjoy it as a spooky Halloween film. For our full review of The Mummy and hundreds of other reviews, articles, and podcast episodes visit True Myth Media!

Like most of the Universal horrors, "The Mummy" is a slow build that may prove too slow for some viewers, as if it's invoking the shuffling pace of the title character. However, if you stick with it, you'll be treated to another fine shape-shifting performance from Boris Karloff (as long-dead Im-Ho-Tep and his modern resurrection, Ardath Bey), and a story that is a rather interesting divergence from the usual "monster." Unlike Hammer's take on the material, the mummified Karloff is only in one scene, with the rest of the film devoted to his human reincarnation; and the subsequent story, while steeped in Egyptian notions of life, death, and the parallels between these two worlds, is more overwhelmingly devoted to Bey's long-lost love, Anok-en-es-Amon, whom he believes to be inhabiting the person of Helen Grosvner (Zita Johann). Edward van Sloan appears in his requisite role as the wise, van Helsing-styled doctor, and David Manners shows up to provide a (contrived) foil to Karloff's plans. I don't know how much (if any) of "The Mummy" was actually shot in Egypt, but the set design is excellent (per the Universal norm), providing a sense of menace through the viewer's own sense of cultural displacement. This is complemented by Karloff's minimalist performance--Ardath Bey has the looks and stealth of his bandage-wrapped counterpart, but also possesses a sly, understated cunning and manner of speaking that makes the character memorably chilling (dig the glowing eyes, too).

Poor David Manners, there was an actor who truly never had a break. Imagine being an actor whose fate was seemingly always to be consigned to playing straight-man to Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi. In one film, "The Black Cat", he actually would up playing straight-man to both of them!

In "The Mummy" it was poor Manners' misfortune to be cast opposite Boris Karloff. How can any actor hope to get noticed while sharing the screen with one of the greatest horror icons of all time, especially in what many consider to be one of Karloff's roles? Granted that, after 80 years, some aspects of the movie may creak a bit. However, there's no getting around the fact that time has detracted absolutely nothing from Karloff's performance.

It is interesting to compare the 1932 version of "The Mummy" with the 1999 version, because the differences in style and production emphasis are so striking. The modern version is all about CGI special effects and roller-coaster paced action. The 1932 version is all about setting an eerie mood and, of course, the sheer charismatic presence of Boris Karloff.

In Frankenstein Karloff played The Monster as a heavy, hulking, stumbling mute. Yet how different he seems in The Mummy. Yes, there are scenes in which the actor was wrapped up and heavily made up to simulate a 3,700-year-old mummy. By all accounts that was a very unpleasant experience for the actor, too. However, in most of the movie Karloff was dressed in a sort of full-length gown, emphasizing the actor's tall and spare frame, further implying the notion that he is a 3,700-year-old re-animated mummy. Nevertheless, the actor's performance was not limited to makeup and costume. Further accentuating the idea of a walking corpse is the subtle manner in which Karloff moved, or should one more precisely say, didn't move. Karloff's mummy moved very slowly, almost gliding; and when he stood he stood very still, moving his body as little as possible. The overall effect of that stillness was to make Karloff's mummy seem even more powerful and menacing. Another notable difference was that, unlike in Frankenstein, in "The Mummy" Karloff got a chance to make use of that wonderfully sibilant, purring voice of his; that unique voice that has put chills up generations of spines, and still continues to do so.

It is also worth noting that Karl Freund's direction was a textbook example to aspiring modern horror film directors of how less can be so much more. The initial scene in which Karloff's mummy becomes alive, opening his eyes slightly and slowly moving one hand just a little bit, still has the power to chill. So does that the subsequent scene, in which all that is visible to the viewer are a couple of bandages moving slowly along the floor and trailing out of the door. Nothing is more frightening than the imagination and, in that classic scene, Freund demonstrated exactly how far a little bit of suggestion can go.