MovieChat Forums > The Mummy (1932) Discussion > Didn't do much for me

Didn't do much for me


I love Karloff's Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein but this one was just a bit dry IMO. Anyone agree?

reply

You're right and IMO, it was the director's fault. Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein were both directed by James Whale, who, apparently had a bit more flair behind the camera.

The Mummy is "a bit dry"? Pun intended, I assume. LOL.

reply

You have to look at thru the eyes of a 1930's audience it was probably scarey to them. This movie and horror were just coming out the universal monsters by the 40's & 50's they were no longer scarey that's why they had abbot & costello meet them.

reply

Yeah I gotta agree with you. It was pretty dry, both Karloff's performance and the film as a whole. It wasn't bad, it just wasn't all that good either.

reply

[deleted]

It wasn't bad. It certainly wasn't the best of the Universal horror films but it's a lot better than most recent horror films.

I've been waiting for you, Ben.

reply

horror2, I see you're a true horror fan. I've been to a lot of different horror forums, spanning from the old to the new, and I usually see you there. I also like your quote from Ms. Alydice!

reply

Thank you very much. I believe I have seen you several places before as well.

I've been waiting for you, Ben.

reply

but this one was just a bit dry IMO


Okay, I chuckled.

---
"In literature, it's called plagiarism. In the movies, it's homage" ~ Roger Ebert

reply

I agree. I DVR'd it off Turner Movie Classics. I've always found this one
never seems to get the air time on stuff like PBS like Frankenstein and
Dracula do.

Was excited to finally get a chance to watch it, but really found
it all a bit flat. The main 'heroes' were all pretty laughable with some
brutal dialogue. Karloff was Karloff, so his performance was watchable, and
i actually found myself rooting for him in the end.

The whole thing seemed very poorly cut. Even the finale just sorta happened
and "BAM" roll credits.



"Be sure to tune in for the big giveaway at 9...."

reply

The whole thing seemed very poorly cut. Even the finale just sorta happened
and "BAM" roll credits.
Isn't that the case for all Universal horror films? Seriously. Think about it.

I can't really say I get the criticism. Not that the classic Universal films were ever very frightening (at least by today's standards) - but the opening scene of 'The Mummy' may go down as the most creepy. Exceptional make-up by Jack Pierce.

Out of make-up (or at least the heavy mummy wrappings in the opening scene), Karloff's ominous and commanding presence (including that incredible voice that wasn't even heard in the first Frankenstein film released the previous year) is really allowed to shine and carry the film.

If you tune-in expecting more action and more of the mummy in all its wrapped glory walking around wreaking havoc- the sequels in the 1940s might be more to your taste. Universal made a lot of "B" level horror productions in the 1940s that were fun, if not a little silly and not having the same sensibilities as the accepted "classics".

reply

Karloff was the only good thing about this otherwise completely lacklustre movie.

I'm Heather Langenkamp's husband in another universe.

reply

me neither, the screenplay was pretty underwhelming





so many movies, so little time

reply

I feel the same way. I strongly prefer the other classic Universal monster movies over this one.

reply