I never liked this one . . . - The Mummy's Tomb (1942) Discussion

[–] simeon_flake 16 years ago

Heh.. and to think that one of my favorite aspects of this movie was that Wallace Ford's character didn't get away with being such an irritant in 'The Mummy's Hand' and that Kharis did get sweet revenge.

Chalk it up to "different strokes"...

reply

[–] runforthesun 15 years ago

I've heard that school of thought, that Wallace Ford dragged Mummy's Hand down, but I'm definitely not in that camp. I first saw this on TV when I was a kid, and his wise cracking was just the ticket to add to the enjoyment, I think the other Universal Mummy movies are way too serious and not too much fun. It helps that Ford is a respected actor, Academy Award nominee, and in my opinion, he brought that talent to bear in Mummy's Hand, I thought he and Dick Foran were a great team.

But I definitely allow for different strokes :)

reply

[–] FortySecondStreetFreak 14 years ago

You mean it plays like a bona-fide horror film.

I think this is still (as is the entire series of sequels to "Hand") one of the most unusual and brave sequels ever made as it goes against the obvious and expected.
You never, not once, thought any of the three leads in "Hand" were in any real danger. No way hero, comedy friend and new love were ever going to DIE....and yet in this they kill all 3 off!

www.beardyfreak.com

reply

[–] jeff_the_dj 13 years ago

Taking about sensitive! Getta grip runforthesun. This is an excellent movie, as fortsecondstreetfreak said above, it took a bold measure FOR its time in killing off all three of the Heros from the last Mummy movie and yet you don't like it? You might want to stick with Fred Astaire movies instead guy.

We can DO IT ALLLL DAY LONG, (We'll have to pay more for the light bill if we do it at night!)

reply

[–] lastmidnite2 13 years ago

And I'm sorry, but when the elderly sister gets killed, the look on her face and the way she screams are hilarious. I roared with laughter!

reply

[–] westsalemcongress 13 years ago

"Taking about sensitive! Getta grip runforthesun. This is an excellent movie, as fortsecondstreetfreak said above, it took a bold measure FOR its time in killing off all three of the Heros from the last Mummy movie and yet you don't like it? You might want to stick with Fred Astaire movies instead guy."

Ha ha. Sounds like "jeff the dj" is the one who is being a little overly sensitive here...

reply

[–] FridayOnElmStreet 13 years ago

I agree with the OP here.

reply

[–] xnet95 12 years ago

The only good thing about this movie is when people get killed. The rest is just filler.

reply

[–] brodiebruce_405 12 years ago

I loved this one and it's direct sequel, The Mummy's Curse.

Like all good slasher sequels (of which this seems to be the 1940s ancestor), it begins by killing off the survivors of part 1 (well, Mummy's Hand)!! I just wish when they killed off Babe that his "Poopsie" doll had rolled out of his hand and into the gutter.

reply

[–] ajm41132 12 years ago

Actually, brodiebruce, the direct sequel to this one is The Mummy's Ghost (1944). I just saw Mummy's Tomb on Svengoolie's show and next Saturday (7-7-12) he will show that sequel on MeTV.

reply

[–] RygarMorte 11 years ago

I agree that this film was ahead of its time when it came to killing off the survivors of the previous installment. This is actually my favourite Mummy film (from the Kharis series, anyway) not just because of that but because they had the balls to set it years later and dress their heroic lead up as an old man. Not many films of the time would have linked the two movies so closely like that, either... the Universal Monster movies in the '40s had that comic book style shared continuity thing going on...

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ElectricWarlock 8 years ago

It was okay. It wasn't as good as the first movie but it was on par with The Mummy's Hand. Though I thought Babe seemed totally different. He didn't have the playful, fun loving, childish side he had in the first movie. He was all serious and straightforward now. I guess the events of the previous movie must've really traumatized him and changed him as a person. Or perhaps he simply just got old.

reply

[–] PeterBlues 8 years ago

a large part of this is just footage from the previous mummy movie "the mummy's hand", and since i had just seen that i fast forwarded it, then the usual story goes on, i saw the first mummy movie in 2002 when these universal monsters first came to dvd, i saw the sequels now many years later and it seems like you've seen one mummy movie you've seen them all, i didn't want to re watch the original because that left quite an impression on me as a teen and didn't want to spoil it now, the very first mummy movie i saw was the christopher lee remake, that was memorable also, the 21st century remakes mostly seemed to be special effects.

like a wildcat that should get tamed,
youre too much for me to set in place,
the fire in your eyes,
your sharp claws and bite,
makes me put away giving it a try,
just urgent to be on your good side,
for peace of mind, until i find,
and worked up the way to try,
not to have a woman rule my life.

reply