SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

Sameer Callahan It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

Alistair Olson After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

Aspen Orson There is definitely an excellent idea hidden in the background of the film. Unfortunately, it's difficult to find it.

skywalking997 The strength of the film lies largely with its visual style. The camera work and framing, as shown here, are a noteworthy step forward over earlier Universal horror films. It does, however, lack the same sort of instantly identifiable iconography that "Dracula" and "Frankenstein" boasted. The central creature is impressively realized, and the make-up effects are subtly evocative, but with the exception of an impressively creepy opening sequence, much of the film plays as considerably less of a horror film, than it does a romantic mystery. It makes for an interesting twist to what was Universal's signature early 20th century cycle of "monster" films, although it may also feel a bit like a departure, for those expecting a more traditional creature feature.

maxmages I was totally surprised to learn that in the 1930's there was not just a movie but a whole movie series. That's why I wanted to look at it immediately because many things interest me. Komma Unfortunately I do not like horror movies and in general I'm rather difficult to impress.I thought the movie is alright not good not bad but quite enjoyable there are some things I liked it there are a few things I do not understand but I have not taken the urge to answer these questions.Animals are actually pretty decent i found it pretty good as direct the movie is no unnecessary subplots no superfluous characters you do not waste so much time and always just say out what the problem is i like it so what is not there anymore today. I also found here is super interesting that in many parts of the film just 10 seconds, only the face of the mummy was shown and nothing else and then it goes on to the next scene it is definitely something different.Nevertheless, I have to say that I did not really like the film, but I would not mind watching it on TV a few more times. I just want to ask a question. Why do people always recreate plot points and film troupes of films from the past few years? 10 years instead of going back even further?PS: Boris Karloff in a shot used about four times in the movie as Transition

sol- Inadvertently resurrected when archaeologists unearth his tomb, an Egyptian mummy assumes life as a museum curator, hoping to eventually resurrect the woman he loved in his Universal horror movie. The film was inspired by the discovery of King Tut's tomb (a recent event at the time) and the subsequent mysterious deaths of those involved in the project, which some attributed to a 'curse of the pharaohs'. Watching 'The Mummy', it is easy to imagine that a more interesting film could have been spun from focusing on the actual discovery of King Tut's tomb and the 'curse'. The movie has its strengths though, including Boris Karloff's performance, detailed make-up and Karl Freund's penchant for atmospheric camera pans. The film also gets off to a strong start with the mummy's hand only ever-so-slowly creeping into shot when he first comes back from the dead. The notion of a lovesick ancient Egyptian is never particularly scary or eerie though, nor is there anything especially engaging about Karloff believing that he has found the reincarnation of his love interest in a female acquaintance. Everything admittedly culminates in a memorable showdown though and Freund makes remarkably good use of close-ups (Karloff's eyes!) throughout, but it is easy to see why this has not enjoyed the reputation of some of Universal's other monster movies over the years.

Fred S. (fredschroeder-63011) I wanted to like this movie a lot. I went into the movie knowing it was supposed to be one of the Universal Classics, right alongside with the 1931 Frankenstein. I especially expected the acting from Boris Karloff to be more present and deeply involved with his character. Unfortunately, for me at least, the movie delivered on neither of these things. The plot seemed like it would be easy to follow and at some times it was, however there were many times throughout the movie that I'd have to rewind and rewatch to understand what was occurring. The powers of the mummy were pretty vague as well, it seemed like he could just choose whatever abilities he wanted and then he could just magically do it. Boris Karloff may not have delivered with the majority of his role in this movie yet there was one thing he did extremely well. He definitely played an extremely believable creepy and eerie historian. The movie seemed like it was just replaying the same few problems over and over again, there was no real plot line except for that they had to keep the scroll hidden and safe. All around it wasn't my favorite movie, but there were enough scenes that I can't say I hated it. It's still worth the watch if you enjoy the 30's monster movies, Many DO regard it as a classic.