Review #112: 'The Mummy' (1932)

The image of Boris Karloff, awakening in his tomb and draped in bandages, his skin flaky and old, is one of the most iconic in horror history. Alongside Dracula (1931) and Frankenstein (1931), The Mummy is one of Universal Studio's biggest hits. Unlike the aforementioned, it is not based on a piece of literature, but was inspired by the discovery of Tutankhamun's tomb in 1922. Director Karl Freund was hired two days before the start of filming, and this is possibly the reason for the film's problems, with Freund's experience lying primarily in the cinematography department.

When the tomb of ancient Egyptian priest Imhotep (Boris Karloff) is discovered by an archaeological expedition, an old script is read out aloud that resurrects his mummified body. Ten years later, the archaeological dig continues, and they are approached by a mysterious man who identifies himself as Ardath Bey, claiming he knows the location of the tomb of Princess Ankh-es-en-amon. Excited by the prospect, they begin to dig, but they are unaware that Bey is the resurrected Imhotep, and is searching for the soul of his lost love. He believes that a young woman named Helen (Zita Johann) is the reincarnation of the long-dead Princess, and wants to steal her soul.

Boris Karloff excels here. Although not exactly the most talented of actors, he has the ability to use his sheer colossal presence to get through to the audience. His giant frame and eerie dead eyes pierce the screen, and he overshadows his quite hammy co-stars. There is a reason why Imhotep and his portrayal of Frankenstein's Monster are iconic. Karloff's face is most interesting, and glares out from beneath all the excellent make-up. Thank God, then, for Karloff, as the majority of the film is quite average.

Possibly the main negative of the film is the director Karl Freund. A legend of a cinematographer, he is responsible for some giants of cinema such as Fritz Lang's Metropolis (1927), F.W. Murnau's The Last Laugh (1924) and Tartuffe (1925), and Carl Dreyer's Michael (1924). He is also uncredited as co-director for Universal's Dracula and well as being cinematographer. The direction seems by-the-number and unspectacular, and while Frankenstein was in the safe hands of James Whale, and Dracula in the hands of Tod Browning, The Mummy seems to suffer from Freund's inexperience. 

That said, it is enjoyable in the way that most old horror films are. It is short and snappy, and doesn't outstay its welcome, clocking in at a mere 73 minutes. It is also quite silly, and Imhotep's supernatural abilities reveal some glaring plot-holes. But it obviously has it's fans, as it has been re-made and re-imagined countless amounts of times. Now for the Hammer remake! 

Directed by: Karl Freund

Starring: Boris Karloff, Zita Johann, David Manners, Arthur Byron, Edward Van Sloan

Country: USA

Rating: ***

Tom Gillespie

Review #51: 'Dracula' (1931)

One of the most iconic and popular characters in film history, Dracula has taken many forms, in many genres, and performed to various quality. Although not the first film to feature the character of Count Dracula (a couple of lost silent films and F.W. Murnau’s unauthorised version Nosferatu (1922) came before), Bela Lugosi’s portrayal of the menacing and seductive Count is commonly seen as the definitive.

The story is known to most – solicitor Renfield (Dwight Frye) arrives at Count Dracula castle at night, despite prior warnings by the nearby locals. He is greeted by Dracula, who, unknown to Renfield, is a vampire. Upon arrival, he pricks his finger, causing it to bleed which visibly excites Dracula until he spies the crucifix hanging around Renfield’s neck. Renfield is drugged by Dracula and the two travel to London the next day by boat. When the ship arrives, only Renfield remains on the boat, now seemingly a lunatic and a slave to the Count. He is hospitalised while Dracula becomes entranced by a woman named Mina (Helen Chandler), who is engaged to John Harker (David Manners). As circumstances grow stranger, Professor Van Helsing (Edward Van Sloan) becomes convinced that the Count is indeed a vampire, and that he must be destroyed.

The film would be the beginning of a long run of successful horror movies made by Universal, which would be hits critically and commercially, and many are nowadays considered classics of the genre. Although falling short of the outright perfection of James Whale’s Frankenstein (also 1931) and its sequel Bride Of Frankenstein (1935), Dracula still proves a great adaptation of Bram Stoker’s novel. Lugosi’s performance is the definitive Dracula, his minimal movements and slow, pronounced dialogue, spoken with his Hungarian accent proves an unnerving Count. I’m not forgetting Max Schrek’s Nosferatu, while amazing for its sheer dedication, it was hardly the Dracula of the book.

Director Tod Browning, who up to the point of making Dracula had made over 50 feature films, controls the film superbly, and opts for slow, menacing darkness rather than loud jump scenes and special effects. It builds up the mood gradually, and with Lugosi’s fantastic central performance, makes for an atmospheric experience. It’s a pity that Browning would almost end his career the next year with the commercially disastrous Freaks (1932), which I consider a true great of the horror genre. It’s just a shame that the film’s final scene is rather soft and anti-climatic, jarring with the brilliance that came before. However, it remains an excellent film overall, and the film that would spawn many memorable films for Universal studios. 

Directed by: Tod Browning

Starring: Bela Lugosi, Helen Chandler, David Manners, Dwight Frye, Edward Van Sloan

Country: USA

Rating: *****

Tom Gillespie