The Mummy [VHS]

I love this movie! Fun to watch over and over.

I liked the Universal Legacy edition of "Dracula" so much, I got the same issue of "The Mummy" as well. The packaging on my copy is slightly improved with the DVD content info printed on the back cover rather than on a sheet glued to the cover. Although I am still impressed by all the extras on this edition, the extras are not as good as the ones on "Dracula," so I am dropping a star. The two films are actually quite similar. From the identical opening music to the almost parallel storyline. Edward Van Sloan and David Manners are in both films and play the same type of roles (Manners playing the romantic love interest who falls for the woman who is under the spell of the "monster" and Van Sloan as the professor who observes and understands what is going on and confronts the "monster"). One difference in "The Mummy" is that, though Dracula is evil on all accounts, Imhotep is a rather sentimental figure. He is a murderer, but his brutality is a means to reuniting with the woman for whom he sacrificed his life 1,000s of years earlier. He was just a mummy in love (Karloff, in his scenes with Zita Johann, definitely plays the role as such).I will focus on the extras offered on this 2-DVD set, as most people who are interested in this release have already seen the film. Like with the "Dracula" issue, You can watch "The Mummy" with two different commentaries. The first commentary includes Rick Baker (makeup man), Scott Essman (horror film researcher), Steve Haberman (screenwriter, film historian), Bob Burns (film buff), and Brent Armstrong (sculptor). Baker speaks by himself in a separate commentary during the famous mummy awakening scene. He finds a lot of inconsistencies in the film and admits to not liking it much, although he is a fan of the makeup techniques used. The others talk together in a more conversational style. This group does not always follow the scenes. They talk about other films and heap praise on the players. I find it the most interesting when they discuss scenes and the film itself. Armstrong points out Imhotep's wrinkled face and theorizes that the intent was to show that the bandages had replaced his skin. Another thing I would not have noticed was the rear projection used in the cab scene. I thought the Universal horror films as a metaphor for the Great Depression idea was a bit stretching it, though. At the end of the commentary, they go off praising this and that. I found this commentary interesting but, with all the people involved, it could have been better.The second commentary is by film historian Paul M. Jensen. Like Steve Haberman's commentary for "Dracula," Jensen reads through prepared notes. Sometimes he's describing scenes and other times he is giving backgrounds of the players and crew. At one point, he describes Putnam's Cagliostro. He gives intriguing information on the discarded scenes. While I liked this commentary, neither ones on this set are as good as David Skal's on "Dracula."Also on the first disc are a collection of lobby cards and stills (including some from discarded scenes) and a trailer gallery of the many Mummy sequels. "Mummy Dearest: A Horror Tradition Unearthed" is a documentary on the making of the film. I like the photos of Karloff having his makeup applied. There is a lot of info on Zita Johann, who clashed with director Karl Freund, and her occultist beliefs. It compares the film to "Dracula" and talks about the other mummy films. It runs 30 minutes.On the second disc are three documentaries. The first is "He Who Made Monsters: The Life and Art of Jack Pierce." This documentary discusses Pierce's work on the films "Frakenstein," "The Mummy," "The Black Cat," "Bride of Frakenstein," "Son of Frakenstein," and "The Wolf Man." I found it very interesting how Frakenstein evolved through the films and the revelation on how one side of his face caved in. I wished they discussed Pierce's techniques for "The Man Who Laughs." I've wondered how they kept Conrad Veidt's mouth curled up. It looks very painful. The documentary concludes with the sad way Pierce was let go from Universal, how he lived the rest of his life in relative obscurity, and his legacy. It is 25 minutes long. "Unraveling the Legacy of the Mummy" is a bunch of action scenes from the Brendan Fraser films with interview clips from the cast and crew (8 minutes). "Universal Horror" is the same documentary that was on the "Dracula" DVD set (probably on "Frakenstein," too). It is excellent, though. The rather lengthy documentary covers many of the scary films put out by Universal in the 1920s and 1930s and includes freaky scenes from such films as "The Phantom of the Opera," "The Man Who Laughs," "The Black Cat," etc. I liked the inclusion of scenes from early silents. It also reveals secrets to special effects found in "King Kong," "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde," and "The Invisible Man." Film historians who were kids back in the day talk about what these films meant to them and the reactions of audiences at the time. Bela Lugosi Jr. talks about his famous father in several clips in this documentary. I've seen it three times and will probably watch it again.

An absolute classic that belongs in your collection with the original Dracula, Frankenstein, and The Werewolf. The nineteen-thirties were unparalleled in these legendary horror films. Is the popcorn ready?

THE MUMMYEgyptology hit its peak during the early 20th century in Britain and America, and Universal's The Mummy went on to capitalize on this wonder. With the opening of long lost tombs and unearthing of ancient artifacts came an understanding of the ancient world. But with this new knowledge also came the mysticism of the old Egyptian pantheon and all that it brought with it--the afterlife, curses, and naturally, mummies. The movie The Mummy explores all these themes, intertwined into a love story that stretches back thousands of years.It begins with an archeological dig in which an old mummy is inadvertently brought back to life. The mummy is Imhotep, a priest who was embalmed alive and whose tomb was desecrated as punishment for the practice of necromancy. The goal of this dark art was to bring his deceased lover back to life, a goal Imhotep intends to conclude in his new life. He takes the name Ardath Bey and slowly begins to plot his moves to recover his long lost love in the reincarnation of a beautiful young woman, Helen Grosvenor. To those who surround her, Helen is just an ordinary girl, but Imhotep recognizes her for who is really is and seeks to once again restore their love, a love so long on hold.In reality, The Mummy is nothing more than a love story with a mystical backdrop. But it is so skillfully done that it actually immensely interesting. Unlike Dracula--which has a similar formula to The Mummy--the story is very engaging. I think to reason for this lies in the powerful performances of the two leads played by Boris Karloff as Imhotep, and Zita Johann as Helen. Both actors dominate the scenes they are in, and their chemistry is captivating. This is not a perverse love, or an act of predation as in Dracula. Imhotep and Helen are in love. They are meant to be together, their happiness only impeded by death, and this makes the scenes when they are on the screen together magical.Karloff himself is great as the powerful priest come back to life. He plays the part convincingly, his movements are slow and deliberate and his speech comes through nearly closed lips. But it are his eyes that glare so menacingly and exude a magical quality. He is cool, all knowing, and master of an art long lost to the world, but known by him. Not only can Imhotep's magic intercede death, but life as well. He uses this art not only to see into the lives of those he seeks to destroy, but he can actually inflict harm upon them. Imhotep even locks himself away in this sort of modern temple guarded by loyal servants and spells.The Mummy's makeup is again the product of Jack Pierce and looks fantastic. What I like is the transformation the mummy undergoes. In the beginning, he is wrapped and decrepit looking. But When Imhotep reemerges as Ardath, the wraps are gone but the flesh of his face is still worn and tired looking.This is an interesting portrayal of the mummy, and ironically, contrary to most people's perception. Most images of the mummy are of a more malevolent character dragging his legs slowly under him, covered in bandages with arms outstretched. Imhotep is the total opposite. His character is deep and you are allowed to feel great sympathy for him. He has suffered much between the death of his love and the tortured execution he undergoes. It is hard to draw a conclusion about him, but regardless, one cannot help but to at least understand his dilemma.The conclusion of the film is in my opinion one of the best in horror history. The viewer is torn, much in the way Helen is torn, between the romantic and spellbinding Egypt of ancient times, and the dull and conventional modern world. Helen will ultimately be forced to choose, but will the destiny of the ancient gods and goddesses seal her fate?

Probably more scary back in 1933 about 10 years after Tutankankhamun discovery . Different than thelater version but pretty good. Horror fantasy. Music from Swan lake Ballet at the opening.

A stunning restoration and transfer of a fascinating atmospheric film that is now 90 years old but still has the ability to chill. Great performances, and a weird and wonderful plot, result in an early horror classic.

This was my first ever scary film, age 10 and on a monochrome TV set. The mummy always scared me the most of all the other horror characters. I had this on VHS years ago and promised my self a DVD copy one day. It has all the old classic plus points and good plot well acted as well as all the nostalgia. I am very happy with my purchase.

Master of horror Boris Karloff appears in the doorway as Imhotep way back in this masterpiece. Although it is in monochrome it doesn't detract one bit from the eeriness of the plot of a mummy coming back to life after four thousand years.

One of my favourites can’t beat the old ones