christopher-underwood
I always tend to steer clear of 'Mummy' films, not for any Oedipal reasons, but because they can get a bit bogged down in Egyptian mythology and more particularly because the wrapped ones tend to move so slowly. In fact, in this one the movement is pretty good, its only a stunt man in there so no attempt at Shakespearean style overacting and generally he's okay. All around him it is very much , the 'B' team except for Jeanne Roland, who does well and looks lovely, but is lumbered with an awfully dubbed voice. The opening scenes with amateurish backcloths are risible and then the film stops for about fifty minutes before an excellent ending. The good old stunt man takes Jeanne down into the sewers and with excellent photography the film really comes alive. Bit late though and it is clear that this film made to fit into a double bill is fit for nothing else.
seance-64749
All four Mummy films by Hammer I like. Curse with atmospheric scenes does give a quality to it. You have fog bound London to add atmosphere. Sets on film re Egyptian biz are quite good.Story so-so various characters who crop up. Then we have the Mummy itself which looks quite impressive, with scenes with Mummy in like in fog top of steps near embankment etc, scene in study where curtains are concealing it. Another scene in house where Mummy ascending stairs, menacing and quite gripping. Odd comical relief in film re certain characters. Overall film has some merit to it!
Theo Robertson
In my review of the Hammer version of THE MUMMY from 1959 I stated that it's a very political horror film centering around the Anglo-Franco debacle in the Suez three years before . CURSE OF THE MUMMY'S TOMB the first sequel continues the political subtext right from the opening scene where a hostage is cruelly slaughtered by backward violent Arabs . It's no coincidence that the heroine from the film speaks with a French accent or that we have a brash , dumb , philistine American portrayed in a rather bad light and the first half of the film holds the concentration due to its political subtext Of course no one watches a horror film due to politics and once the eponymous title creature makes its appearance things stop being intelligent and becomes clichéd . As in most horror movies there's a complete lack of credibility involved . Having a monster stalking the streets of London gives the impression that it can teleport a few feet away from its victim then materalise back to its lair . Doesn't any passerby notice an eight feet bandaged monster walking about ? Likewise the monster meets with a contrived fate This is a relatively poorly regarded movie from Hammer and shares many of the problems with the next sequel THE MUMMY'S SHROUD in that the Mummy takes too long to make an appearance . But unlike THE MUMMY'S SHROUD this film has a cerebral subtext to hold a thinking audiences interest
Neil Doyle
This may not be the best of The Mummy films from Hammer, but it is handsomely filmed and well acted by a fine British cast--especially TERENCE MORGAN, RONALD HOWARD and YVONNE ROLAND as the charming feminine lead. The less you know about the Terence Morgan character (Adam), the more you'll enjoy the plot.The story requires a lot of exposition at the start which means a lot of talky and static scenes before the real suspense starts. The tale is not exactly original in concept. Again, the mummy has come to life to kill the people who've exploited him. High among his priorities is the fast-talking, rather obnoxious American showman (FRED CLARK) who is anxious to make a profit on exhibiting the mummy in show biz style.DICKIE OWEN makes a formidable mummy with the help of some fine make-up effects but it is really the convincing performances of the three principals that makes the story credible.I missed hearing James Bernard's background music, usually a strong point in any Hammer horror film.Summing up: Easy enough to watch but you have to be patient to get past the slow start.
AD
