Halloween Week: The Mummy (1932) movie review

Here's what you need to know; A peculiar find is made at an archaeological dig in Egypt led by Sir Joseph Whemple, a mysterious cursed scroll that has the power to raise the dead, and a Mummy that was buried alive, and condemned to suffering in the afterlife; Imhotep. A decade later, Whemple and his archaeologists are approached by a mysterious Egyptian fellow in possession of the scroll, one that leads them to the find of the century, the untouched tomb of Ankh-es-en-Amon. But this Ardath Bey may have his own, more sinister intentions for finding the tomb, intentions that put Whemple and his son in the path of an ancient wrath.
Surprisingly, while I adore the 1999 remake of The Mummy, and think the 2017 remake is a slimy mess, I've never seen original film from 1932, but it's the season of spooky films, and up until this point the oldest film I've ever reviewed was The War of the Worlds, so let's get something off the bucket list, and review not only the oldest film I've ever reviewed, but actually the oldest film I've ever watched, The Mummy.

I'm just going to say it, it's been a long time since a film has left me this conflicted; I love movies, but it's honestly hard for me to talk about a film like this one, since it's considered such a timeless masterpiece, and a lot of time has passed, this was before World War II. Maybe there are some films out there that are timeless, but cinema has changed an awful lot in the 80 years that this film's been around; what scares audiences has changed, what audiences find acceptable has changed, the technology of film has improved a thousand fold, so with all that in mind, while there are things I appreciate about The Mummy, as a horror, I don't find it scary in the slightest. Let's start with what I don't like, immediately what springs to mind is the awful romance, I know that it was very common place in old movies, I've seen enough of them, but it doesn't change my opinion that the romance element of this film is weak and contrived, which I could actually give a pass to if it wasn't so funny, and it certainly is unfair to give this film shit for that, so I won't, it is funny that this film did romance better than a film I saw in 2017, even funnier that despite being about a walking corpse, this film has more soul and life in it than that film, what film you ask, well, that's part of the fun. That's really the only part of this film I think is outright crap however, which is a good thing, it'll hardly be surprising to hear that this 80 year old film actually holds up decently in some areas. One aspect that hasn't aged well however is, like I alluded to earlier, the horror, though I will admit three scenes in this film were actually quite effective, one of which being the opening scene when Imhotep is awoken; the lifeless twinkle in his eyes and the slow deliberate movements are kind of creepy, and there is a gorgeous image of the bandages being dragged through the doorway, I actually love that. But sadly Imhotep didn't scare me in this film, I found Boris Karloff as Imhotep very entertaining, as there were scenes where he displayed menace, but scary, no. One such scene of menace is another one of those effective scenes where he kills someone by stopping their heart, yeah, pretty grim isn't it. In another scene, he kills a museum guard off screen, and it's actually a bit creepy how he dies off screen, but you hear the deed being done. The weakness of Imhotep however is something that's to be expected, the lack of violence, outside of killing people with spells, Imhotep never lifts a finger, in situations where he could easily kill or incapacitate someone, he just stands there, talking menacingly, which Boris Karloff does very well, but there are a few times when the reason for him not just killing someone alludes me. This passiveness applies to pretty much everyone in the film, and it's something I've seen in many old movies, for example the original 3:10 to Yuma, where Ben Wade stops the wagon and politely talks to people, rather than killing their arses like he does in the in my opinion superior remake. The Hays Code is something I remember from film studies; a set of moral guidelines in motion pictures, think modern political correctness but more conservatively minded. What's sad is that this makes a lot of older films remarkably tame, and while The Mummy didn't have to abide by the Hays Code, that tameness is very prevalent.

The Mummy isn't a long film, with a runtime of just 73 minutes, what that doesn't allow for is terribly good character development, which makes the characters disappointingly hollow, with the very bizarre exception of Helen, who is by a mile the weakest character in the film, unless you count the Nubian. There is however one scene in this film that I absolutely adore, and it's such a tiny little thing; but when Joseph Whemple gets his hands on the scroll of Thoth, he has this fantastic look of dread on his face that's actually kind of disturbing to me, the scene brilliantly shows his personal dread and shame for what happened to his colleague in the film's opening scene, and is easily the best example of character development in the film. Going back to a previous point though, with a runtime of just 73 minutes, you'd expect this film to have a decent pace, since there's not a lot of time to tell a story, but this film really takes it's time, really; it's a good thing I can appreciate Boris Karloff and the good production quality, because with the tameness, combined with the shallowness, this would otherwise be a really boring film, and it gets even more bizarre with the film's ending, with the classic 'The End' title card, but the ending is very abrupt, leaving no room to conclude the crappy romance, he doesn't even get to kiss the girl in the end, good thing he got that in earlier then. One really good thing is that while the film has its weaknesses in the depth department, time doesn't change the fact that this is a well made film; while the romance is terrible, the film's script isn't bad, all things considered, I found myself interested in this film's plot, and surprisingly invested in its characters; so when Imhotep tries to kill one of them towards the end of the film, again by stopping his heart, I found it intense, not going to lie. Watching it on Blu ray, naturally, I was also surprised by how good the film looks, the better picture quality makes this film very visually appealing, and it's well directed, again with some very effective cinematography, though it's not exactly Gareth Edwards, obviously. Boris Karloff's make up is exactly what you'd expect, though he's looking pretty good after 3000 years in the ground, again, comparing it to the CG enhanced necrosis of Arnold Vosloo's Imhotep or Sophia Boutella's Ahmanet really isn't fair. Being almost 90 years old, obviously this film has no computer effects, since computer effects wouldn't even start to exist for another 40 years. But this film, while minimal on the visual effects, actually doesn't do that bad. The opening title is a cute little model, which I love, Imhotep's magic pool is pretty cool, and Imhotep's eyes are cool, as bizarre as that sounds. The only effect that's noticeably outdated is a scene where someone turns into a skeleton, and that's really to be expected, people decomposing wouldn't get nailed by movies for another few decades. Finishing up on the effects, it's no King Kong or Beast From 20'000 Fathoms, but it's not as bad as you'd think for 1932.

I feel like giving this film shit is like picking on an old person; judging this film purely by modern standards is really not how you do it, which is why I said I was conflicted at the start of this review. On one hand, it's very, very much a product of its time, with a general lack of depth in its story and characters, a complete absence of violence of any sort, and a sluggish pace as a result, and horror that may have been scary then, but can be outdone by kids films these days. But on the other hand, the film is well made, not for the time but just in general, the effects are good, and most surprisingly, there's a good script that lets you get invested in the story, and Boris Karloff is really good as the Mummy. I cannot deny that The Mummy is a good film, but I'm hard pressed to say it compares to more recent, more frightening movies, even the 1999 Mummy, which I think is superior.  The Mummy is a good film regardless, and if you're up for a literal piece of film history, you should consider giving it a watch.