In the terminology of today's film industry, this movie would most likely be called a "reboot" of the classic Universal Mummy. At the beginning of the 40s, Universal was seeing change in its' management who were trying new approaches. This group had seen some prior success with relaunches like SON OF FRANKENSTEIN and decided to give the Mummy another chance.
The film begins with an "origin" explaining how our Mummy came into existence. This is footage directly lifted from the original Mummy, only they have changed the names of characters (Imhotep to Kharis, Anunk-Su-Namon to Nananka). There is a small change in this footage as part features Tom Tyler (once the mighty Shazam in the Captain Marvel serials) to replace Boris Karloff, though you can still see Karloff in the group shots. Once our story is set, we meet our two American heroes, who discover an old urn in a village bazaar that sets them off on the movie's adventure.
Beside the basic plot framework repeating from the original, there is actually very little that I find the two movies have in common. The first movie is often credited as being one of the most eerie and atmospheric horror pieces that Uni put together in their heyday. All of that dream-like tone is gone here, replaced more so with a sense of adventure, spiced with quite a few attempts at humor. Both movies focus quite a bit on the Egyptian relic's quest to punish those who have violated his tomb, though the original spends a great deal of time revolving around Karloff's obsession with the modern re-incarnation of his lost love. There is, really, none of that present here except for a brief unexplainable diversion where the high priest suddenly decides he is going to make our heroine immortal to be his bride.
One of the things that I think this movie does better is more focus on the mummy, itself, in its' linen-wrapped glory. As a child, when I first discovered the Universal classics, it always disappointed me how little we got to see the mummy itself in the Karloff classic. They rectify that in this movie by putting the full focus on the creature, though that is both good and bad. The director does some nice creative work of blacking out the mummy's eyes and mouth in order to give it a more sinister look. On the other hand, Tyler does a rather poor job of "suit-acting" with lowered head and timid movements that make the mummy feel less monstrous than most other versions I've seen.
As I stated before, the movie never really captures any of the essence of the original and never establishes any real atmosphere. In that regard, it feels much more like the Brendan Fraser modern remakes as action movie more than horror movie. I, also, found the comic relief sidekick to be very irritating. I don't know if his humor came across as more funny in 1940, but most of it fails for me, as a viewer, and contributes to the lack of any real mood.
I have seen pretty much every Universal monster movie and all their sequels. All in all, this is one of the better sequels that I've seen. It just can't compare to the original, which is probably an unfair comparison to make in the first place.
The film begins with an "origin" explaining how our Mummy came into existence. This is footage directly lifted from the original Mummy, only they have changed the names of characters (Imhotep to Kharis, Anunk-Su-Namon to Nananka). There is a small change in this footage as part features Tom Tyler (once the mighty Shazam in the Captain Marvel serials) to replace Boris Karloff, though you can still see Karloff in the group shots. Once our story is set, we meet our two American heroes, who discover an old urn in a village bazaar that sets them off on the movie's adventure.
Beside the basic plot framework repeating from the original, there is actually very little that I find the two movies have in common. The first movie is often credited as being one of the most eerie and atmospheric horror pieces that Uni put together in their heyday. All of that dream-like tone is gone here, replaced more so with a sense of adventure, spiced with quite a few attempts at humor. Both movies focus quite a bit on the Egyptian relic's quest to punish those who have violated his tomb, though the original spends a great deal of time revolving around Karloff's obsession with the modern re-incarnation of his lost love. There is, really, none of that present here except for a brief unexplainable diversion where the high priest suddenly decides he is going to make our heroine immortal to be his bride.
One of the things that I think this movie does better is more focus on the mummy, itself, in its' linen-wrapped glory. As a child, when I first discovered the Universal classics, it always disappointed me how little we got to see the mummy itself in the Karloff classic. They rectify that in this movie by putting the full focus on the creature, though that is both good and bad. The director does some nice creative work of blacking out the mummy's eyes and mouth in order to give it a more sinister look. On the other hand, Tyler does a rather poor job of "suit-acting" with lowered head and timid movements that make the mummy feel less monstrous than most other versions I've seen.
As I stated before, the movie never really captures any of the essence of the original and never establishes any real atmosphere. In that regard, it feels much more like the Brendan Fraser modern remakes as action movie more than horror movie. I, also, found the comic relief sidekick to be very irritating. I don't know if his humor came across as more funny in 1940, but most of it fails for me, as a viewer, and contributes to the lack of any real mood.
I have seen pretty much every Universal monster movie and all their sequels. All in all, this is one of the better sequels that I've seen. It just can't compare to the original, which is probably an unfair comparison to make in the first place.