मौत का श्राप

The Curse of the Mummy's Tomb

After Hammer's first successful stab at a mummy film (THE MUMMY - 1959) it's pretty rough going with their bandaged follow-ups. This one was not quite as unwatchable as I feared, but was still a limp and rather average affair that I don't see myself revisiting any time soon, if ever. A typical group of treasure seekers uncovers another Egyptian carcass which ultimately gets put on public display by a sleazy American showman, but mysteriously disappears and starts killing people. There's a lot of dull filler through most of this, but by the time the mummy starts stomping there was more action than I was lead to believe from others' reviews. This mummy's makeup isn't too bad, and he's more inventive than most with some of his killing techniques. ** out of ****

The Curse of the Mummy's Tomb (1964) is Hammer's second venture into the world of ancient Egypt. Without giving too much away, the story is similar to all mummy films - an ancient tomb is opened and those who opened it must pay. To many, the film may seem slow to start, but once the mummy is released, things pick up. Terence Morgan, Ronald Howard, and Jeanne Roland are all adequate, but somewhat uninspired. Fred Clark is the brightest spot in the movie as the wealthy Alexander King. Clark's character, obviously inspired by PT Barnum, is a breath of fresh air to this otherwise predictable mummy story. He is looking to cash in on the mummy by presenting it as some sort of sideshow spectacle. The mummy make-up is good - the most obvious comparison would be to that of Kharis in the Universal mummy sequels. Also, like Kharis and unlike Christopher Lee in Hammer's first mummy film, this mummy walks and moves in a more "normal" pace. He is not the athletic mummy played by Lee. After reading this it may sound as if I didn't like The Curse of the Mummy's Tomb. While not the best mummy movie or the best Hammer film, it's still fun - especially the final third of the movie.

The Hammer Studios had a good idea in resurrecting the 'Mummy'. This is the same wrapped and rolled menace, but this time in color. Typical story of a mummy being removed from its resting place and taken out on tour. Beware of the curse, again. Action doesn't really pick up until about half way through the movie, and that is when the thrill level steps up. This is sub-par for the high standards already set by Hammer. The cast includes Terence Morgan, Fred Clark, Michael Ripper and Jeanne Roland. Dickie Owens is the Mummy.

This is what a horror film should be. This is exactly what a Mummy film should be. It is undeniably one of the best Mummy films, if not the best. That's because we get all of the elements. We have the "curse" upon those who dare to infringe upon the mysticism of the culture. We also have the beautiful woman who is to be the Mummy's love interest. We also have an array of interesting, even believable characters for science fiction purposes. Most importantly, we have the "brother" angle here. We know, of course, the Mummy is one brother, and it isn't long before we learn who the other one is. Which one will want to kill the girl? Which one will fight to save her? That is what makes the Mummy films so great. Everything this does, this does well. The cast is superb. If a few are annoying, it is because they do their jobs at playing annoying characters. That's called "good acting". It's something many of today's prima donas would never do. Can't blame them. They would lose their fan base of dorks. This was done in the days when fan bases were much more mature. The atmosphere here is very good, too.

This is a very slow film, with a not very frightening monster, a rather dull romance, and some pretty unconvincing backgrounds.That said, it does have its moments of excitement, and the basic story manages to hold one's interest, if you can get through the long stretches of expository dialogue. The parts that stay in my memory the strongest are those involving the tragic figure of archaeologist Giles Dalrymple, played by Jack Gwillim.This dignified older man has a weakness for alcohol, and as his embarrassment at being an unwilling participant in the hokey show biz presentation of the mummy by the American impresario increases, his drinking gets worse. There are a couple of truly memorable and sad scenes involving his boozing, one where a housekeeper tries to persuade her employer to eat supper, as he pours himself the latest of many drinks and insists he isn't hungry. The other is an uncomfortably convincing scene of Giles trying to be helpful to a younger colleague, who is translating a manuscript, and Giles clumsily spills his drink on the ancient parchment. The younger archaeologist has been trying to restrain his impatience and discomfort with the awkwardness of his mentor being intoxicated, but he loses his temper and curses Giles for being a drunken old fool. The actor's look of chagrin at what he has just said is completely real, as is Giles' sad, low key response, as he looks shocked at first, but says " So I see I've lost your respect now, also", and the younger man tries to pretend he didn't mean it. This scene is perhaps the most memorable of the entire film, and quite moving. It's a small moment in the convoluted tale of the mummy and the curse, but a striking one, nonetheless. Having recently acquired a copy of this movie and seen it twice, I am struck by the idea that the basic storyline is rather intriguing, and might have made for a much more exciting picture. I think the main problem is that the leads are not terribly interesting personalities and/or that their characters are under-written. Imagine the possibilities if Christopher Lee had played the part of Adam Beauchamp instead of Terence Morgan, or Richard Pasco had played John. Terence Morgan gives his role a good try, but I can't help feeling that Lee would have brought a really intense, evil charisma to the part of Adam that would have made Annette's attraction to him more believable. Also, imagine the level of intensity and fire that Pasco would have brought to the role of John, with serious conflict between him and Adam over the love of Annette. I think this is not really a bad film at all, but it could have been better, with more inspired casting.

After a cripplingly slow start, the second-half of this low-budget (even by Hammer standards) tale is quite lively and gruesome. Devotees may miss Cushing and Lee but Hammer alumnus Michael Ripper IS on hand, as an unlikely Cockney-accented Egyptian called Ahmed. Director Michael Carreras liked to shoot all his films in widescreen and the film is probably best seen in its original Hammerscope format.

A very dull Hammer horror film with people opening an ancient mummy's tomb, the mummy comes to life, kills all the defilers, etc etc. It starts off great with a stabbing and a hand being cut off but quickly slows down and becomes dull. The story concentrates more on the romantic triangle between John (Ronald Howard), Adam (Terence Moragn) and Annette (Jeanne Roland). The "romance" scenes between them are pretty deadly--Howard and Morgan walk through their roles and Roland has got to be the WORST actress I've ever seen in a Hammer horror movie (and that's saying something). She certainly is beautiful but that doesn't excuse her lousy performance. The mummy doesn't even swing into action until almost an hour in! SPOILERS!!! It does have some gruesome scenes--two more hands are cut off (Hammer seemed to really enjoy that in this one) and one man's head is crushed when the mummy steps on it (heard but not seen)! These bits are the only highlights in the film and are cut from most commercial TV prints leaving you NO reason to watch this. Cool mummy makeup too. END SPOILERS!!! It looks good and is lavishly filmed but, all in all, this movie is very dull and pointless. Don't bother. with this one.

All Hammer Movies had that look. They had a way of presenting Color in a formula of their own design and it is part of their appeal to this day. In a word, it is sumptuous. Here we have the Studio's second Mummy Movie as our old friend is awakened once again to materialize the proverbial Curse. It has a rather talky first half but the verbiage is slightly interesting and the "Mummy as Sideshow" is a new take. The second half kicks into gear and moves quite energetically, well as energetic as a Mummy can be. He seems determined to wreak the necessary havoc and does so quite brutally. In the finale things really come together with a Plot twist and an exciting chase through the sewers. Overall, this is mid-range Hammer and that is almost always better than the Studio's contemporaries. Definitely worth a view for Hammer, Horror, and B-Movie Fans.

Hammer made its reputation ,not to mention its money , with Gothic horror but in 1964 this was the only such movie on its slate .That year they turned their attention elsewhere --to the psychological chiller with Fanatic and Hysteria ; to the adventure yarn with The Brigand of Khandahar and She ;to the war picture with The Secret of Blood Island .This may be why the movie looks so tired and underfunded -almost as if they wanted to be seen as a studio that could turn its hand to many genres and were a little shame faced about doing horror pictures This a routine and unoriginal revamp of the mummy movie sub genre with all clichés present and correct .There is one deft twist-the mummy's brother turns out to be an immortal ,alive and living in London .For the rest it is the over familiar tale of archaelogists who invade a tomb becoming prey for the rampaging ,vengeful mummy who sets out to kill the " desecrators "and who turns out to have a soft spot for the comely female of the party . Fred Clark is good as the American impresario who seeks to exploit the discovery of the tomb for commercial gain and there is sound support from Ronald Howard ,George Pastell and John Paul but Terence Morgan is dull and the heroine ,Jeanne Roland is so badly dubbed as to be incomprehensible at times .There was no exterior shooting in the picture and it shows with the Egyptian desert represented by a painted backcloth Add a mummy which lacks the poetry and pathos of Karloff and Lee in previous pictures and this is second rate fare ,well below the usual standards of the studio