Way back in the mists of time, when I was first dipping a toe into the world of ‘Film & Film theory’, I enrolled in a college film and media course, and the first module of that course was analysing changes in cinematography, style, culture and media literacy across 3 different eras using the same film as a grounding. and one of the first films we attempted to deconstruct was ‘The Mummy (1932)’, ‘The Mummy (1959)’ and ‘The Mummy (1999)’.

This was not only one of my first Hammer horror films (alongside Frankenstein and Dracula) but was also one of the first times that I began to develop a sense for the developing art of film as a medium. how film makers learned from film makers on how to make film tell a story more through the visuals, than by just simply telling the audience what was happening. I dont think I could have dealt with a better triptic honestly.

This film came about well after Universal studios and Hammer films had ‘Hammered’ out an agreement between themselves allowing Hammer to continue to adapt the ‘classic’ monsters without fear of litigation from Universal, and in exchange Universal got the international distribution rights to (most) hammer films going into the mid 1960s. And what Hammers ‘The Mummy’ does have going for it, is nearly 25+ years of Universal ‘Mummy’ films and sequels, plus a few 40s and 50s horror movies with similar themes, to cherry pick the best bits out of to create, in effect a kind of ‘Greatest hits’ mummy movie.

The plot picks up in late 19th century Egypt as father and son duo Stephen and John Banning are on an expidition to find the secret tomb of ‘Princess Ananka’. John is determined that the tomb will be located almost imminantly, but a leg injury has him stuck in bed, in a tent at the edge of the expedition. Eventually, the expedition strikes good fortune and a tomb IS indeed discovered. but Johns reluctance to leave the site for medical aid until the tomb has been analysed, documented and key items removed for further inspection, has left him permanently disabled.

Before going much further, a local by the name of Mehemet Bey stops the team, warning them that disturbing the tomb could bring TERRIBLE consiquences. But this is a group of British chaps in the late 19th century…So he may as well have not bothered for all the good it did to warn them. However, things DO go quite wrong during the removals, when an unknown force attacks Stephen leaving him ranting like a maniac about unknown evil forces.

The gang get home to London, and some time later we’re reintroduced to the Bannings, John hasnt spoken to his father in a very long time due to his mental health issues since the ‘experience’, but he’s been summoned to speak to him urgently, at which point its revealed that he senses a great evil is returning again.

We’re then flashed back as a LOT of exposition reveals that, while inside the tomb, Stephen had read a ‘scroll of life’ which when read aloud accidentally ressurected the tombs ‘protector’ Kharis. Kharis was a high priest in the ancient egyption times who had a deep love for Ananka, and on Anankas death, he attempted to use the scoll of life to ressurect her. but got caught and was murdered as punishment and left to rot in Anankas chamber.

Little did the British explorers realise, that Kharis was there and that they’ve brought him back to London for more examination. Mehemet has ALSO come to London at roughly the same time Kharis is being transported and using the ‘Scroll of life’ he ressurects the mummy, to bring vengence to the ‘Infidels’ who desicrated Anankas chambers. Leading to all kinds of Mummy related shenanigans, ESPECIALLY when Isobel Banning (Johns Sister) enters the picture, and its revealed she has an uncanny resemblence to Princess Ananka.

And honestly? I have VERY little to complain about with this one. ‘The Mummy’ is probably my least favourite of the Universal monster movies, and most adaptations or offshoots of ‘The Mummy’ story, I find just drag atrociously, to me? I find them to be very ‘style over substance’ movies…usually one or two good bits of plotting or storytelling wrapped up in 70-90 minutes of brilliant direction and cine…which is fine if you like looking at pretty things, but not so good if you actually want to be captivated by the story. In particualr, the Universal ‘Mummy’ for me struggles on two counts, taking the sluggish elements of ‘Dracula’ and the blunt elements of ‘Frankenstein’ and shoving them together into a feature so slow, the monster could probably outrun it with ease.

Mercifully, BECAUSE the Hammer version gets the pick of the buffet on plot elements and story lines, we have what I would consider probably the best mummy movie made to date…Is it cheating that its essentially stitched together from 6-8 other mummy and mummy adjacent movies narratively?…maybe…but when its this good, who cares!?

The scripts razor sharp, expertly paced and doesnt hang around for a minute longer than it needs to. the characters all have a decent level of complexity, the plotting makes sense, feels naturalistic and for the time really pushed the boundaries of cinema. the tone is very dark in places, but it isnt afraid to contrast it with a little bit of humour here and there, but unlike ‘Horror of Dracula’ and ‘Curse of Frankenstein’ the humour in this is a lot more subtle and way less overt (no random burgermeisters pulling daft faces in THIS film!) the dialogues superb, the ending, satisfying and well handled.

Literally my only gripe here, is that for SOME BIZARRE reason, they decided to go all in on stereotying and racism towards the egyptians and…for SOME reason…the Irish. I dont know why, it doesnt suite the pictures tone or needs to do what it did. But they repeatedly cut back to painfully racist Irish stereotypes in the form of transporters who ‘hick’ there way through several scenes slurring and looking rough around the edges…the scenes in egypt display several ‘white’ workers who’ve been ‘tanned’ and they COMPLETELY gloss over the fact that John and co are essentially using hired slave labour for their expadition. I know its a film of its time, and its important that we reflect on films that do this to show WHY we should never do what we did again. But its just so surreal to see this film do what its doing when it really didnt need to…

Beyond that however, this is quitessential Hammer Horror. the direction is of a company in its stride Terence Fischer and Jimmy Sangster were now three films into this series and were in their element. With gorgeous, rich and lavish direction that commands a real sense of vibrance and talent. Of the four original ‘adaptation’ Hammer Horror films, I think this one is the most pleasing visually, with the cast all well aware of their screen presence, extravigant set spaces that are utilised superbly and a clearly developed hand on the rudder uniting sound, lighting, set work and camera operations into probably the single best shot Hammer film in the companies history.

The cine too is superb. rich colour usage and a keen eye to lighting and shadow work, render this film a feast for the eyes. compositions are astounding, managing to create striking visual imagery AND hearty amounts of experimentation without ever really dropping the ball or making the end product look or feel cheap. Its an ‘epic’ in horror movie form. and a master class on how to structure your scenes and visually tell a story. all wrapped up in an incredibly tight edit that does what it needs to do and leaves the audience wanting more.

Performance wise, this is the 3rd outing for Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing under Hammer, and as always they’re superb. I think I honestly prefer Lee’s ‘Mummy’ to his ‘Frankenstein’ everyone understands the tone needed for this one, theres a sincerity and genuineness in the performances here that havent been seen in previous entries. Not a bad performance in the entire cast run (barring the racist characturing) its amazing.

Only enhanced by a top tier soundtrack that matches the tone and energy of this film perfectly, and results in one of the finest Hammer scores recorded. and thats not even mentioning its implementation IN the film. which elevates the whole thing to the next level.

‘The Mummy’ completes the trifecta of Hammers early monster movies. and while they would go on to adapt other Universal Monster movies going forward, these first 3 outings really changed the face of horror and UK cinema, essentially acting as the catalyst that would eventually become the 70s amacus/folk horror movement.

This? is a masterpiece of horror cinema, and I dont use that term lightly. a vividly rich, razor focussed and lavish viewing experience that more or less does everything it can do WELL above a base standard. If you have even a passing interest in 50s horror, the first three Hammer horror films should be on your list by default. But this one especially.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-mummy-1959/1/