A Filmmaker's Review: "The Mummy" (1932)

I'm going to be perfectly honest, I did not think too much of this film the first time I watched it, but after a few times, I began to appreciate it more for what it was - a film about a monster. And that's all it was. And that was fun. It worked brilliantly both for the way in which the story was told and for Boris Karloff's career-long investigation into the portrayal of monsters and villainous characters.

The film is about the discovery of a mummified body whilst on an Egyptian excavation. When the mummy comes back to life, he goes out searching for the woman that was once his wife whom he believes has been reincarnated into a modern woman. When he finds her, he begins strange mind-control techniques that involves a scroll which was used to bring mummies back to life. Once her boyfriend finds out about this, he takes drastic action against the mummy by getting involved with those who knew about this certain scroll - threatening to destroy it before its too late.

When you look at the themes of love and control, you get this deeper message and metaphor of domestic abuse. I do not know whether this was the intention of the filmmaker, but I would like to believe so because it fits so very well. There is a strange intention to show the way in which the monster abuses the girl he is with by making her return to him whilst, also having her state that she does not want to go back to him. It's living this double life, one of which is being entirely controlled by someone else. Another metaphor I get from this is the disillusion of religious practice and the requirement for the questioning of belief systems. This is something that her boyfriend does and the fact that he is deeply punished to the point of unconsciousness for it makes us see what happens when the control of religion and belief is questioned or insulted. Again, I do not know whether this is truly intentional by the filmmaker but it is very telling and gives an extra dimension to the storyline, making it even deeper and better for the audience's viewing experience.

Another thing I adored about this film was the acting of Boris Karloff. He's a brilliant actor and his role in "Frankenstein" has practically become the go-to for presenting any Frankenstein's Monster figure in future films, cartoons etc. It has practically become immortal and I am very happy to see that there has been so much content to come out of his exploration of the villainous monsters that litter our memories with nightmarish images. It was very important for the progression of horror cinema. When we really look at it, there probably would not be many studies into filmmaking and early horror and monsters if it had not have been for Boris Karloff's commercialisation of them through the majorly frightening way he would portray them.

Future versions of "The Mummy" I don't feel ever lived up to this one because they all rely on the shock value of the Mummy coming to life and special effects in order to tell the story. The simplicity of this film obviously leaves much to the imagination which, in parts, is worse. Boris Karloff alone is far more frightening and honestly, I cannot give fault to the storyline either. It is a simplistic storyline but also allows for expansion and tension. This means that there was no real need for many special effects and thus, the film becoming that slightly more skin-crawling and frightening. Especially when you had these dark close-ups of Boris Karloff in costume. These were especially frightening.

In conclusion. this film allows us to see the extent of the filmmakers reliance on Boris Karloff’s incredible talent but also makes us see that there can be major metaphors studied in the early films of Universal Pictures as well. I feel like the modern films cannot live up to this one, it is far too pure and far too simplistic in its attempt to scare its audience in the most general of ways. It makes it look far too realistic without the special effects and that is what frightens us the most.