The Mummy's Shroud (1967)

Powerful

Fantastic!

A lot more amusing than I thought it would be.

I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

The Mummy's Shroud is far from an awful film, I've yet to see an unwatchable Hammer film, even their lesser work. It is however an uneven film, with a number of strengths and an even number of big weaknesses, and one of Hammer's least accomplished.It looks good, some of the editing lacks tightness sometimes and the Mummy effects are not very good, but the photography is solid and often wonderful especially in the final thirty minutes, the lighting is suitably eerie and the sets give a sense of time and place very well while also looking great. The music score thunders thrillingly and doesn't feel stock and over-bearing, fitting with the atmosphere appropriately. The murders are inventive and quite grisly, while the first murder is the one with the most punch the most memorable being Longbarrow's. While the best The Mummy's Shroud gets is the final thirty minutes, which is very entertaining and legitimately scary.Casting and acting-wise, it is a rather mixed bag with a few coming off well. The best performance comes from Michael Ripper, I appreciated that his role was more substantial in comparison to some of his other roles, and he is excellent in it, the tragic nature of the character Longbarrow was so poignantly done and had such pathos that it was easy to feel sympathy for him. John Phillips also stands out as a suitably loathsome villain, while Barbara Sellars matches him more than ideally; the interplay between Phillips is very effectively played by both. David Buck is an appealing hero. Catherine Lacey tries too hard sometimes, but it is clear that she was having fun and she is enjoyable to fun as one of the film's more colourful characters.Others don't fare so well. Roger Delgardo has a tendency to over-compensate, that it takes one out of the film, his tongue-in-cheek comedic nature too much out of place. Andre Morell was a reliable actor but is completely wasted, no matter how hard he tried to give some serious depth to his character. As truly attractive Maggie Kimberly looks, her acting is very over-theatrical and melodramatic and it does hurt the film sometimes. Lastly the Mummy of the title is badly disadvantaged by the truly laughable and fake look it has(the Egyptians in the opening sequence are also very poorly made up), its far too late and far too short screen time and Eddie Powell's(even more lumbering and anaemic than the worst of Lon Chaney Jnr's interpretation) emotionless and un-menacing performance.The film takes far too long to get going, with an overlong(did it really need to be seven minutes?) and not always relevant opening scene, with the back-story rather unnecessary. Despite the distinguished delivery, the narration was not really needed, and it should have been a case of more show less tell. The script is very stiff and rambling, with a lot of talk that doesn't do anywhere. The first half is also let down by its draggy pacing, noticeable lack of suspense and horror and a very over-familiar story with a few subplots that either lead nowhere, add little or both.All in all, an uneven film and one of Hammer's lesser and least accomplished films, but by all means watchable, especially for the final thirty minutes and Ripper's performance. 5/10 Bethany Cox

Returning from an expedition, the crew members who brought a royal mummy back to town find themselves being stalked and killed by the revived mummy and try to stop its deadly rampage.This one actually turned out to be quite decent overall as there's a lot to like here but does have some big flaws here. One of the biggest pluses to this is the rather enjoyable action scenes that have a lot of rather kinetic, enjoyable fun to them, whether it's the opening assault taking place in historical Egypt or the exploration of the tomb, as both of these manages to feature some enjoyable and surprising aspect to not only keep them moving along but also feature some suspenseful moments to match the spectacle. Other action scenes, especially the resurrection flashback which utilizes the great eye-moving trick before getting out of the coffin while the unaware victim keeps reading off the scroll until the fateful attack, the first attack in the gypsy's' lair as it appears behind the beaded door and especially the second attack in the photography studio where the reflection in the solution lead to a wild brawl that gets quite fun throughout the rather brief time but ends on a blast with the flaming acid signaling a rather impressive scene. As well, the finale here works incredibly well by featuring the appeasement attempt before it resurrects and begins brawling and chasing them around the exhibit before finally having the fun of getting the mummy turned to stone so there's plenty of exciting action placed there to get this one on a high-note. Still, there's a few things that hold this one back, most notably the subplot about the doctor being placed in an asylum which has little if anything to do with the film itself and isn't really given any sort of justification why. It plays it off as if that was how the end result for him all along was going to play out, yet then has him break out anyway which causes a series of logic problems with incarcerating him in the first place. Likewise, it's all part of the problem with this one as it really holds off the mummy getting involved until really late into this one by being resurrected pretty late and note really getting a lot to do with this scenes of the crew waiting around for it to come to life. That it has to go back to resting instead of going out as a hunter for the full-time does make this tend to feel a bit repetitive having to go into the resurrection each time out, but overall isn't all that bad.Today's Rating/PG: Violence.

Mummy's Shroud, The (1966) * 1/2 (out of 4)Hammer had great success at taking various Universal monsters and making them their own in a long running group of films. They did wonders with Frankenstein and Dracula but The Mummy, on the other hand, offered up more disappointments than anything. This time out we start off with some narration by Peter Cushing (rumored) who tells us of a young pharaoh who escapes persecution thanks to his slave. Flash forward to 1920 and an exhibition uncovers the tomb of the young boy. Like idiots and after being warned, they mess around with his skull, which sets loose the mummy to seek revenge. I guess this film is best remembered for being the last Hammer film to be shot at Bray Studios but it's surprising how poor all the sets look here. Usually you could depend on good looking sets but that's not the case here and this is easy to spot early on when we get the big battle but it's obvious that they'll all fighting on cardboard sets. Things don't improve as we flash forward as we get one long, boring dialogue scene after another and it gets so bad that you'll be wishing a real mummy will show up at your house and crush your skull just so you can quit watching this thing. The usually dependable Andre Morell comes off pretty boring here as does John Phillips and David Buck. Hammer regular Michael Ripper doesn't add anything either. The locations used here make you feel as if you're on a fake set, which is never a good things and there's zero atmosphere created by director Gilling. The entire movie moves as slow as Lon Chaney, Jr.'s mummy and that's certainly not a good thing. There are a few effective moments and the highlight is the final sequence with the mummy. I won't ruin how they destroy him but it's certainly a great looking sequence.

Mummy movies are notoriously difficult to make interesting. The original Universal film with Boris Karloff succeeded by becoming a dark and dreamy romantic fantasy. Hammer's full-blooded remake in 1959 gave us a powerful yet sympathetic Mummy portrayed by Christopher Lee. Beyond those two, most mummy films have been of middling quality. This is one of the better ones, though it surely has its faults.The lengthy historical prologue has been complained about by many, but I think it it necessary to show the great loyalty and devotion that the slave Prem has towards his young master, Kah-to-bey. It gives him a sympathetic edge, as he did everything to honor his master both in life and death. This aura of sympathy is in all of Hammer's Mummy films to some degree. Lee's Kharis suffered horribly for true love while Ra-Antef in "Curse of the Mummy's Tomb" was a noble soul terribly betrayed. Prem fits well with his predecessors.The reanimated Prem is little more than a slave of the fanatical Hasmid and his crazed mother. But when he strikes, it's with a lot of violence in some very well-crafted death scenes. He crushes one character's head like an eggshell (off screen but we can imagine the gruesome details), splatters another with burning acid before setting him on fire, strangles another before dashing his brains out on a wall and wraps up another in a bed sheet before tossing him out a window to the street far below! Now THAT is a violent mummy and one capable of more than just simply strangling people.Prem's unique look is based on actual Egyptian mummies. Some find it disappointing...I do not. One of the best scenes is when the mummy slowly opens its crusty eyelids. Prem is also mighty tough. He gets singed with acid (giving him a nice smoky look), hacked with an axe and shot to hell at close range without much effect. When destruction finally comes to the mummy, it comes in a most unique and gruesome fashion.Most Hammer films boast good performances and there are several worth noting here. John Phillips hits just the right note as the arrogant and cowardly Stanley Preston. One of the more subtle horrors of the film is his completely loveless and emotionally dead relationship with his wife. Just before his meeting with the Mummy, Preston must realize that he will be missed by no one. Elisabeth Sellars as Mrs. Preston gives one of the most cold-blooded and emotionally detached performances I've seen. Roger Delgado is great as the sinister Hasmid, unleashing an amazingly perfect stream of Arabic gibberish. Delgado would perfect his evil as The Master in Dr. Who. Another wild performance is given by Catherine Lacey as the demented Haiti the fortune teller. Never has any fortune teller delighted in predicting her customer's deaths as much as Haiti.One black mark against the movie is the criminal misuse of Andre Morell as Sir Basil. Morell was a terrific actor, so memorable in "Plague of the Zombies", "Hound of the Baskervilles" and the little-seen "Cash On Demand", but here he makes little to no impression. Something which I blame more on the script and the director than Morell himself.Maggie Kimberly is quite stunning as Claire. She looks rather average at first, but the more she is in peril, the more attractive she becomes.The actor who really walks off with the movie is Hammer mainstay Michael Ripper. What a versatile actor he was. As the meek and suffering lackey of Preston's, he makes for a perfect milksop. We feel an overwhelming sympathy for this simple character and his death is a brutal shock.There are parts where the movie lags, particularly in the opening desert scenes, but once Prem is awakened, the action never flags and the movie builds to a powerful and action-packed climax. In the end, Hammer gave as much life as they could to the tired mummy concept with "The Mummy's Shroud" and the film should satisfy anyone looking for escapist horror.