With The Mummy's Hand (1940) taking place in 1940, this film should therefore be set in 1970, as frequent mention is made of thirty years having passed. However, there is no attempt to create a futuristic setting and the film includes contemporary mentions of the ongoing Second World War. See more »
George Zucco confirms that while it didn't kill him (being set afire at the end of The Mummy's Hand), it "maimed and distorted" the mummy, which neatly explains why Lon Chaney Jr. looks nothing like Tom Tyler, it does not explain why the wrappings on Chaney's mummy are not even singed. See more »
Whether you can believe it or not, the facts are here and we've got to face them. A creature that's been alive for over 3,000 years is in this town.
See more »
The Mummy's Tomb is the 2nd part of the original "The Mummy" franchise following on from The Mummy's Hand (1940).
It's set 30 years after the events of the first film and the mummy has returned under new guidance, this time to kill off all surviving members of the Banning family who were responsible for foiling the evil plans in the first movie.
This time there is no comedy, the entire tone of the movie is considerably darker!
For this reason it doesn't have the same charm as the first movie but it makes up for this with better cinematography and continues the story perfectly.
It does suffer all the tropes of movies of this era (And there are many) but it could have been considerably worse. For fans of classic horror cinema this is a watchable continuation of the franchise.
Looks better than the first part
Follows on very well
Remaking scenes from the earlier film is a tad silly
Things I Learnt From This Movie:
Mummys are excellent climbers
If in doubt, cry witch!
Playing dead works against Mummys
12 of 13 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this