The Mummy 1932

Mr. Beethoven. Tis inte dö! Här är en red bull. Red bull? Sänkta priser på massa take away. Hej där! På netto nät har vi nu startat grillarna. Allt för dig som ska flippa börjare, fixa pizza, röka mackill eller försöka lista ut hur man grillar en kronets kocka. Grillar utesök köper du på nettonnet.se eller i nänsta Lagerkop.net.

Hello and welcome to the Mummy Movie podcast. As this is the first episode, I will first explain a little bit about the podcast, how it will be formatted, and also give a little bit of information on who I am as well. Basically, for each episode, I will take a single mummy movie and just analyse it, study it and review it. In general, I will be working my way from the oldest mummy movie to the newest one.

In terms of me, my name is Peter Rose, I have two Egyptology degrees from Swansea University, I have also worked as an archaeologist in both the UK and Egypt, and have done some work in epigraphy in Egypt as well. Now, you have probably heard of archaeology before. I would be very surprised if you had not. However, I often find people do not know what epigraphy is, so I will just give a little explanation.

Basically, epigraphy is the study of inscriptions, and in my experience it also has a lot to do with the reconstruction of text as well. So for now, I'd say that's enough about me. Back to the podcast. For this episode we will be looking at what many consider to be the first true mummy movie The Mummy from nineteen thirty two with Boris Carlos.

In terms of the structure of the episode We will start with a section on the background information of the film, then there will be a section on the historical accuracy of the film, and finally I will review it, say what I like and dislike, and just giving my overall impressions. Right. Let us not waste any more time. Let us dive headfirst into a film that inspired every mummy movie, and in general, many horror movies as well that followed it.

Let us open the creaky coffin door and enter the world of the mummy 1932. I have seen this film a few times over the years, and I always find the use of Swan Lake in the opening credits to be an odd choice. The only thing I can think of is that the very successful Dracula with Bella Legosi only came out a year before this and also used the piece of music.

I know that Dracula used Swan Lake because it saved on the cost of producing original music, and I can only assume that this is why the mummy used it as well. But for whatever reason, the music just seems to fit a little better with Dracula, or at least I feel it does anyway. This film cost almost$200,000 to make in 1932, which in today's money equals about$4 million.

Bearing in mind that the film industry was much smaller back then, this would have been considered a relatively large budget for a horror film. The film was a moderate box offer success, and this can largely be attributed to three things. Firstly, there was still much interest in Egypt thanks to the discovery of the tomb of Tutankhamun ten years previously. Secondly, Boris Karloff, who had also played Frankenstein, was a rising star and box office drawer.

Finally, America at this time was going through the Great Depression, and the cinema offered the public an escape from their troubles for a short time. Now we shall look at the historical accuracy of the film.

Firstly, it is worth noting that I am aware that these films are not made to be accurate. Therefore, the purpose of this section of the episode is not to mock the film as I believe some people would do, and so I shall be trying to remain a little respectful of what the writers and directors were trying to achieve here.

That being said, this film immediately opens on a mistake, and it is a mistake that anyone can see. As Swan Lake plays, the credits roll, and in the background we see a scroll covered in hieroglyphs. These hieroglyphs are clearly upside down. I don't think you even need to know that hieroglyphic texts were a form of writing, to realise that the large bird in the centre of the scroll should not be standing on its head. Moving on.

When we look at the ancient Egyptians in the film, we have the mummy Imotep and his love interest Anaxanamoon. If we are to take this at face value, Imoltep was the architect behind the steppe pyramid, which was built during the third dynasty of Egypt. Whilst Anaxunamun was the sister slash wife of Tutankhamun, who lived over a thousand years later in the eighteenth dynasty.

This does immediately seem like a mistake, although it should be noted that Imoltep was a name used by other Egyptians as well. What likely happened here was that the writers simply used two names of two ancient Egyptians that although well known to Egyptologists may have been less well known to the public. At the beginning of the film, the Egyptologists are confused by the organs being left in the body of the mummy, and assume that it means that Imhotep was buried alive.

Some mummies did have their organs still in the bodies. There are different types of mummification, some of which cost more, for say kings and queens, whilst others cost less. These ones were often used by elite individuals or by the middle class, and very often, as they were cheaper, the organs were not removed. Further, the idea of the ancient Egyptians burying people alive is pure fantasy, although personally I do think it is a fun trope.

I did see a frequent claim whilst researching this film that one of Ramesses III's sons, Pentawer, was buried alive as punishment for helping to kill his own father. Although he was part of such a conspiracy, the claim that he was buried alive is incorrect. Essentially, when his potential mummy was discovered in the late 1800s, it looked like it was screaming, which led a lot of early investigators to let their imaginations run wild.

The rumour was eventually put to rest in 1912 by Grafton Elliott Smith. However, I do agree that this body likely caused some inspiration for the buried alive trope. During the film, there are several references to the princesses of Isis, claiming that they have to be both princesses of the king and virgins. I feel here they are getting offices a little bit confused, and they may be referring to the godswife of Amon.

This particular office was significant during the eighteenth dynasty, which does seem to be an important setting of the film. The God's wife of Amon was supposed to be royalty, although the idea of the godswife of Aymon remaining a virgin did not come about until the twentieth dynasty. However, the film also talks about the office as if there were many of them at one time, when in reality there was only ever one God's wife of Aemon at one time.

If you are interested in the role that women played in ancient Egypt, the God's wife of Amon is an excellent office to look at as it was both long lasting and at its peak incredibly prestigious. During the second half of the film, there is a long flashback scene where we watch both Anaxanamun's funeral and as Imotep is captured and buried alive.

During the actual funeral, the coffins used simply look like cheap props. Okay, we've talked a lot about the things the film gets wrong. I feel it is only right that we look at the good bits as well. At the beginning of the film, they find a box that contains a scroll of Thoth. This scroll is a fictional creation, but they do at least show the correct god on the box. In general, although not perfect, the film does a good job of showing the correct gods at the correct times.

Throughout the film, Imoltep is often called the high priest of the Temple of the Sun at Kana. Karnak is a real place. In fact it is the largest temple complex in all of Egypt. However, there is no temple of Ra, the sun god, at Karnak. Though there was the cult centre of Aimun Ra, which was a combination, unsurprisingly, of the gods Aemun and the sun god Ra. Therefore it may be that the film is trying to refer to the high priest of Aemun Ra.

During the eighteenth dynasty, the high priest of Amen Ra was an office of great importance that was only going to become increasingly more important with time. Several hundred years later, during the twenty first dynasty, this office was arguably considered as important as the pharaoh.

What is interesting about the film's use of the title, The High Priest of the Temple of the Sun at Karnak, is that you can actually see later mummy movies burrowing it, and with time, each film slightly edits a wording. For instance, the mummy's hand from 1940 calls the office the High Priest of Kanak, cutting out the part about the Temple of the Sun.

By the Mummy nineteen fifty nine with Christopher Lee, the position is called the High Priest of the Great God Karnak. To show this, I have a clip from each of the films. First, the mummy from nineteen thirty two. Imhote High Priest of the Temple of the Sunnet Kana Next we have the clip from the mummy's hand. But first, I must hand it over to Your own. Secret guarded by the high priests of Karnak. And finally, we have the clip from the Mummy 1959.

Great Carnac, God of all light and darkness, hear this prayer from the humblest of your servants. Again, Karnak is a temple complex, not a god. I personally find this quite interesting, as it shows that most mummy movies simply borrowed from the films before it, rather than doing their own research. During the flashback scene which shows Ananka's funeral, we watch as a procession moves towards her tomb. This procession does get a few things correct.

Firstly, it includes professional mourners who had been paid to mourn the deceased. Further, most of these were women, which is accurate. Oxen are also used in the scene for pulling the sledge, which contained a shrine and the body of the deceased. There are many depictions of this from Egypt. Further, all of the priests shown are bald. Again, this is accurate as many priests used to shave off all of the hair on their bodies and heads as a way to remain pure.

Basically, the funeral scene is far from perfect but it does get enough right to suggest that some research was done. As mentioned before, there is clear evidence that each of the mummy movies simply borrows from the films before it. As such, almost by default, this is one of the more accurate mummy movies, although it still has many, many issues when it comes to this area.

The final part of this podcast is going to be a review of the film. I'm just going to talk about what I liked and disliked in the film and say whether I actually enjoyed it or not. Firstly, very early on in the film we see a shot of Hatshepset's Mortuary Temple, Del Bakeri. This is one of the most breathtaking locations, not just in modern day Luxor, but Egypt as a whole. I personally loved being able to see what it looked like ninety years ago, when work on its third terrace had not even begun.

For me, as an Egyptologist, this was an excellent and really interesting opening shot for the film. Another area of the film I really enjoyed was the way Imotep killed many of his victims. There is no fake strangling in this film. There is very little obvious violence at all. For the first two deaths, the shock of seeing him simply drives his victims insane. In fact, his first victim, named Ralph Norton, actually ends up laughing himself manically to death. For heaven's sakes, what is it?

Hearing him laugh did cause a slight prickle on the back of my neck, which I do not normally get from a horror film of this age. Several of these deaths use the element of mystery really well. Although shown in mummy form, Immotep is not necessarily overexposed when looking this way. And although to a modern audience this still is not particularly scary, I can at least see how people in the 1930s may have been a bit freaked out by it.

Some of the deaths unfortunately are not quite as effective. For instance, he can also cause people to have heart attacks, and this just comes across as goofy rather than scary. Fortunately, I quite like goofy stuff, although it clearly was not the intended purpose. In terms of Boris Carloff's performance as a mummy, I personally for you is to remember.

As is unsurprising from a horror legend, he has a certain subtle creepiness to him, which both makes you want to carry on watching and look away at the same time. This is most noticeable when he is talking to the love interest, Helen, who bears a striking resemblance to Anaxonamon. During their scenes, he has a way of leaning a little too close to her, or standing just slightly too close for comfort that actually made my skin crawl slightly.

I also love the way that rather than being killed quickly, the mummy lives in the modern day well, the nineteen twenties and thirties anyway, for a good ten years and assimilates into society. Although we don't see how he hides and survives in this time, it makes sense as to why he has learnt both English and Arabic. It also leads to a certain amount of mystery about his appearance, which I'm glad they did not explain as it does make you think about the film after you have finished watching it.

Basically, his appearance comes off as quite unnerving. The makeup used has clearly been designed to make him look a bit decayed, but in a strangely unnoticeable way. As you watch, you are constantly questioning whether he is supposed to have just aged in a strange way or whether he is decaying with time.

On the downside, I did feel that this film dragged on a bit. It was only 17 minutes long, but it feels like it lasts for about an hour and a half, and I feel that this is actually because it has a strangely slow and plodding pace. Overall, however, I really like this film. I think it is quite goofy and charming, meaning I'm not really liking it for the reason it was made.

But there are enough elements that are still creepy that can help me to appreciate what a contemporary audience may have experienced when watching this. Thank you very much for listening and please join me next time when I will be looking at The Mummy's Hand from 1940. Tänk till exempel att ligga med benen i högläge hjälper lite, ifs Olicksfallsförsäkring hjälper mycket.

Hej, det här är Alexander Pelrus från Framgångspodden. Jag sitter här i Jondi Ionic 9 efter att jag precis spelat in en podd i bilen. Och det slog mig efter över tusen samtal framgång har lärt mig att det inte handlar om att köra snabbast genom livet utan att ha rätt energi och rätt riktning. Och ibland handlar det också om att skapa utrymme för att tänka klart. Jondi Aonikni är byggd för just det. Helt elektriskt med upp till 620 km-sträckvid och möjligt att ladda 30 mil på bara 15 minuter.

Nu vis Jondi Ionic 9 som business lease från 3 690 kronor i månaden. Gå in på jondi.se och ser Jondi Ionic 9 can power your world. More is more. 8 Plus, spela ansvarsfullt.