Release Date: February 29th, 1940 (Chicago premiere) Directed by: Joe May Written by: Lester Cole Based on:The House of Seven Gables by Nathaniel Hawthorne Music by: Frank Skinner Cast: George Sanders, Vincent Price, Margaret Lindsay, Dick Foran, Nan Grey, Cecil Kellaway, Alan Napier
Universal Pictures, 89 Minutes
I’ve always wanted to see this movie but it’s just evaded me over the years. It was streaming on something I have, though, so I figured it was as good of a time as any to finally check it out.
Man, Vincent Price is super young in this. The only other film that I have seen where he’s actually younger is The Invisible Man Returns, which is from January of the same year. He’s also invisible throughout that picture.
This story isn’t a horror film despite Price’s penchant for those roles. Although, some in this wealthy family believe that there is a family curse and thus, make some pretty heinous and drastic decisions based off of that fear.
The family, falling on some fairly hard times, is contemplating selling their mansion. This pits the two brothers against each other. The villainous one of the two, believes that there is a fortune hidden in the house and that with it, he can survive, living life at the pampered level he’s accustomed to. With that, he frames his nice brother, played by Vincent Price, for the murder of their father. In prison, years later, Price’s Clifford meets Matthew, who is part of the family that “cursed” Clifford’s. The two actually become friends and devise a plan to clear Clifford’s name and to expose what his dastardly brother did to him and the family, since his imprisonment.
Surprisingly, a lot happens in this movie that it is just shy of 90 minutes. It’s well paced, doesn’t waste a moment and you really like the virtuous, honest characters in this. You want to see the villain get what’s coming. Plus, the performances are solid and even for still being in his twenties, Price showed great promise, here.
I ended up liking this more than I thought I would. I didn’t expect it to be bad but it was a short, dramatic film with a young Price lacking the mileage he had by the time he became a horror icon with 1953’s House of Wax.
Also known as: The Concert Feature, Highbrowski by Stokowski, Bach to Stravinsky and Bach, The Musical Feature (working titles) Release Date: November 13th, 1940 (New York City – original roadshow version premiere) Directed by: Samuel Armstrong, James Algar, Bill Roberts, Paul Satterfield, Ben Sharpsteen, David D. Hand, Hamilton Luske, Jim Handley, Ford Beebe, T. Hee, Norman Ferguson, Wilfred Jackson Written by: Joe Grant, Dick Huemer Music by: various Cast: Leopold Stokowski, Deems Taylor (host, narrator)
Walt Disney Animation Studios, RKO Radio Pictures, 125 Minutes, 124 Minutes (2000 roadshow restoration), 80 Minutes (1942 cut), 120 Minutes (1991 VHS cut), 115 Minutes (1946 cut)
With only their third animated feature film, Walt Disney Animation Studios achieved true perfection and describing Fantasia as anything less than a masterpiece should be criminal.
Okay, hyperbolic speech aside, this is still an amazing motion picture that was, hands down, the best use of the animation medium up to its existence. Frankly, it’s still a hard movie to top and it has aged tremendously well, still being one of the greatest works of motion picture art in history, regardless of its genre or style.
Now I can see why this wouldn’t be some people’s cup of tea. But we can’t all appreciate greatness or understand the artistic and historical significance of something so old in a time where people barely have the attention span to read just a tweet.
Fantasia is an incredible motion picture, regardless of how you may feel about it, as it showcased how versatile the animation medium is while also taking it to a level that people couldn’t have fathomed in 1940.
It’s a beautiful looking film that’s meticulously crafted and executed on every level. It showcases the best animation of its time with some of the greatest musical creations in human history and it all comes together in a perfect, visually stunning, audibly pleasing and fluid composition.
The film is a series of different small films within the larger tapestry. Each one features classical music tunes played with incredible animated visuals that are cued up to the music. It’s a unique and really cool experiment that more than paid off for the studio and it’s gone on to inspire countless other films and animated releases in various formats from film, television, video, live shows and modern concerts that use animation and cued lighting techniques to respond to the music being performed.
Out of all the old school animated Disney pictures, this is the one that I’ve always wanted to see on the big screen. It’s eluded me over the years but hopefully, if we’re ever in a post-pandemic world, I’ll be able to eventually see it how it was truly intended.
Rating: 10/10 Pairs well with: Disney’s other early animated feature films.
Release Date: February 7th, 1940 (New York City premiere) Directed by: Ben Sharpsteen (supervising director), Hamilton Luske (supervising director), Bill Roberts, Norman Ferguson, Jack Kinney, Wilfred Jackson, T. Hee Written by: Ted Sears, Otto Englander, Webb Smith, William Cottrell, Joseph Sabo, Erdman Penner, Aurelius Battaglia Based on:The Adventures of Pinocchio by Carlo Collodi Music by: Leigh Harline, Paul J. Smith Cast: Cliff Edwards, Dickie Jones, Christian Rub, Mel Blanc, Walter Catlett, Charles Judels, Evelyn Venable, Frankie Darro, Thurl Ravenscroft
Walt Disney Animation Studios, RKO Radio Pictures, 88 Minutes
“[after singing “When You Wish Upon a Star”] Pretty, huh? I’ll bet a lot of you folks don’t believe that, about a wish comin’ true, do ya? Well, I didn’t, either. Of course, I’m just a cricket singing my way from hearth to hearth, but let me tell you what made me change my mind.” – Jiminy Cricket
I figured that I’d followup my review of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs with Pinocchio. I’m planning on working my way through all the Disney animated films of the classic hand drawn style. I think I’ll probably just do them in order, as opposed to jumping around.
To start, I’ve always liked this story more than Snow White and the animation is also a step up, as it looks more fluid, more refined and kind of pristine by comparison.
While I know that these movies have been digitally restored and tinkered with, you can still see a difference in the overall craftsmanship between the two films. And that’s not a knock against Snow White, as it is still better than anything that came before it. This is more to illustrate how Walt Disney really jumped forward with this picture.
This is also a main reason as to why I want to review these films in order, as it makes it easier to see the progression of Disney’s artists, as well as the company’s overall execution.
Apart from that, I find this to be a good, amusing and lighthearted film that has stood the test of time. It’s still funny and while it might not seem relevant, it still has lessons within it that are important for kids to learn. In the simplest terms, this movie shows kids that its not cool to lie or to be a crappy person.
The film also does a fantastic job at expressing wonderment. It’s a great adventure where Pinocchio is a fish out of water but also in awe of all the things that seem greater than himself.
It also teaches about stranger danger and how some people shouldn’t be trusted and that there are schemes and scams in the world, waiting to exploit those who aren’t careful.
I love this film. While it’s not my favorite of the classic Disney animated pictures, it is definitely one of the best of the earliest crop.
Rating: 8.5/10 Pairs well with: Disney’s other early animated feature films.
Release Date: November 14th, 1940 (San Francisco premiere) Directed by: William Wyler Written by: Howard E. Koch Based on:The Letter by W. Somerset Maugham Music by: Max Steiner Cast: Bette Davis, Herbert Marshall, James Stephenson, Gale Sondergaard
Warner Bros., 95 Minutes
“With all my heart, I still love the man I killed.” – Leslie
Man, oh man… I love the opening scene of this movie. It’s so damn good that it immediately pulls you right into this film from the get-go.
Also, I can’t believe that this is the first Bette Davis movie I am reviewing. I’ve seen so much of her stuff over the years but I guess this is the first film I’ve checked out over the last 18 months during this blog’s existence. So I should probably play some catch up and have a Bette Davis mini marathon in the immediate future.
The popular opinion about film-noir is that it was born with The Maltese Falcon in 1941, a year after this film came out. However, The Letter is very much film-noir. But there are many noir-esque films that predate 1941. Fritz Lang’s M came out in 1931 and you can’t tell me it’s not film-noir at its core.
So maybe William Wyler, this film’s director, was a bit ahead of the curve when it came to Hollywood trends. According to Eddie Muller of TCM’s Noir Alley, Wyler was the Steven Spielberg of his day and a real artist and king behind the camera. It shouldn’t be shocking that he was ahead of his time and quite possibly contributed to the genesis of film-noir.
The film is superbly acted, especially where Bette Davis is concerned. However, Gale Sondergaard’s Mrs. Hammond is the real scene stealer. Man, she just has an intense presence whenever she appears on screen and the fact that she was able to do this opposite of Davis is damned impressive. She didn’t even have to say anything, she just had to stand there, ominous and brooding over the scene around her.
The plot sees Davis’ Leslie Crosbie murder a man in the opening scene. Quite viciously for 1940, mind you. As the plot rolls on we learn that she killed him in self-defense. However, a blackmailer knows that she’s hiding something. This film then spirals down with twists and turns typical of the noir style.
What really makes this film alluring and sort of majestic is the setting. This takes place in Malaysia. It’s a tropical setting with an almost proto-Tiki aesthetic to it. The film just looks and feels exotic and isn’t your typical setting for a film of this style.
The shots of the plantation home and property, especially the opening and closing shots are incredible. The cinematography was handled by Tony Gaudio and he nailed it. This is quite easily one of the best looking motion pictures of the early 1940s.
The Letter is solid, through and through. And it is rare that you get to see Bette Davis share scenes with someone as commanding and intimidating as her.
Rating: 8.5/10 Pairs well with:Dark Waters, The Little Foxes, Jezebel and Dark Victory.
Release Date: August 16th, 1940 Directed by: Boris Ingster Written by: Frank Partos, Nathanael West (uncredited) Music by: Roy Webb Cast: Peter Lorre, John McGuire, Margaret Tallichet, Charles Waldron, Elisha Cook Jr.
RKO Radio Pictures, 62 Minutes, 67 Minutes (longer cut)
“I want a couple of hamburgers… and I’d like them raw.” – The Stranger
Stranger On the Third Floor is a film-noir released a year before the experts say that the genre/style began. The Maltese Falcon is widely considered the first, even though it isn’t. But like that film, this one also features the remarkable Peter Lorre.
Maybe Stranger On the Third Floor isn’t considered “the first” noir because it came and went without making much of a bang. It was a low budget, short, crime drama that didn’t boast any big stars. Lorre certainly wasn’t the legend he would become and even though it did have Elisha Cook Jr., who also appeared a year later in The Maltese Falcon, he was never more than a character actor that popped up in mostly limited roles.
Stranger On the Third Floor has come to garner some respect and admiration over the years, however. Once film-noir was sort of defined and the date of its genesis was given to 1941, many film aficionados wanted to go back and look for the films that influenced the style. Sort of proto-noir pictures, if you want to call them that. Funny that Lorre was at the forefront of two of these proto-noirs: this film and 1931’s German masterpiece M. I guess his film with Hitchcock, 1934’s The Man Who Knew Too Much, also shares some similarities to the style.
There are two really strong things about this picture.
The first is Peter Lorre’s performance. Sure, it’s similar to his other early roles and almost the same as his character from M, well not the child killer part, but the killer part, along with the mannerisms, the predatory movements and his icy glare. Lorre isn’t an actor that needs to say much of anything, he conveys things through his eyes and his body language that is as expressive as the greatest silent film era stars. That moment where Lorre opens the apartment door and slithers out like a reptile is chilling to the bone, even 78 years later.
The second is the cinematography. The lighting and the camera work are both exceptional. The film uses a lot of shadow in the same vein as the look of darker German Expressionist films. Although, the rest of the visuals aren’t all that surreal. But the high contrast chiaroscuro look gives the picture a haunting quality and it seems to most come alive in the scenes surrounding Lorre’s character, as the rest of the film looks pretty standard where he isn’t present. Well, except for that execution dream sequence that is a combination of surrealism, Expressionism and minimalist set design: all used to great effect.
The finale of the film plays more like a horror picture in how Lorre carries himself, how the film builds tension and dread, as well as those final moments before the killer meets his demise and that last line he delivers. In a way, the film shows a sort of link between Expressionism, horror and noir.
Stranger On the Third Floor is a unique motion picture that was more trendsetting than its lack of initial success would have you believe. Even if it didn’t inspire most noir directors of the era, it featured a lot of people, behind the scenes, that would go on to create the worlds of more notable film-noirs.
Rating: 8.25/10 Pairs well with: Other film-noir-esque movies with Peter Lorre: M, The Maltese Falcon, The Man Who Knew Too Much, Three Strangers, Black Angel and Quicksand.
Release Date: December 13th, 1940 (first chapter) Directed by: William Witney, John English Written by: Franklin Adreon, Ronald Davidson, Norman S. Hall, Joseph F. Poland, Barney A. Sarecky, Sol Shor Music by: Cy Feuer, Ross DiMaggio, Mort Glickman Cast: Edward Ciannelli, Robert Wilcox, William Newell, C. Montague Shaw, Ella Neal, Dorothy Herbert
Republic Pictures, 267 Minutes total (15 episodes), 100 Minutes (film)
I love serials. Although, I hate cereal.
One is a really long movie of bizarre yet awesome proportions with cliff hangers, splitting it into lots of chapters. The other is a bunch of soggy crap that babies and weirdos eat that only works if it has colorful marshmallows in it and a pedophile leprechaun on the box.
The serial I watched most recently is another one put out by Republic Pictures. It doesn’t feature a famous comic book hero but it has a mad scientist and a new superhero created just for this story.
The villains is, you guessed it, Doctor Satan. But he isn’t the same Doctor Satan that would appear in those early Rob Zombie splatter movies.
The hero is a masked vigilante known as The Copperhead. His real identity is Bob Wayne, who is not related to Bruce Wayne but is seeking justice and revenge on Doctor Satan over the death of his stepfather.
The Copperhead is kind of cool and Republic should have spun this into a series. It was later remade though into a Turkish action film called The Deathless Devil (Yilmayan seytan), which I have never seen but I’m going to try and find.
The visual style and tone of this serial is consistent with other ones done by Republic Pictures. The action is pretty well done. Overall, it is the story that is its greatest feature. It is well-paced with cliffhangers that feel less cookie cutter. Also, the characters are just cool.
At some point, I will do a list ranking the best serials and this will be in the upper echelon, especially for something that doesn’t rely on already well-known characters.
It is engaging and exciting and full of a bunch of cool stuff.
The next branch of the Universal Monsters tree that I have rewatched is the Invisible Man series of films.
This character and the other invisible characters in this series, were like the Mummy in that they never really got to crossover with the other monsters of their era. I would’ve loved to have seen how Claude Rains’ Dr. Jack Griffin a.k.a. the original Invisible Man would have fared against Dracula, Frankenstein’s monster and the Wolf Man.
Like other characters in the Universal Monsters mythos, this one was milked to death. It also spawned a total of five films.
The Invisible Man (1933):
Release Date: November 13th, 1933 Directed by: James Whale Written by: R.C. Sherriff Based on:The Invisible Man by H.G. Wells Music by: Heinz Roemheld Cast: Claude Rains, Gloria Stuart
Universal Pictures, 71 Minutes
Directed by James Whale, who gave us Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein, this film is another classic gem in the catalog of his stellar work. Whale, once again, gave us some amazing cinematography even though this was an insanely difficult film to shoot for its time. The tone, the humor, the dread, all of it worked to a tee and came together like a perfectly woven tapestry.
Claude Rains is one of those actors that I cannot praise enough. He was a genius and between this film and his Phantom of the Opera adaptation, he proved that he was not just a master of horror but a master thespian able to perform at a level far exceeding many of the well-known dramatic actors of his era. There are few things in life that I prefer watching to Rains playing Dr. Jack Griffin in this film. His voice work, his body work, all of it was perfection.
This is the best film in the series and a solid, if not still the best, interpretation of H.G. Wells’ classic novel, The Invisible Man. This is a great example of James Whale’s supremacy as a director, especially in the horror genre, as well as one of the very best films put out by Universal – not just in their classic monster series and not just in that time period but of all-time.
The Invisible Man Returns (1940):
Release Date: January 12th, 1940 Directed by: Joe May Written by: Joe May, Kurt Siodmak, Lester Cole Based on:The Invisible Man by H.G. Wells Music by: Hans J. Salter, Frank Skinner Cast: Sir Cedric Hardwicke, Vincent Price, Nan Grey, Alan Napier
Universal Pictures, 81 Minutes
The title is somewhat misleading, as this is a different character entirely. Although Dr. Jack Griffin’s brother Frank is a new character in this film and weirdly, Jack is referred to as “John” in this movie.
The film stars Vincent Price, a legendary horror icon in his first ever horror role. Price would gain more fame and legendary status several years later after starring in House of Wax. Regardless of that, Price played a likable and not so horrific character as this film’s incarnation of the Invisible Man. His character, Sir Geoffrey Radcliffe is sentenced to death for a murder he didn’t commit. Knowing that he is innocent, the brother of the original Invisible Man injects himself with the invisible serum so that he can escape and clear his name.
One thing leads to another and we get the happy ending.
Alan Napier who played Alfred in the 1960s Batman TV series has a big role in this film. Vincent Price would later go on to star as the villain Egghead in that same series.
This was a solid sequel and I really enjoyed it. It wasn’t a rehash of the original film, it was a pretty original idea and it was executed greatly.
The Invisible Woman (1940):
Release Date: December 27th, 1940 Directed by: A. Edward Sutherland Written by: Kurt Siodmak, Joe May Based on:The Invisible Man by H.G. Wells Music by: Frank Skinner Cast: Virginia Bruce, John Barrymore, John Howard, Charlie Ruggles, Oscar Homolka
Universal Pictures, 72 Minutes
With Universal pumping out an insane amount of sequels to their horror franchises, they wasted no time in releasing The Invisible Woman the same year they released The Invisible Man Returns. Sequel-mania was running rampant at Universal!
This was the first film in the series to really take a plunge. There was nothing really “horror” about it and in fact, it was a comedy.
The plot sees a recently fired department store model get revenge on her boss after she is made invisible by a loony scientist. It was basically like the plot from 9-to-5 starring Jane Fonda, Lily Tomlin and Dolly Parton. Except it was about one woman and she was invisible.
This is a pretty forgettable film and had it not been wedged into this series – ending up in box sets like the one I own, it would’ve been lost in the sands of time.
The Invisible Agent(1942):
Release Date: July 31st, 1942 Directed by: Edwin L. Marin Written by: Curtis Siodmak Based on:The Invisible Man by H.G. Wells Music by: Hans J. Salter Cast: Ilona Massey, Jon Hall, Peter Lorre
Universal Pictures, 81 Minutes
This film takes The Invisible Man formula and gives us something pretty awesome: an invisible agent fighting the Nazis and a Japanese associate during World War II. Additionally, Peter Lorre is in this as the Japanese villain, which is intriguing, bizarre and just totally awesome! Sir Cedric Hardwicke plays the villainous Nazi, making his second appearance in this series, as he also played the villain in The Invisible Man Returns.
This is my favorite sequel in the series, as the plot is awesome and it was well-executed.
Coming out at the height of World War II, this must have been an exciting film to watch. The special effects are once again top notch and the acting was good from all parties involved.
The Invisible Man’s Revenge (1944):
Release Date: June 9th, 1944 Directed by: Ford Beebe Written by: Bertram Millhauser Based on:The Invisible Man by H.G. Wells Music by: Hans J. Salter Cast: Jon Hall, John Carradine, Evelyn Ankers
Universal Pictures, 78 Minutes
The final film in the series gives us John Carradine as a scientist who is another new character with the power of invisibility.
New character wants to harness the power, new character gets the power, new character seeks revenge against those who wronged him. Sound familiar?
Well, at this point the traditional formula of this series has run its course and unfortunately, we didn’t get something as original and new as the previous film in the series.
This film isn’t a complete waste and it is okay but you’ll watch it swearing that you’ve seen it already. Plus, I really love John Carradine.
More Universal Monsters reviews are coming as soon as I rewatch them. Next up will be the Wolf Man series.
Continuing on with my quest to rewatch and review all the classic Universal Monsters franchises, I have now gotten to the Mummy series.
The Mummy (1932):
Release Date: December 22nd, 1932 Directed by: Karl Freund Written by: John L. Balderston, Nina Wilcox Putnam, Richard Schayer Music by: James Dietrich Cast: Boris Karloff, Zita Johann, David Manners, Edward van Sloan, Arthur Byron
Universal Pictures, 73 Minutes
Immediately following the success of 1931’s Dracula and Frankenstein films, Universal went with the next monster needing to scare the crap out of theatergoers: the Mummy. And who did they get to portray the now iconic character of Imhotep a.k.a the Mummy? Well, they went to Frankenstein’s monster himself, Boris Karloff.
This film was directed by Karl Freund and it was his official directorial debut. For a rookie director behind the camera, Freund had a great eye for capturing intense dread and a very visual gothic style of storytelling. The film was consistent with the vibe of Universal’s other early monster films. While not exactly on the level of what James Whale created in the first two Frankenstein films, this movie does deserve to be applauded as a feat of cinematography and lighting.
Karloff was as amazing as he always is and that should be no surprise. He gave us a much more organic Imhotep than what was given to audiences in the bad 1999 remake of this film. Karloff’s face, especially his eyes, during the waking of Imhotep from his 2,000 year slumber was pretty enchanting and frightening.
I think that this film is overlooked in comparison to the other franchises under the Universal Monsters banner and looking back at it now, I am not sure as to why. It is just as chilling and just as effective as their other early films.
The Mummy’s Hand (1940):
Release Date: September 20th, 1940 Directed by: Christy Cabanne Written by: Griffin Jay, Maxwell Shane Cast: Dick Foran, Peggy Moran, Wallace Ford, Cecil Kellaway, Eduardo Ciannelli, George Zucco, Tom Tyler
Universal Pictures, 67 Minutes
After an eight year hiatus, the Mummy returned! Except this mummy was a new character.
The mummy in this film is named Kharis and although his origin story is very similar to Imhotep in the first film, there are some differences. Additionally, this is almost the start of a new series itself, as Kharis continues on as the series antagonist leaving Imhotep behind. In this film, Kharis is played by Tom Tyler, who was best known for starring in low-budget westerns and as Captain Marvel in the serial Adventures of Captain Marvel.
This film uses some pretty awesome sets and that was the biggest takeaway for me in the realm of design and art direction.
This film also introduces the concept of the mummy needing tanna leaves to survive and to be controlled. It is a fictitious plant, so there is no need to worry about people actually using tanna leaves to animate mummified corpses.
This film is generally forgettable and the weakest in the series other than its set design.
The Mummy’s Tomb (1942):
Release Date: October 23rd, 1942 Directed by: Harold Young Written by: Neil P. Varnick Cast: Lon Chaney Jr., Dick Foran, John Hubbard
Universal Pictures, 61 Minutes
In this film, we get Lon Chaney Jr. playing Kharis the mummy. This is actually the first of three films where Chaney takes over as the undead monster. So Chaney has played the Mummy, Dracula, the Wolf Man and Frankenstein’s monster. He’s been four out of the six monsters from the Universal Monsters franchises. If only he were the Gillman and the Invisible Man and he would’ve done a clean sweep.
I liked this film better than the previous one. Chaney brought a level of credibility and emotion to Kharis and he made him more relatable.
The problem with this and this branch of the Universal Monsters’ tree is that these films almost blend together too much. There isn’t a lot that sets each one apart and they feel like a retelling over and over again. It is hard to make the Mummy character as compelling as the other Monsters as it is really just a slow moving guy in bandages that wobbles around and moans. Yes, it is a scary concept, especially at the time it came out but it is the most one-dimensional of the Universal Monsters.
Lon Chaney Jr. did a good job and he owned the role probably more so than Boris Karloff did. Besides, Karloff was barely in bandages and spent most of his film playing an Egyptian dude in disguise.
The Mummy’s Ghost (1944):
Release Date: July 7th, 1944 Directed by: Reginald Le Borg Written by: Griffin Jay, Henry Sucher Music by: Frank Skinner Cast: Lon Chaney Jr., John Carradine, Robert Lowery, Ramsay Ames
Universal Pictures, 61 Minutes
Here we go again, another Mummy film.
At this point, I am growing tired of the formula and I am a pretty big old school horror aficionado. This is where I realized, that this is probably the weakest of the Universal Monsters sub-franchises.
Lon Chaney Jr. returns but even he can’t make this as interesting as I hoped it would be. I also don’t understand why Universal made the poor mummy walk up and down a steep sloped roller coaster track that led to his hideout. Why wouldn’t the evil jerk who is controlling the mummy pick easier terrain for his tortoise-like assassin?
But at least when it comes to style and cinematography, it is consistent.
The Mummy’s Curse (1944):
Release Date: December 22nd, 1944 Directed by: Leslie Goodwins Written by: Leon Abrams, Dwight V. Babcock Music by: William Lava, Paul Sawtell Cast: Lon Chaney Jr., Peter Coe, Virginia Christine
Universal Pictures, 62 Minutes
Two Mummy films in the same year? Man, wasn’t Universal getting burnt out on the most mediocre of their Monsters series? And wasn’t Lon Chaney Jr. in desperate need of a break between these movies and all the others he was pumping out?
The mummy wants his bride and that is the plot of this one. Well, that and the fact that some bad guy has nine tanna leaves once again and can therefore control Kharis to do his evil bidding.
At five deep, these films just keep blending together more and more. There is nothing to really set this film apart. Plus, these movies are so short, that it was like watching five different pilots for the same show.
But, the series is over.
More Universal Monsters reviews are coming as soon as I rewatch them. Next up will be the Invisible Man series.