Poor David Manners, there was an actor who truly never had a break. Imagine being an actor whose fate was seemingly always to be consigned to playing straight-man to Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi. In one film, "The Black Cat", he actually would up playing straight-man to both of them!
In "The Mummy" it was poor Manners' misfortune to be cast opposite Boris Karloff. How can any actor hope to get noticed while sharing the screen with one of the greatest horror icons of all time, especially in what many consider to be one of Karloff's roles? Granted that, after 80 years, some aspects of the movie may creak a bit. However, there's no getting around the fact that time has detracted absolutely nothing from Karloff's performance.
It is interesting to compare the 1932 version of "The Mummy" with the 1999 version, because the differences in style and production emphasis are so striking. The modern version is all about CGI special effects and roller-coaster paced action. The 1932 version is all about setting an eerie mood and, of course, the sheer charismatic presence of Boris Karloff.
In Frankenstein Karloff played The Monster as a heavy, hulking, stumbling mute. Yet how different he seems in The Mummy. Yes, there are scenes in which the actor was wrapped up and heavily made up to simulate a 3,700-year-old mummy. By all accounts that was a very unpleasant experience for the actor, too. However, in most of the movie Karloff was dressed in a sort of full-length gown, emphasizing the actor's tall and spare frame, further implying the notion that he is a 3,700-year-old re-animated mummy. Nevertheless, the actor's performance was not limited to makeup and costume. Further accentuating the idea of a walking corpse is the subtle manner in which Karloff moved, or should one more precisely say, didn't move. Karloff's mummy moved very slowly, almost gliding; and when he stood he stood very still, moving his body as little as possible. The overall effect of that stillness was to make Karloff's mummy seem even more powerful and menacing. Another notable difference was that, unlike in Frankenstein, in "The Mummy" Karloff got a chance to make use of that wonderfully sibilant, purring voice of his; that unique voice that has put chills up generations of spines, and still continues to do so.
It is also worth noting that Karl Freund's direction was a textbook example to aspiring modern horror film directors of how less can be so much more. The initial scene in which Karloff's mummy becomes alive, opening his eyes slightly and slowly moving one hand just a little bit, still has the power to chill. So does that the subsequent scene, in which all that is visible to the viewer are a couple of bandages moving slowly along the floor and trailing out of the door. Nothing is more frightening than the imagination and, in that classic scene, Freund demonstrated exactly how far a little bit of suggestion can go.
In "The Mummy" it was poor Manners' misfortune to be cast opposite Boris Karloff. How can any actor hope to get noticed while sharing the screen with one of the greatest horror icons of all time, especially in what many consider to be one of Karloff's roles? Granted that, after 80 years, some aspects of the movie may creak a bit. However, there's no getting around the fact that time has detracted absolutely nothing from Karloff's performance.
It is interesting to compare the 1932 version of "The Mummy" with the 1999 version, because the differences in style and production emphasis are so striking. The modern version is all about CGI special effects and roller-coaster paced action. The 1932 version is all about setting an eerie mood and, of course, the sheer charismatic presence of Boris Karloff.
In Frankenstein Karloff played The Monster as a heavy, hulking, stumbling mute. Yet how different he seems in The Mummy. Yes, there are scenes in which the actor was wrapped up and heavily made up to simulate a 3,700-year-old mummy. By all accounts that was a very unpleasant experience for the actor, too. However, in most of the movie Karloff was dressed in a sort of full-length gown, emphasizing the actor's tall and spare frame, further implying the notion that he is a 3,700-year-old re-animated mummy. Nevertheless, the actor's performance was not limited to makeup and costume. Further accentuating the idea of a walking corpse is the subtle manner in which Karloff moved, or should one more precisely say, didn't move. Karloff's mummy moved very slowly, almost gliding; and when he stood he stood very still, moving his body as little as possible. The overall effect of that stillness was to make Karloff's mummy seem even more powerful and menacing. Another notable difference was that, unlike in Frankenstein, in "The Mummy" Karloff got a chance to make use of that wonderfully sibilant, purring voice of his; that unique voice that has put chills up generations of spines, and still continues to do so.
It is also worth noting that Karl Freund's direction was a textbook example to aspiring modern horror film directors of how less can be so much more. The initial scene in which Karloff's mummy becomes alive, opening his eyes slightly and slowly moving one hand just a little bit, still has the power to chill. So does that the subsequent scene, in which all that is visible to the viewer are a couple of bandages moving slowly along the floor and trailing out of the door. Nothing is more frightening than the imagination and, in that classic scene, Freund demonstrated exactly how far a little bit of suggestion can go.