Archaeologists defile the tomb of mummified Kharis, who was buried alive for falling in love with an Egyptian princess.Archaeologists defile the tomb of mummified Kharis, who was buried alive for falling in love with an Egyptian princess.Archaeologists defile the tomb of mummified Kharis, who was buried alive for falling in love with an Egyptian princess.
- Awards
- 1 nomination
- The High Priest
- (as Eduardo Cianelli)
- Mr. Solvani
- (as Cecil Kelloway)
- The Beggar
- (as Siegfried Arno)
- Bar Patron
- (uncredited)
- King Amenophis
- (archive footage)
- (uncredited)
- Egyptian Thug
- (uncredited)
- Princess Ananka
- (archive footage)
- (uncredited)
- Director
- Writers
- Griffin Jay
- Maxwell Shane
- John L. Balderston(1932 screenplay) (uncredited)
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Did you know
- GoofsA little before 15 minutes into the movie, Professor Andoheb refers to "the Inca ruins in Mexico". Yet the Incas never were in Mexico. In reality, the Incas were centered in Peru with their empire stretching from Ecuador to northern Chile.
- Quotes
Andoheb: Tana leaves!
The High Priest: Bring three of them. Three of the leaves will make enough fluid to keep Kharis's heart beating. Once each night, during the cycle of the full moon, you will dissolve three tana leaves and give the fluid to Kharis.
[a jackal howls]
The High Priest: Children of the night, they howl about the Hill of the Seven Jackals when Kharis must be fed. Should unbelievers seek to desecrate the tomb of Ananka, you will use nine leaves each night to give life and movement to Kharis. Thus you will enable him to bring vengeance on the heads of those who try to enter.
Andoheb: Yes, master.
The High Priest: But never, for any reason, must you brew more than *nine* leaves at one time. Should Kharis obtain a large amount of the fluid, he would become an uncontrollable *monster*, a soulless demon with the desire to kill and kill.
- ConnectionsEdited from The Mummy (1932)
Now what struck me immediatly was the fact that the production values and general appearance of the movie are considerably weaker than the original which you wouldn't expect since it was made almost a decade later.
Second though advertised as a horror it most certainly isn't, this is closer to a comedy by far especially since our two leads crack wise from start to finish and much of it is really quite ahead of its time.
Once again we see an expedition go terribly wrong as a mummy rises from the dead and.........you know the rest.
Though it all looks pretty terrible the acting and writing is better than the original and though I'd certainly not say The Mummy's Hand is a good film I can definetly see the appeal.
The Good:
Some great characters
Some great writing and great comedy
Has a real charm
The Bad:
Looks even more dated than the 1932 original
Fall apart in the final act
Things I Learnt From This Movie:
Even our comedic leads were more convincing than Tom Cruise in the 2017 remake
- Platypuschow
- May 14, 2018
Details
- Runtime1 hour 7 minutes
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.37 : 1