One and One and One Again

Well, look who's back....

I did say that I had found other films to watch - I just finally got around to it.

My apologies to all who are quite sick of this subject and all it entails - but you are quite welcome to leave.

For whatever reason, old films tend to be....quick. Short. Perhaps it's because they set up and end everything quickly without side plots and tangents, and stick to the main characters and story from the start. And, of course, they ARE shorter. But that's irrelevant at the moment.

They still make hour and a half films now (Sherlock...) that seem longer than these old films. It just...intrigues me.

It was as good as I expected. The scene of Kharis' burial of the princess was long and unnecessary, and quite violent - but only insomuch as typical royal Egyptian funerals. The reason I found it unnecessary is because I already knew it.

And Kharis was.... By the way, SPOILER ALERT if you plan to watch it and want to be completely unspoiled and you couldn't guess the ending.

Well, he was very proud. I doubt he's unintelligent, so I can only assume he's proud. Because trying to fight his way out of the only exit of a tomb through many guards would have been doomed to failure and also rather undignified. However, it was at LEAST a day until he was sentenced - no escape attempt?

It wasn't as if he didn't know what to expect... And then he just walks into his own tomb? That's it? ........unless they did more than just wrap him in bandages....

Alright, that would actually answer it. If they had mummified him completely alive and then buried him while he was 'alive' under the Scroll of Life... That would answer it.

But even before that! He knew what would happen to him!

He does play quite proud people.....

And then, of course, there's John Banning.

For whatever reason, He kept reminding me of Finch in this film.... He talks more than Van Helsing and so wasn't him it was just....

He had a twisted leg, had an energy about learning, and meddled in things he should have better left alone.

He was rather finch-like. Except that even Finch doesn't come THAT close to death.

......except that one episode that I'm evil and tell people about.

I really am going to be in trouble whenever they watch it.....  But then again, people shouldn't spoil ME.

I don't spoil people the right way....

And Isobel's hair-! It does have to be rather thin though.... Although, we never do see it actually come down - it's possible that, since the scene is cut up (like they do it in films), it's not her natural hair.

But it's so long and lovely! And dark - but that's a different subject.

Speaking of different subject, the film was incredibly familiar. It took me until the last few minutes to figure out why: it was much the same as Pyramids of Mars. Not quite in plot, of course - but rather in set and design.

Doctor Who

The Mummy

Both Egyptians in a rich house, both wearing red fezzes, both controlling mummies. The difference being, of course, that Kharis was human once and the ones of Pyramids of Mars were alien...things.

The Mummy

Doctor Who

And both got killed by the things they thought they controlled. Granted, in The Mummy, he did control him - but then he ordered Kharis to kill the 'Princess' and that went about as well as could be expected.

The Mummy

Doctor Who

And the women are even both wearing supposedly Victorian garments! Well, as close as they could be....  Sarah Jane's rather looks more like Edwardian than Victorian, and Isobel's day-clothes look more Georgian or even Tudorian rather than Victorian - but we'll allow that they are wearing old gowns. That's probably about all we can allow on that note....

But Sarah Jane at least isn't SUPPOSED to be a Victorian lady as Isobel is - and for whatever reason, Mrs. Banning meeting the inspector in her dressing gown and nightdress with her hair DOWN just....seems wrong on countless levels.Someone would have had to go fetch the Inspector, so surely she could have gone and put on some proper clothes? Please?

But that's beside the point - as I said, we'll allow....  One can't expect great historical accuracy in older films unless they're older films set in the time period they were produced in - and aren't those just so much fun?

It's amusing how many times before I said they were inaccurate, not realising that they were MADE in that time thus they MUST be right. I annoy myself....

Doctor Who

And both the Doctor and Banning are strangled by mummies to unconsciousness. Both are thought dead and left behind, and both come back to life - or at least don't actually die.

The Mummy

The Doctor is saved because he's an alien and it really wouldn't be fair to make him so much like humans because he'd have run out of regenerations long before he'd have been around so long. They had to at least put him on SOME sort of equal footing after giving him a death wish and fatal curiosity. Especially too much of the latter....

And John Banning is saved because Isobel loves him and did he REALLY think she was going to stay up in her room after telling her that he was going to be attacked next by something that wants to kill him, alone? Hardly likely!

This also makes the....third and fourth times Lee strangles Cushing. At least Banning doesn't pass out so quickly - so either he got better at acting (Impossible - well, mostly.  Horror of Dracula came out in 1958 and The Mummy came out in 1959) or he still has no excuse for losing consciousness so quickly when strangled by vampyres.

Although, as Van Helsing, he also has the extra pressure of being fully aware of what happens if he slips up or loses - so perhaps the exertion before and hyperventilation contributes to lack of oxygen later? And Banning has a much cooler head and not the threat of condemned (the other word works better, but it sadly has rather....crude connotations any more. Why have people ruined the English language? Or any language? Why must they be crude anyway? Not fair..... I have to find other descriptive adjectives and there aren't many for that place...) immortality for all time, drinking the blood of others.

That would be a horrid thought really. I feel sorry for Harker - what he feared came upon him....

And why didn't they just blow the Mummy to pieces? It wasn't exactly....healing itself from the damage Banning inflicted on it - why not simply continue the damage until it was blown into such tiny pieces that even Abby and Ziva couldn't put it back together again OR all the King's Horses and all the King's men?


For that matter, they could have just turned the mummy into a mummified version of Ducky's Meat Puzzle - that would have worked too.

Instead, he's sunk to the bottom of the bog with the Scroll of life (that water was disgusting and Isobel's hair was covered in it that's just...ew. And how did Lee go UNDER the surface? It just....No.

Of course, I assume it wasn't really a bog - but nonetheless. The idea.

But who's to say he can't or won't come back? He could control himself now, could he not? And they only did how much Frankenstein films - it isn't that improbable....

Irrelevant!

I did enjoy the film though. On the subject of NCIS though, I wonder if Tony's watched any. He seems to have watched everything else, it wouldn't surprise me - In fact, I certainly expect him to have.

Which, of course, will mean that he hasn't and won't. Surprise, surprise....

It is fun to recognise his his quotes and references - and amusing to see how much we do know.

Now, what is immediately left....  Grimm, 1984, and Island of Terror. What I'll start and what I'll finish are two different things though, as ever.

By the way, on a side note, a 'Terance' (or Terrance?) directed both films.