Noutions Good movie, but best of all time? Hardly . . .

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

Bluebell Alcock Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

Ariella Broughton It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

JohnHowardReid Copyright 31 December 1943 by Universal Pictures Co., Inc. New York opening at the Rialto: 30 June 1944. U.S. release: 7 July 1944. U.K. release: 2 June 1947 (sic). Australian release: 6 July 1944. 6 reels. 5,499 feet. 61 minutes.SYNOPSIS: Sequel to The Mummy's Tomb starring Chaney junior as the mummy. Since Turhan Bey failed in the previous movie, Egyptian priest Zucco sends John Carradine to New England to help the mummy find his princess. This time a young college co-ed played by Ramsay Ames is the Ananka look-alike.NOTES: Number four of the seven-picture "Mummy" series.COMMENT: The story continues on from The Mummy's Tomb (1942). The mummy it appears was not destroyed in the fire after all, but only disfigured - if you can imagine a mummy being disfigured, though his one eye is rather frightening. Lon Chaney is so completely swathed in bandages as to be unrecognizable - any stuntman or cheap double could have done just as well. Robert Lowery is a rather wet hero, though Ramsay Ames makes a rather fetching heroine and there is a solid cast of character players.Le Borg's direction is much, much more stylish than his usual humble standard. Some of the sequences are compellingly stated and good use is made of natural locations at the climax. The film looks well-produced though Sickner's photography lacks the atmosphere that Woody Bredell would have brought to the film. The eerie effects are mainly achieved through Jack Pierce's skilled make-up and Salter's well-thumbed musical compilation of standard Universal "B"-picture themes.There is more than a hint of blasphemy in the script's adaptation of King James-type prayers to pagan identities such as Amon-Ra and it's odd that this was deemed acceptable by the supposedly strict censors of 1944.

TheLittleSongbird None of the four Universal Kharis films are particularly great, and to me The Mummy's Hand is the only one that is near-good. This said, neither of them are bad either, and of the sequels to The Mummy's Hand my vote for the best of them goes to this, The Mummy's Ghost.What makes The Mummy's Ghost the best of the sequels(if not exactly by much) is that it is the only one that tried to do something different. Even if the basic plot is still very flawed and formulaic, The Mummy's Ghost contains by far the boldest and most shocking ending of the four(and in a very good way, it's the highlight of the film), and is the only one to have almost non-existent stock footage material. The Mummy's Ghost does contain some campy fun with John Carradine and a few scenes with Kharis have some creepiness(others however just read of repetitive running around).There are some attractively made sets, some atmospheric lighting and Ramsey Ames' costumes are to die for, though on the most-part The Mummy's Ghost is not one of Universal's most accomplished-looking films. Three performances register quite well. Best of all is John Carradine, who is deliciously diabolical and although he doesn't feature in much of the film he is still very memorable. George Zucco's role is also brief, but nonetheless played with sinister authority. Lastly, Lon Chaney Jnr's performance as Kharis is more consistent this time round, he intimidates much more and lumbers less, there even was glimpses of effort at giving Kharis a human side despite not having much to work with.However, apparently The Mummy's Ghost was made very quickly and it does show in some shoddy editing, some terribly staged close-ups of Kharis and Kharis basically looks like a man very poorly wrapped up in bandages. While Chaney, Zucco and Carradine fare well, the rest of the cast on the other hand are bad. Ramsey Ames' alluring appearance and beautiful costuming are not enough to make up for how she spends her whole screen time looking bewildered and on edge, while Robert Lowery is hopelessly wooden to the point he veers on irritating. The chemistry between the two of them is non-descript.The story does try to do things differently, but still manages to be on the paper-thin and formulaic side, with much of the plot reading of a series of familiar plot devices routinely handled. It also takes too long to get going, with an incredibly dull first third to the extent that the final fifteen minutes feels like a real relief, and is let down even further by tediously padded out college scenes(that are poorly played and add very little to the storytelling) and a sickeningly saccharine and passionless romantic subplot that seemed to only be there for the sake of it. The college and romantic scenes also suffered from the worst of the film's erratic(mostly lethargic) pacing and incredibly trite dialogue. The direction shows little care and style, with occasional glimpses of atmosphere that stops it from falling into ineptitude, and the characters are even more thinly written than the story, and some like Lowery and his friends are annoying.All in all, has a lot lacking but has just enough to make it watchable. 5/10 Bethany Cox

snicewanger The Mummy's Ghost is the third in the "Kharis" the Mummy series and Griffin Jay's script is more or less a rehash of the same old lady in distress plot line of the first two with a twist ending that is a grabber.Director Reggie LeBorg was Chaney's buddy and knew Lon would be pretty well crooked when the lunch break was over, particularly when Lon was in his mummy makeup. Jack Pierce got very tired of Lon's constant gripping and moaning about it. There is a story that LeBorg told about the scene where Kharis strangles Prof Norman. Frank Reicher was one of Hollywood's most respected character actors. When the scene started rolling, Chaney went charging in,grabbed Reicher by the throat and pushed him into the wall. Chaney had been hitting the bottle and was pumped. When Chaney broke off, Reicher screamed "He almost killed me!" and proceeded to verbally ream Chaney a new one, calling him unprofessional and stupid. Chaney just sat there in his mummy makeup muttering an apology and shivering in shame. Chaney's glass breaking scene when Ananka's mummy dissolves is yet another legend. Again he fortified himself with some Jack Daniels and did the whole scene himself without a stuntman. He cut his chin under his mask on a shard of glass, you can see the blood at the end of the scene.Acquanetta had been originally cast in the Amina/Ananka role but she injured herself on the first day of shooting. Ben Pivar claimed, however, that LeBorg had demanded that she be replaced during rehearsals because of her poor acting. Anyway, the beautiful Ramsay Ames was thrown into the part with just a few days notice, which may account for her confused look.in most of her scenes. Ramsay had been hired to appear in musicals because of her singing and dancing talent but Universal kept casting her in horror and mystery films. Robert Lowery was way too old to play a college student and wasn't happy about being cast in the movie. He seemed to have a "lets get this thing over with attitude" throughout the film.The plot holes and lack of continuity in the Mummy series are well known and have been pointed out in many knowledgeable sources. Kharis is a killing machine and not a sympathetic creature as some of the other Universal monsters are. His tendency to kill senior citizens is yet another reason not to root for him. Watching The Mummy's Ghost isn't the worst way to spend an hour and is essential if your are following the series.

TheRedDeath30 In a lot of ways, the original Universal Mummy series of movies set the blueprint for what a horror sequel should be. Consider all of the similarities to modern series like Friday THE 13th. The monster keeps returning film after film, even though we've seen him destroyed each time. Even more, there is seldom any rational explanation given for his return, he just simply is back because the studio needed him to be. Though there is some half-hearted attempt to connect the continuity of the series, for the most part each of the movies features completely different actors in completely different scenarios, the only common thread being the monster itself. Each sequel supplanted the atmosphere and quality of the original by increasing the violence and sex (okay, so by sex I'm talking about a hip-hugging night gown in this case, but it's the 40s, right). At this point in the Mummy series, they are pretty much following a cookie cutter format. We have George Zucco as the high priest of an Egyptian order initiating a new priest (in this case John Carradine). That priest's purpose is to resurrect Kharis the Mummy to avenge some wrong. Queue up a few random murders from the Mummy until we meet the modern reincarnation of the lost princess. Some drama unfolds until the Mummy can kidnap her, but instead the priest falls in love with her and ruins everything. I am not lumping the original Karloff classic into this mold. That's an excellent atmospheric creeper with a dreamlike tone, but the four Kharis movies pretty much follow the same path but with diminishing quality.If there are "positives" here I would say that Chaney puts some more effort into his role as Kharis in this one that he did in the previous MUMMY'S TOMB. I still don't understand why one arm doesn't work and I miss the hollow eyes that they employed in MUMMY'S HAND, but he's more physically imposing in this one. Also, this is the only classic horror film I can recount from memory that does not have your standard "hero saves the day" ending. I don't want to spoil too much, but it's pretty dark for a movie from this time period.Most everything else about this movie pales in comparison to the ones before it. The boyfriend and his college pals are just bad actors, with some terrible dialog written for them. They are just there for nothing more than to move the plot along. Same goes for the museum types and the police, who are all cardboard and offered nothing much to do. Even John Carradine, who I normally enjoy, is not nearly the maniacal villain that the previous priests were.It's not awful and there's still a lot of fun to be had in this movie, but it's not one of the best Uni sequels by any sort.