|
|
Post by kolchak92 on Sept 13, 2020 1:42:28 GMT
1932, 1999 or 2017?
|
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Sept 13, 2020 1:56:48 GMT
Well.....actually....I'm rather partial to 1959. Haven't seen 2017 yet.  |
|
|
|
Post by kolchak92 on Sept 13, 2020 1:58:35 GMT
Well.....actually....I'm rather partial to 1959. Haven't seen 2017 yet. Oh right, I have to see that one of these days.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Sept 13, 2020 2:00:06 GMT
1999
1959
1932
2017
|
|
|
|
Post by alpha128 on Sept 13, 2020 2:03:44 GMT
Well.....actually....I'm rather partial to 1959. Haven't seen 2017 yet. That's my favorite too!
|
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Sept 13, 2020 4:13:49 GMT
The '99 and '17 are basically typical action movies for the summer. Not much worth there. The 1932 was a real mover and shaker. It, as me ol' mum would say, scared the pee wadin' out of 1930s audiences. The archaeologist reads the scroll out loud. Big mistake.  |
|
|
|
Post by kolchak92 on Sept 13, 2020 4:19:45 GMT
The '99 and '17 are basically typical action movies for the summer. Not much worth there. The 1932 was a real mover and shaker. It, as me ol' mum would say, scared the pee wadin' out of 1930s audiences. The archaeologist reads the scroll out loud. Big mistake. The 1932 version was more or less Dracula with an Egyptian facade, not that anything was wrong with that.
|
|
|
|
Post by BATouttaheck on Sept 13, 2020 4:23:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by kolchak92 on Sept 13, 2020 4:27:20 GMT
One of Karloff's most iconic roles. It's a shame though that he only appeared briefly in the full makeup though.
|
|
|
|
Post by BATouttaheck on Sept 13, 2020 4:34:32 GMT
Speaking of makeup   Jack Pierce works on his masterpiece  250 Yards of bandages |
|
|
|
Post by BATouttaheck on Sept 13, 2020 4:45:15 GMT
 This one isn't one of the three choices BUT it was pretty good ! |
|
|
|
Post by BATouttaheck on Sept 13, 2020 4:50:24 GMT
2nd choice  Fun adventure and Frasier and Weisz worked well together ... great supporting characters and special effects. |
|
|
|
Post by darkreviewer2013 on Sept 13, 2020 4:53:26 GMT
The 1959 Hammer Horror movie is my favourite version. Great cast and good story well-executed. I found the 1932 film dull and have largely forgotten the 1999 version.
|
|
|
|
Post by kolchak92 on Sept 13, 2020 4:57:20 GMT
The 1959 Hammer Horror movie is my favourite version. Great cast and good story well-executed. I found the 1932 film dull and have largely forgotten the 1999 version. 
|
|
|
|
Post by rudeboy on Sept 13, 2020 6:46:51 GMT
32, then 59
99 isn’t terrible. I never saw the 2017 version and never will.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantomparticle on Sept 13, 2020 8:51:11 GMT
The Universal classic.
Not as frightening today as it was in 1932, but it has that great moment with Bramwell Fletcher losing his mind and Karloff's intensely subtle, powerful performance. Despite the restrictions of the make up and the character (not easy to be agile when you are 3,700 years old), Karloff has never been more magnetic. With his piercing eyes and deeply resonant voice, he manages to convey someone who is of the earth and unearthly at the same time.
Christopher Lee faced the same restrictions, but he is entirely silent and there is only one moment when he recognizes the reincarnation of his lost love that he has any chance of making the character more than just a standard killing machine. Peter Cushing is the center of the movie. Without him, I doubt we would be talking about it as much.
The Universal sequels in the 1940's are mostly lame time killers and the British series in the 1960's, even though they tried some new ideas, never rise above mediocre.
|
|
|
|
Post by FridayOnElmStreet on Sept 13, 2020 10:41:33 GMT
1932
|
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Sept 13, 2020 10:46:25 GMT
I am usually a person who likes old versions but not in this case. 99 version is my fav. I have watched it 4 times over the years. This movie has some good comic scenes as well. Actress has a better role.
I have not seen the 2017 version. I comparing 99 with some older versions.
|
|
|
|
Post by darksidebeadle on Sept 13, 2020 10:57:45 GMT
32
17
99
|
|
|
|
Post by claudius on Sept 13, 2020 11:12:52 GMT
Never saw the 2017 version.
The 1932 version is still the creepiest (that glare Im-Ho-Tep gives). It also has one of my favorite Boris acting moments (his meeting Helen, his imposing stature dropping to 0, acting suddenly tongue-tied to this reincarnation of his lost love).
The 1999 version is an adventure funfest, started my fan crush on John Hannah.
The 1959 film, although third, is among my favorite Hammer films.
As for the sequels, THE MUMMY'S HAND is the best.
|
|
