The Mummy's Revenge (1975)

At one time or another Paul Naschy seemed to have played just about all of the classic horror monsters in his movies, so it is no surprise that he'd eventually turn his hand to portraying a reanimated Egyptian mummy.  The Mummy's Revenge (1975) came out at a time when mummy movies were deeply unfashionable - Hammer's last effort, Blood From the Mummy's Tomb (1971), didn't even feature a traditional perambulating mummy - with the sub-genre feeling played out.  In truth, mummy movies had never been as popular as those about vampires and werewolves, their obvious problems being both the monster's lack of personality and the lack of variations in storylines.  Most mummy movies, from both Universal and Hammer, had the title monster cast, essentially, as a slave, acting as an instrument of revenge against desecrators of its, or its master or mistresses, tombs, controlled by a present day High Priest of some Ancient Egyptian sect.  Along the way, it usually encounters some contemporary woman who turns out to be the reincarnation of his lost love, resulting in the mummy's loyalties being torn between her and the High Priest.  There were variations along the line, of course, but they were all minor.  Which is precisely the problem that The Mummy's Revenge runs up against: no matter how much Naschy, (in his capacity as writer, under his real name of Jacinto Molina), tries to work new twists and variations into the story, it just can't help but keeping veering toward the traditional mummy movie format.

His main innovation is to make this film's mummy, once revived, far more proactive than his predecessors.  He is very much in control of the narrative, with the contemporary High Priest, his descendant and therefore also played by Naschy, merely his facilitator, reviving him and hiding him while he carries out his plans.  Moreover, this time around, it is the priest who starts getting cold feet and having divided loyalties, rather than the mummy.  (Naschy's mummy is alaso, as far as I know, the first to actually speak since Karloff's version, back in 1932).  But the plot is still revenge-driven - this time it is personal as the mummy is that of an assassinated Pharaoh known for his cruelty and sadism, now looking to find a suitable vessel for the soul of his also murdered concubine, so that they can pick up their activities again, four thousand or so years on.  Of course, that 'vessel' turns out to be the daughter of the owner of the London museum that the Pharaoh's sarcophagus had been transported to after its rediscovery, who just happens to be the physical reincarnation of the mummy's lost love. The film is also far gorier than previous mummy movies, with Naschy in mummy mode crushing a lot of heads and lots of virgins being sacrificed.  

Overall, the film feels like a compendium of of highlights from previous mummy films: we have the late nineteenth century English setting of Hammer's The Mummy (1959), the mummy wandering around the London sewers and its tussling with British bobbies, are also borrowing from a Hammer film, this time Curse of the Mummy's Tomb (1964).  The Ancient Egypt opening is an obligatory part of every mummy movie, while the casting of Naschy as both mummy and modern day High Priest seems to be a nod toward the 1932 original.  The museum owner's daughter being the reincarnation of the mummy's lost love might well be an homage to Blood From the Mummy's Tomb, where the archeologist protagonist's daughter is the reincarnation of an Ancient Egyptian queen, whose mummy and sarcophagus are in his private museum in his cellar.  Ultimately, there's little that we haven't seen before.  Except that it all looks as if it was shot on an even lower budget than the latter day Universal mummy movies, ground out as programmers.  Everything about it looks and feels cheap - the Ancient Egypt scenes, in particular, feel threadbare, with everything seemingly happening inside a tent.  Even Hammer's largely studio-bound version of Ancient Egypt in The Mummy feels both more extravagant and more authentic, with director Terrance Fisher using the restrictions of Bray Studios stages to create an oppressive and claustrophobic feel that sets the tone for the whole film.  Even the use of some authentic London locations, though, doesn't help The Mummy's Revenge, with it all feeling as if it was shot somewhere just outside Madrid.

The whole thing is very flatly directed by Carlos Aured, in his fourth and last directorial collaboration with Naschy, had done far better work on both Horror Rises From the Tomb (1973) - which also features Naschy in a dual role as both an executed medieval sadist and his present day descendant - and Curse of the Devil (1973) - with Naschy again in a similar dual role.  The only sequence in The Mummy's Revenge which shows any real directorial flair is that showing Naschy's sarcophagus being entombed in darkness, gathering dust then suddenly illuminated again as a pick axe breaks through the wall of the tomb centuries later - all in a single, seemingly continuous, take.  The Mummy's Revenge is one of those films that I badly wanted to like - I've enjoyed many of Naschy's monster movies - but it just never seemed to spark into life - the plot is too plodding, the pace too slow and it looks too bland.  Even most of the acting performances feel bland, (even taking bad English dubbing into account) - Euro exploitation favourite Jack Taylor tries valiantly to make something of the hero, but never convinces as an Egyptologist who just seems ineffective.  Naschy is as fascinating as ever in his dual role, but curiously, his attempts to actually give the mummy a character, rather than just portray him as a shambling, dusty, hulk, make the character less interesting.  Stomping around, his face covered in what looks like clay, as he plots his lover's reincarnation and sacrifices virgins, he comes over like any other sadistic horror movie villain, lacking the aura of ancient menace that the traditional shuffling, bandage-clad mummy creates.  Indeed, in the hands of a decent actor, the mute and crumbling mummy can even evoke a degree of pathos - as in Christopher Lee's performance in the title role of Hammer's The Mummy, a film which, sadly The Mummy's Revenge never comes close to emulating.

(Although the release date of The Mummy's Revenge is usually given as 1975, this is apparently its Spanish re-release date, with its first screenings in Spain having been in 1973.  An English language version apparently showed on US TV in 1974.  There was also, apparently, an English language  'international' version with added nudity, but this seems never to have been released anywhere and appears to have vanished completely, with all current English versions using the original Spanish print).