Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

It's complicated... I really like the directing, acting and writing but, there are issues with the way it's shot that I just can't deny. As much as I love the storytelling and the fantastic performance but, there are also certain scenes that didn't need to exist.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

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.

If you want see something really scary see this movie. This is scarier then The Mummy's hand. And that is not easy to do. This is scarier then The Mummy's tomb. And that is not easy to do. One movie that is scarier then this The Mummy's curse. This movie has a great story line. It also has great acting. It also has great special effects. 5.8 is a good ratting. But this is such a great movie the 5.8 is underrating it. This is a 9. This is scarier then The Shining and that is not easy to do. Reginald Le Borg was a great film maker. This is one of the his best movies. See it.

In the previous movie, "The Mummy's Tomb" the mummy known as "Kharis" (Lon Cheney Jr.) had been killed by fire. However, because of his curse 3000 years earlier he cannot remain dead as long as a certain ritual involving tanis leaves are prepared during a full moon. So the High Priest of Karnak instructs a priest named "Yousef Bey" (John Carradine) to bring him back to life. When Yousef Bey boils the tanis leaves Kharis reappears in the small town of Mapleton where he was last seen. This time however there is a beautiful Egyptian woman by the name of "Amina Mansouri" (Ramsay Ames) who becomes his intended target due to her now possessing the soul of Princess Ananka. Anyway, rather than give away the entire story and risk ruining the movie for those who haven't seen it I will just say that this particular film is a little bit better than it's two predecessors, "The Mummy's Hand" and "The Mummy's Tomb" in that it seemed to flow a bit more smoothly. Obviously, it should be remembered that this was made in 1944 and as such it doesn't have the advanced techniques available to horror films today. But it's still pretty good and I rate it as slightly above average.

No need to recap the plot—the point is the mummy's on the loose again, dragging his foot behind. As a kid, I could never get too scared since the 3,000-year old guy moves like he's even older. So I figured why doesn't everyone just run away when he comes, but then his movies show how really good he is at trapping people, and how they're toast after that. Plus, he can have an occasional hissy-fit, as he does here when he re-decorates the museum with one big hammer hand. And guess who's cooking his tanna leaf dinner this time. It's scary old John Carradine looking and sounding like a voice from beyond the grave. Between them, I still get a few chills, even this many years later. But one thing has really changed between then and now. Now I follow the beauteous Ramsay Ames like a bee on honey. Okay, so her acting is not exactly Oscar bait—but with looks like that, it doesn't have to be. Thanks to her and my improved glands, I now understand why old bandage body keeps wandering around Universal's backlot looking for her in movie after movie. I would too. Anyway, not a whole lot happens on screen til that bang-up finale when you might say everything and everyone comes together in front of a rickety old trestle to nowhere. However, I do recommend that Miss Ames keep her beauteous make-up on, since that last frame does nothing for getting her a next job.