Charlie Chan en Égypte

Charlie Chan in Egypt (1935)

*** 1/2 (out of 4)

An archaeologist makes a major discovery when he finds a mummy's tomb but he hasn't much time to celebrate his finding because he's shortly after found dead. The locals believe that it's the curse of opening up the tomb but Charlie Chan (Warner Oland) believes something human was behind the murder.

CHARLIE CHAN IN Egypt is without question the highlight of the series as it contains the perfect mix of mystery and some pretty dark horror elements. It's funny to think that the mummy only appears in a couple scenes here yet you could make a strong argument that this here was much better than Universal's 1932 film as well as any of its sequels that would follow. Of course, this isn't a mummy movie per say because it's a mystery but there's no doubt that the horror elements here are used to perfection and in the end we're left with a very good and highly entertaining gem.

I think the strongest thing going for the film is its atmosphere created by director Louis King. The director had specialized in "B" and "C" movies throughout the silent era but this here was clearly the job of someone with talent who could show it when given the right material. The screenplay itself contains a very good story, some memorable characters and there's no question that it leaves you guessing as to who is doing the killings all the way to the end. Take the screenplay and mix it in with the atmosphere and you've got something quite special. Just take a look at how dark the entire movie is and how the director makes perfect use of the trapped doors and those glowing eyes from the mummy's tomb.

Another major plus are the performances with Oland once again delivering a great one in the role of Chan. By this time he obviously had the role down perfectly but it's worth praising him for not just sleep-walking through the film or phoning in the performance. Pat Paterson, Thomas Beck and James Eagles are all extremely good as well. A young Rita Hayworth adds some sexiness to the picture and Stepin Fetchit is here with his typical scared cat role.

CHARLIE CHAN IN Egypt is one of the better mysteries from the decade but you can also strongly argue that it contains some of the best horror elements as well. It's funny to think that Fox really wasn't all that impressive when it came to their horror films from this decade yet, in a mystery of all things, they deliver something this good.

This has always been one of my favourite Warner Oland Chan's, made even more suitably murky and mysterious by the passage of time and the way it's been handled since it was made.

Charlie's in Egypt to track down the person responsible for leaking valuable ancient artifacts into European collections, finding murder as well. With some fantastic atmospheric sets as backdrop and a great cast he and the ever dependable Thomas Beck act as a team to get to the bottom of the mystery and nab the culprit. Every other post has highlighted the main problem with it: Stepin Fetchit. It's a shame they put him in but it's not a problem to me as I don't watch it for him shuffling and mumbling along but for the main story unfolding around the rest of the cast. His major scenes could easily be cut out or altered to save everyone's black and white blushes today - but where would you stop? Airbrush cigarettes, smoke and alcohol, cgi over carbon non-neutral cars or low efficiency lightbulbs, even change Oland to a white Swede and superimpose a black superhero in goodie Beck's place to engage a more proactive and socially inclusive demographic, erase mention of Egypt to try to disguise the colonial connotations etc? And of course if we went that far also add plenty of mindless graphic sex and violence because that's OK in todays crazy world; the Nazis would have simply burned all the prints of this and everything considered similar and revised the history books.

With all its faults I'm grateful for what we've got – some of the early Chan's are lost forever – at the very least for an insight into the human mental condition as it existed in Hollywood in 1935 but more for as it exists around the world today. If you really don't like it you could campaign for its destruction, but if you like watching pre WW2 b&w middle brow detective movies containing innumerable dead people like this like me watch it without angst as a good film.

Charlie Chan comes to Egypt to investigate why certain items found in an archaelogical dig have turned up at rival museums rather than the French museum to which they were promised. It turns out that, while first denying any knowledge, one member of the team does admit selling some smaller items in the collection because funds were needed to continue the operation because the chief archaeologist, Dr. Arnold, out in the field and on a dig, had been unresponsive to any communication and because his spending had been out of control.

But then in a completely unrelated matter Charlie notices that a sarcophagus of one of the Egyptian kings looks like it has been recently tampered with. It is decided that x-rays will be used to look in the sarcophagus, and the image shows a bullet wound in a body that supposedly died three thousand years ago. The coffin is opened and the body of Dr. Arnold is found inside. And so the investigation begins.

I found this Charlie Chan entry from the series rather claustrophobic and slow moving in the middle, although it did have a fascinating dynamite ending. There are only a few suspects from which to choose, and on top of that Dr. Arnold's two grown children are such whiners. Plus the absence of Keye Luke as "number one son" is noticeable and the presence of Stepin Fetchit was grating. On the other hand, Paul Porcasi as an Egyptian version of Inspector Clouseau was a standout.

The end is fascinating though, because Charlie shows his knowledge of forensics and that he does know his way around a crime lab. Mildly recommended, mainly for Oland as Chan.

I did not like this one on the first viewing, but I had a very bad tape which didn't help. With the DVD (part of recent Chan Collection that came out in 2006) I enjoyed this more, thanks, in part to have the option of English subtitles.

I still think this is a slightly sub-par Warner Oland-edition Charlie Chan, but only because I think so highly of the other films. It did have some excellent suspense and strange characters and is known because of the appearance of young Rita Cansino who would go on to star status as Rita Hayworth.

THE BAD - None of Charlie's kids are here to help him out, and that's a loss. Instead, for humor, we have Stepin Fetchit with his mumbling drawl and unfunny character (unlike Mantan Moreland in later Chans, even though both are horrible black stereotypes of the day.) Worse than the above, we have a shrill, hysterical female lead character , "Carol Arnold" (Pat Paterson) who got on my nerves, big-time! That's almost another stereotype of the period: women who fall apart easily and act like overemotional cripples. After a few of these outbursts, I just hit the mute button when she went into her act. She had a brother in here who was almost as bad except he had far fewer lines. Also in here was the typical thing you saw more of in the '30s than in modern films: stories that dealt with the occult and a lot of superstitions.

THE GOOD - The action was pretty good and this story gave us more of the weird suspects than what is normally provided. Not only weird people but strange scenes. Combine those with the usual Chan witticism's, profound statements and uncommon courtesy he gives everyone, and it's an entertaining film. I would never have recognized Hayworth if I hadn't been informed it was her. She played a dark-haired Egyptian woman. If you froze some frames and looked carefully enough, you could be convinced it was her, but it wasn't easy. She certainly wasn't the incredible beauty she would be in the next decade.

Despite the ridiculous presence of Stepin Fetchit, who really contributes nothing but the most egregious of stereotyping, this is a pretty good mystery. Oh, he is quite successful at mumbling incomprehensibly and bringing a flashlight when one is needed. He lives in perpetual fear. Anyway, something is going on with Egyptian treasures that British imperialists are stealing from Egypt to take back to museums. During a discovery, an archaeologist drops dead. This leads to infighting among groups who obviously have made a major discovery and would like it for there own. Charlie Chan has come on the scene and has no idea at the outset that there is so much going on. There is a romantic angle with the young male lead getting in over his head. One interesting thing is the appearance of the beautiful young Rita Hayworth who does little more that look attractive. What is interesting to me is that there is a point where they start to blame Charlie for all the ills they are facing. He takes this in stride because, after all, he is a lesser being in the pecking order. The method of murder and the wrapping up of the case is quite satisfying.