IMDb RATING
6.6/10
2.3K
YOUR RATING
While investigating the theft of antiquities from an ancient tomb excavation, Charlie discovers the body of the expedition's leader concealed inside the mummy's wrappings.While investigating the theft of antiquities from an ancient tomb excavation, Charlie discovers the body of the expedition's leader concealed inside the mummy's wrappings.While investigating the theft of antiquities from an ancient tomb excavation, Charlie discovers the body of the expedition's leader concealed inside the mummy's wrappings.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
Rita Hayworth
- Nayda
- (as Rita Cansino)
John George
- Harip - Grave Opener
- (uncredited)
Gloria Roy
- Bit Girl
- (uncredited)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Of the dozens of Charlie Chan films, this stands as one of the best--even though it sadly co-stars the biggest walking negative stereotype in movie history, Stepin Fetchit. Once again, Fetchit plays a rather sub-human part but at least he's a little less degrading than usual and the rest of the film is exceptional.
This film is very much like a combination of a Chan film and a mummy film--and because of the interesting backdrop the film seems far fresher and more interesting than most in the series. Charlie has been sent to an archaeological dig by a French museum. It seems the museum is justifiably angry because items from the tomb belong to them but someone has been selling them to collectors and other museums. Naturally, when Chan arrives people begin to die and it's up to Charlie to get to the bottom of it.
Despite not having any of the Chan children (particularly the ever enjoyable Keye Luke as "Lee"), this is a dandy film with some interesting twists and a mystery that is a tad over-complicated but fun to unravel. As far as my feelings about Fetchit, in this film he didn't act that much different than the Birmingham Brown character from the later Chan film, so perhaps I am just being a tad oversensitive. It's just that in so many prior films Fetchit was the living embodiment of all the negative Black stereotypes--so bad that seeing him once again kind of made me cringe.
This film is very much like a combination of a Chan film and a mummy film--and because of the interesting backdrop the film seems far fresher and more interesting than most in the series. Charlie has been sent to an archaeological dig by a French museum. It seems the museum is justifiably angry because items from the tomb belong to them but someone has been selling them to collectors and other museums. Naturally, when Chan arrives people begin to die and it's up to Charlie to get to the bottom of it.
Despite not having any of the Chan children (particularly the ever enjoyable Keye Luke as "Lee"), this is a dandy film with some interesting twists and a mystery that is a tad over-complicated but fun to unravel. As far as my feelings about Fetchit, in this film he didn't act that much different than the Birmingham Brown character from the later Chan film, so perhaps I am just being a tad oversensitive. It's just that in so many prior films Fetchit was the living embodiment of all the negative Black stereotypes--so bad that seeing him once again kind of made me cringe.
Warner Oland works on behalf of French Archaeological Society concerning Egyptian antiquities being sold to private collectors and rival museums. Before the case is solved, Chan will uncover and solve a murder and avoid being done in. Mystery is pretty straight forward with fewer misleading clues than most of this series. "Theory like mist on eyeglasses -- obscures facts." Chan still (as usual) does not reveal all until the end although this time with the paucity of suspects it is more likely that you can guess the guilty party. Story relies more on travelog-type shots, similarity to real-life and contemporary film mysteries about mummies and tombs, and basic lectures on how X-rays work and archaeology to keep interest. It works. Pat Paterson (Charles Boyer's real life wife) does a credible job as the damsel in distress and under the influence of cannabis. Stepin Fetchit's role as a bug-eyed dim-witted servant will upset modern viewers and probably served as comic relief to contemporary audiences. Although an unrecognizable Rita Cansino (Rita Hayworth's real last name) is given a credit at the beginning of the film, she hardly has any lines. Not as good as Charlie Chan in London or Paris, but one that dedicated fans will not want to miss. Recommended.
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.
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.
Warner Oland does it again with a great performance as Chan. This one also has a great setting and creepy atmosphere. It is set at a newly excavated Egyptian tomb with all the trappings. There are some genuinely scary sequences creeping around the tomb at night. A young Rita Hayworth (billed as Rita Cansino) has a small part. The only drawback for me is the stereotyped portrayal by Stephin Fechit. He is hard to understand and very annoying at times. The performances by Mantan Moreland and Willie Best in the much later Monogram Chans serve the same niche as Fechit's "Snowshoes" character, but come off much better and are funny in the same way Lou Costello or Curly Howard are funny. But this does not harm the picture. Another one to see over and over again just for the atmosphere if nothing else.
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'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.
Did you know
- TriviaA young Rita Hayworth appears in a minor role, before she became a star.
- GoofsThe plot revolves around items from the tomb of a high priest of Sekhmet, and the statue of Sekhmet, which are found in the tomb itself. Although Sekhmet was indeed the goddess of revenge, she was not a mortuary goddess. The writers may have confused Sekhmet with Selket, who *was* a mortuary goddess.
- Quotes
Charlie Chan: Drop of water on thirsty tongue more precious than gold in purse.
- ConnectionsEdited into Who Dunit Theater: Charlie Chan in Egypt (2021)
- How long is Charlie Chan in Egypt?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Charlie Chan in Egypt
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime
- 1h 13m(73 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.37 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content