The Egyptian

Waltari's impressive historical fictional work,"The Egyptian",is a long,well-thought out,well-researched,throughly planned piece of good writing.It covers a period of about 60 years in the life of Sinhue,the narrator,and describes his life,adventures,travels,and spiritual and emotional growth in careful detail.This film adaptation covers about 20% of the original,and as a consequence,looses a lot in the telling.The technical aspects are so impressive as to warrant a Ph.D. for their efforts.And,as for acting,Tierney,Ustinov,Wilding,Simmons,Daniell,and Carradine lead a strong supporting cast.(I especially enjoyed Carradine's cameo as the philosophical grave robber,with his Nitzschean interpretation on the futility of life.He told it the way it was.)Costumes,sets,props,etc. were superb.They should have been-they spent 5 years doing the research.And Purdom was a worthy replacement for Brando in the title part.Let's face it-the film was bound to disappoint anyone who wanted the original story.I don't feel qualified to comment on Darvi's portrayal.And Could anyone else BUT Mature have carried off Horemheb?My biggest criticism comes to the pacing.It does drag.But watch it for a well-done,thoughtful epic.

Few people realize it, but there was world literature in the ancient world before the Greeks came on the scene. Besides the literary remains that are in the "Old Testament" of the Jews, there were considerable works from Mesopotamia and Egypt. The summit of the former were the religious poetry and "The Epic Of Gilgamesh". The Egyptians produced many poems, but there main addition was a tale of adventure of a traveler and physician called "The Story Of Sinuhe". It is from this work (actually a fragment, that we don't know the ending of) that the novel "The Egyptian" came from.

The story is unique (as is the movie). "The Egyptian" was a best seller in the early 1950s, and Darryl Zanuck decided to take a chance making it: yes he wanted a showcase for his girlfriend Bella Darvi as Nefer, as well as the rest of the cast (Victor Mature, Edmund Purdom, Peter Ustinov, Michael Wilding, and Gene Tierney), but he was aware that these films rarely made large box office. One can chalk up this as an example of Zanuck trying something different.

The number of movies that deal with ancient Egypt are very small. "Land Of The Pharoahs", "The Egyptian", "The Ten Commandments" (both De Mille versions), "Moses", "Holy Moses!", "Cleopatra", "The Mummy" (all versions), "The Scorpion King". If there are 20 films about ancient Egypt it's is tremendous. But "The Egyptian" is unique. While the second "Ten Commandments" discusses Ramses the Great (Pharoah Ramses II - Yul Brynner) and his father Seti I (Cedric Hardwicke), and the films on Cleopatra deal with her, few other names of ancient Egypt crop up in film. Egypt's greatest Pharoah was Thutmose III, who conquered most of the known middle east of the era of 1470 B.C.E. or so. No film about him has appeared, nor of his usurping predecessor, history's first great female ruler Hatschepsut. But the only known Pharoah who attempted a religious revolution that approached what the Jews (and later the Christians) attempted - a type of monotheism - is the subject of "The Egyptian". This is Pharoah Akhnaton.

In reality Akhnaton was practicing a personal form of monotheism that was not meant for public consumption. But it angered the priestly class who worshiped Amon, rather than Aton. Due to our uncertain historic records (although Akhnaton's official records - the "Tel-el-Amana" letters - are quite complete as far as they survive), we do not know if the Pharoah was killed in a palace coup or not. However he died, he was succeeded by a young brother or son of his whose name is better recalled than any other Pharoah except Ramses: Tutankhamon.

This film is actually quite good as far as it goes. Wilding makes a good natured Akhnaton, who is too weak to be as effective as a religious reformer is supposed to be. Mature is good as the ambitious (and - outside the film - ultimately successful future Pharoah) Horemheb. Tierney and Purdom do well in their lead parts and Ustinov is good as Purdom's friend. Also good is Ms Darvi, in a large supporting part. In a wonderful cameo is John Carridine, as a philosophical grave robber. The film is certainly worthy of viewing, as one of the few attempts to show part of the history and culture of Ancient Egypt.

The picture narrates upon Sinuhe the Egyptian (Edmund Purdom) who works as a medic for paupers and hapless . He meets a good woman (a gorgeous Jean Simmons) and a bad woman called Nefer (a femme fatale Bella Darvi ; Marilyn Monroe lobbied hard to play her , but Darryl F. Zanuck had earmarked the role for his then-mistress Darvi) and an one-eyed , rascally servant (Peter Ustinov). After this , the physician saves and heals pharaoh Amenophis IV (Michael Wilding) from a lion and is appointed as a royal healer . In the palace court from Thebas happens various intrigues with the Pharaoh's sister (Gene Tierney) and the general Horemheb (Victor Mature)and the priest (Henry Daniel) , follower of ¨Amon Ra¨. As Akhenaten tried to bring about a departure from traditional religion, yet in the end it would not be accepted . After his death, traditional religious practice was gradually restored .

The film is partially based on historic deeds and loosely based on Mika Waltari's novel . It's a slice of ancient history set in 1300 B.C and the 18th dynasty : Amenophis IV (son of great pharaoh AmenophisIII) is known as Akenaton , he was proclaimed maximum priest imposing a sole and only God , Aton (the sun God) pitting to priests worshipping Amon-Ra . Amenophis created a new city (called Ajetaton or Amarna). He was married to Nefertiti and would born Tutankhamon but Horemheb rules over and is proclaimed pharaoh . There is an Italian version about similar events titled ¨Nefertiti queen of Nilo , 1961¨ (by director Fernando Cerchio with Jeanne Crain and Vincent Price) but with lack luster and lesser budget . This adaptation by Michael Curtiz is much better with an impressive control of the crowd and scenarios . The musical score from Alfred Newman and Bernard Herrmann , two greatest cinema musicians is extraordinary with romantic and spiritual chores score . Leon Shamroy's spellbound color cinematography ensure the glimmer spectacle . The casting is of first range , they are mightier than the movie . At a cost of $5 million, the film took two years to research , the designers ultimately cataloging five million items of clothing and properties . As set design , gowns , and production are breathtaking . After shooting was completed, Fox made back some of the film's immense cost by selling many of the set pieces, props and costumes to Paramount, which then employed them in an even bigger epic, Cecil B. DeMille's Ten Commandments . The motion picture will appeal to historical epics buffs. Rating : Good . Well worth watching .

"The Egyptian" has several pluses that make up for a rather slow pace. There is plenty to the story, which involves a lot of action as well as some interesting themes, and there is a lot of good scenery and cinematography. Most of the cast is pretty good, and there is an assortment of interesting characters.

The setting in ancient Egypt works well and is used to good effect. It makes for many interesting sights, which are filmed nicely and used well in the story. The plot does a good job of weaving the reign of Pharaoh Akhenaten, who tried to bring monotheism to Egypt, into the lives of the main characters. As the central character, Edmund Purdom is all right, but some of the other characters often command more attention. Victor Mature is particularly convincing as the no-nonsense Horemheb, and Peter Ustinov steals more than one scene as Purdom's assistant.

The only real flaw is the length. While there is plenty to the story, there are times when it moves quite slowly, and it doesn't seem as if it would have been all that hard to shorten some of the scenes. In particular, some of the speeches that summarize the conflict of ideas among the characters would have been more effective if they had not been quite so wordy.

But overall, this is a good movie, and it works pretty well both as a period piece and as a story.

Film historians have said much about ancient epics that have been the interest of many directors from the beginning of cinema. The pioneers of such epics, particularly biblical ones, were D.W Griffith with his "mother of all epics" INTOLERANCE (1916), and Cecil B DeMille with his flair for magnificent spectacles, costumes and lavish scenes. Who can forget his TEN COMMANDMENTS (1923, 1956) or THE SIGN OF THE CROSS (1932)? Nevertheless, here comes another epic, made in the 1950s, directed by Michael Curtiz, and based on the novel by Mika Waltari, "The Egyptian." Michael Curtiz, already famous for his great classic CASABLANCA (1941) wonderfully manages to adjust his film to the audiences of that time, to entail the most important ideas and facts from the thick novel, and to recreate the lifestyle of the Egyptians who lived in one of the most amazing periods, in the reign of Akhnaton.

The first and most important fact for me in this movie is the psychological development of the main character that Edmund Purdom plays. Sinuhe, having been brought up in a simple family by his step parents, becomes a physician. All his life, he never stops asking a question "why?" and searching for the answer. Alluring love that he finds in a courtesan Nefer (Bella Darvi) leads him to financial and spiritual disaster. He has to repair the mistakes by hard work in the House of Death and starting to build up his reputation from nothing. First, he thinks that the only cure is revenge. However, in the long run, he realizes that "eye for eye" is no solution. Finally, what stands before him in very strange circumstances is the temptation to be a pharaoh. Nevertheless, there is one moment he finds the answer for his questions that touched him throughout his life... The story of the main character, though based on the book, is so interesting psychologically that every open minded person should consider this aspect in the film. The main character's psychological struggle is intensified by the times he lived in, the times when, probably for the first time to that extend, the power of sword clashed with the power of thought.

Curtiz's movie also retains one rule that all films of his era kept to: great cast and lavish sets. There are mostly British actors and actresses who give very nice performances. How is it possible not to mention the mainstay of ancient epic, Victor Mature. This time, he is not Demetrius, Hannibal or Samson but Horemheb - a fighter, a lover, at last a pharaoh. Jean Simmons appears in a very delicate role of Merit, a woman who loved Sinuhe all her life but it was too late when he realized that. Peter Ustinov, probably most famous for his gorgeous performance as Nero in QUO VADIS? three years earlier, does a great job as Kaptah, Sinuhe's friend. The royalty of the film is also played by two great cast, Gene Tierney and Michael Wilding. Tierney is excellent as cold, desirous of power Baketamon, the sister of pharaoh. Wilding gives a marvelous performance as "insane" Akhnaton. When I was in Louvre in Paris and saw Akhnaton's original face carved in stone, he looked very much the same as the actor in the film. Bella Darvi, an actress born in Poland, is quite memorable as a wicked courtesan Nefer. And there is one more actress who appears only in one scene but whom it is hard to forget, Judith Evelyn as Taia, pharaoh's mother. This voice, these eyes!

The sets are magnificent. The director recreated the most probable image of the outdoor temple of Aaton, the god that the Egyptians worshiped to in the reign of Amenhotep IV. I also loved the scene of pharaoh's first entrance. What a glorious picture that forever lasts in one's memory!!! However, there is also one aspect that I would like to draw the attention of all people interested to see the film. The Egyptian is similar to other epics in many respects, but it also stands out as a unique film. There are very few films which make such a wonderful use of different curiosities as for ancient times. There is a mention of iron used first by the Hetites. It's also the only film about ancient Egypt which talks openly of Egyptians' magnificent curing abilities. It memorably shows the contrasts of lifestyles, particularly the moment of a slave's death for whom no one cares followed by the announcement and consequently the widespread mourning after the death of pharaoh. Finally, "The Egyptian" shows one historical fact: there were other nations except for Jews (before Christ) where the spirit of God shone in some human hearts. Yet, the only difference was that it did not survive that long as at Jews' because it did not have a strong fundament. The scene of Akhnaton's death supplies you with so many biblical and Christian values that you may think you watch a religious movie.

All things considered, I highly recommend Michael Curtiz' film. It is a great production at multiple levels: an entertainment for epic fans, an admiration of marvelous performances for cinema fans, a soul feast for spiritual people. Finally, it is a beautiful story of extraordinary things which happened thirteen centuries before the birth of Jesus Christ.