User reviews

Maybe it's just a personal affection for this screen version of the Mika Waltari novel, or a fondness for things Egyptian (I grew up loving to visit the mummies in Boston's Museum of Fine Arts) but I think this is a rather good film. The production values are great regarding color and cinematography, and it appears some effort went into historical authenticity (much of it from the novel, I'm sure).

Purdom is admittedly a bit stiff in the lead role, but one can accept this as part of Sinuhe's character. Victor Mature is, well, Victor Mature. Peter Ustinov is a delight to watch here , in the type of role which he always did so well and so wittily. Bella Darvi's performance as Nefer is classically camp, and I find even Michael Wilding's rather dry portrayal of Akhenaten to have its own appeal.

The historical oddity of Akhenaten's monotheism, a brief detour in ancient Egypt's history, is interesting, as is Akhenaten himself, and well worth reading about; the religious wars portrayed here have a basis in fact.

An interesting footnote regarding Darvi, whose birth name was Bayla Wegier: she was a Polish émigré who producer Darryl Zanuck and his wife Virginia took under their wing (I believe they may even have adopted her). Her screen name Darvi is formed from Zannuck's and his wife's first names. She continued her acting career in France, but never achieved great success and, after a rather unhappy life, died at her own hand in 1971.

Altogether this is an interesting film and enjoyable to watch both for the visual values and for the history. Turner Classic Movies shows this in letterbox, which is essential to capturing the scope and sweep of the story.

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 .

I'll start off right at the beginning by saying "I like this movie." It's sweeping, it's grand, it's gripping and it's fun. Sinhue the physician,sits in front of his small stone hut writing his memoirs. And what a story it is! Taken from a river and reared by an elderly couple who doted on him, he becomes a physician to the poor. He befriends Horemheb who sees glory while Sinhue sees healing. And both run into the future pharaoh Anknaten (forgive my spellings), who endures an epileptic fit.

And this pharaoh has another "flaw": He believes in one god instead of a pantheon of gods. Back then, this was totally revolutionary. Sinhue and Horemheb grow up. One night, Sinhue sees a woman who makes him lose his senses. He gives up his practice, sells his parents' home and even their tombs just to spend a night with her. Does he? I won't tell. Meanwhile, Merit, a tavern maid played with sweet simplicity belying strength by Jean Simmons, falls in love with Sinhue. She falls under his spell and under the spell of the belief in one god.

Victor Mature overacts perfectly as Horemheb. Edmond Purdom is sincere as Sinhue the lost physician (does he find redemption? Stay tuned). Even Bela Darvi, the woman who steals Sinhue's heart isn't as bad as everyone has said. The fact that she was Daryl F. Zanuck's mistress had nothing to do with the casting - right? Yeah, right...still, she wasn't that bad _ I've seen worse. I think she did better in "The Egyptian" than many of today's young actresses have done in anything. I said it before and I'll say it again -- I like this movie. I recommend it. It makes you think despite some hammy acting. Have fun with this movie; it's worth it.

Zanuck had high hopes for this extravagant production, including a major casting coup when Brando signed on for the lead. Alas, Brando dropped out of the project and was replaced by Edmund Purdom, whose acting is the antithesis of "the method". The completed production is more a tribute to the state-of-the-art in mid-century production values and presentation than a high-quality example of epic filmmaking. The script quality ranges from the sublime (the bordello sequences) to the ridiculous (the royal palace scenes); while the performances, even the best of them (Ustinov, Darvi, Tierney), are mundane at best. That's not to say this picture, like most epics of it's kind, isn't a worthy indulgence. It is, if only for the overbearing production design, magnificently intrusive music score (co-written by two legendary screen composers), and sheer extravagance of it all. It's all relative though, since only the largest TV screens and loudest high-end sound systems can provide anything close to the experience of the 2:55-to-1 CinemaScope ratio employed, featuring dialogue-panning, multi-track stereo. An expensive Fox laserdisc is currently the only available option for viewing this picture as closely as originally intended. It must have been quite a big deal when the movie palace curtains opened on this one in 1956!

The behind-the-scenes story here is that Bela Darvi - atrocious and wooden in a key role - was in fact the main squeeze of 20th Century's Daryl F. Zanuck who liked to arm-wrestler men half his age. Purdom was almost as wooden, and the rest of the cast didn't jell either, although Michael Ansara as a Hittite commander and Victor Mature as his Egyptian counterpart stood out. However, the Egyptian atmosphere and costumes and sets are well worth a look; this production did not skimp on money. Give it a try.

The Eighteenth Dynasty of the monotheistic pharaoh Akhenaten and his wife Nefertiti has always held a fascination for Egyptologists and the monumental, best-selling novel by Finnish Mika Waltari, written in a burst of inspiration over a three and a half month period was a vehicle which Hollywood simply could not resist. The novel was praised for its authenticity and although this viewer blushes to disclose that he has not yet read the original, the synopsis confirms that this screen adaptation by Philip Dunne and Casey Robinson is far from being so but of course audiences at the time expected neither historical accuracy nor deep characterisations in sword and sandal epics but paid to see spectacle and attractive actors on display which this Twentieth Century Fox production certainly delivers in spades.

Typically for producer Darryl F. Zanuck no expense has been spared here in terms of sets, costumes and props, many of which were leant to Paramount for 'The Ten Commandments'. Whereas de Mille's film was a resounding success, 'The Egyptian' opened to mixed reviews and acquired the stigma of being the first flop in Cinemascope.

One's view of a film is often influenced by its reputation but this one, under the direction of Michael Curtiz, is not nearly as bad as some would have us believe and has a great deal to recommend it.

It marks an unique musical collaboration between Alfred Newman and Bernard Herrmann whilst masterful cinematographer Leon Shamroy received one of his eighteen Oscar nominations, a record matched only by Charles Lang. As for the cast, it is the female of the species that dominates with a wonderfully butch Gene Tierney as Baketamon, a beautiful performance by Jean Simmons as Merit, an entertainingly bibulous cameo by Judith Evelyn as Taia and not forgetting the exotic but ill-fated Bella Darvi as Babylonian temptress Nefer. She might not have been the greatest of actresses but one can fully understand Zanuck's obsession with her.

Inveterate scene-stealer Peter Ustinov as one-eyed servant Kaptah provides comic relief whilst remaing 'real' which he was again to do as Lentulus in 'Spartacus'. The dramatic contrast between warlike Horemheb and pacifist Akhenaten is provided by Victor Mature and Michael Wilding. Although as different as chalk and cheese both actors were refreshingly honest regarding their acting abilities with Mature's strong presence and Wilding's immense charm compensating to a degree for their undoubted limitations. Edmund Purdom, borrowed from MGM following the success of 'The Student Prince', grows into the difficult role of physician Sinuhe and is sufficiently earnest. Like Ms. Darvi he was hailed as an 'exciting new talent' but Hollywood is an unforgiving place and a succession of flops scuppered both their careers. Purdom is here replacing Marlon Brando and one cannot help but wonder how the film's dynamic would have changed with Brando in the role.

The theme of Waltari's novel regarding unchanging human nature is timeless and struck a chord in the aftermath of WWII whilst calling to mind that there is indeed nothing new under the sun. I really must get around to reading it.

One of the most pleasurable aspects of movie viewing is to get lost in a film. To have it totally wash over you, so that you absorb it as it is, and thus, experience it to the fullest. Every time I see it, 'The Egyptian' is such a film. Over the years it is a picture critics have loved to hate. Many have thrown darts at its vulnerabilities. But perhaps it is because of the very tone the film brings with it rather than its most obvious characteristics. It is at once forbidding, remote, possibly dangerous; beware of what lies within! The haunting chords of the music, seen over the 20th-Fox logo, usher us into titles of other-worldly turquoise lettering.

Strange! Archaeological! Decadent! It is as if we are descending into some vault of antiquity, wherein might be great treasures, mixed with uncertain hazards. (One might imagine Darryl Zanuck commanding: 'Make it ancient!') Then, what a darkly dramatic story unfolds, all within the same tone set at the start.

Of Hollywood's mid-50s 'Egyptian Trilogy', 'The Ten Commandments' portrayed the civilization's sternness, the phenomenal 'Land of the Pharaohs' its nuts and bolts, while 'The Egyptian' shows it all, from glamour to tragedy, for us to wonder at.

No need to say much about the players here, but I think that, with the passage of time, Bella Darvi is being redeemed. What a perfect face for the role, right out of a Symbolist painting. If her acting does not please some, it might be argued that, in her role as a 'courtesan', she is obviously better in bed than yakking to some poor helpless admirer. I think that Curtiz captured the kinkiness of her sado-masochistic relationship with Edmund Purdom's character with aplomb, censorship being what it was at the time. Sir Peter Ustinov, in his memoirs, was pretty kind to 'The Egyptian', writing that it was 'like being lost in a huge set for 'Aida'. His pronunciation of the word 'beer' I have adopted myself ever after.(One of the film's historically accurate references: the Egyptian's invented beer!) Henry Daniell, egads, what a perfect performance. Gene Tierney, what a screen treasure. Bless DFZ for giving her this 'late' role. C'mon folks, don't be so hard on Victor Mature! He's a cheesemaker's son! Who rose to be pharaoh! Sounds like a peculiarly American opportunity. One of the best moments: John Carradine's existential observations on the sands of time. And Purdom's utterance about dwelling beyond the sunset of the world. If that isn't Grade 'A' epicness, what is?

Of course, along with everything else, the music is sublime. It is frequently noted that Alfred Newman and Bernard Herrmann created one of the screen's most compelling scores, perfectly harmonious, yet each theme is well developed, with a life of its own. Newman, pressed for time by DFZ, called in Herrmann, someone he could trust implicitly, to take up half the burden.

Benny, not the easiest guy to work with, obviously respected Newman enough to really deliver inspiring music. They alternated cues, an ingenious approach. No spoilers as to who did what here, but Benny brings an edge with him, mysterious, awesome sounds. Alfred brings fulsomeness, longing, poignancy. Both are consummately epic. Even when seen on a squeezed TV print, the effect of seeing the two composers' names side by side in the main credits, which the ultra-wide anamorphic screen could comfortably accommodate, is spine-tingling.

Leon Shamroy, the Dean of CinemaScope, does not let us down here. The lurid greens and moody shadows (probably distortions in all the terrible TV prints I've seen through the years) perfectly accompany the multi-dimensional script (by the great Philip Dunne and WB vet Casey Robinson, whom Curtiz must've brought with him to 20th). How remarkable it is that Shamroy, who was as much of an institution of cinematography at Fox as Newman was with music, would lens 'Cleopatra' a few years later, but in the brighter, sharper images of '60s Todd A-O. These old studio guys are really heroes of mine.

To me, who wants to fret about all the imperfections and criticism opportunities in a picture like this? I'd rather yield entirely to its spell, and dive off into its sea of lavishness, to emerge after the inspiring climax of 'The End' refreshed, moved, and hungry for more.

And yes, we should cry out to 20th-Fox for a DVD release worthy of DFZ's legacy.

Hollywood's version of Mika Waltari's book, is an interesting film. Placed in ancient Egypt, it is the story of Sinuhe a medicine man that through his life knows about misery, love, passion, treason, richness, ambition and also murder, in the times of Akhenaton the king that -long before Jesus was born- tried to introduce a single pacifist God's religion against his people's beliefs.

The script is good and so are the settings, locations, gowns and ancient Egypt's atmosphere. Direction by Michael Curtiz is correct too and interest is well kept in spite of the film's extense duration. Music is accordingly good also. But then, where did the movie fail to be a classic or at least a well remembered "epic" spectacular?

It fails in a casting with major flaws. Jean Simmons brings a correct performance as Merit the girl in love with Sinuhe but not corresponded, as well as Bella Darvi as the high class prostitute Nefer and Gene Tierney as Baketamon the Pharaoh's ambitious sister. Peter Ustinov (Kaptah), renders one of his usual outstanding jobs as the physician's friend and good old Henry Daniell is a convincing priest.

Nevertheless, two main characters where a complete selection mistake and that hurts the movie badly. Victor Mature as Horemheb the soldier who became king shows his inevitable and usual overacting and literally spoils every scene he appears in (and he is in many). Edmund Purdom plays Sinuhe and shows his traditional wooden acting and a complete lack of charisma and of the minimum strenght the role of a man that goes through everything in life demands. One comes to think that perhaps if Marlon Brando hadn't turned down the role of Sinuhe -he was the first choice- he could have raised high the film and even smooth Mature's devastating performance.

In all, this is a film to see -entertaining and interesting- but a clear proof that miscasting is a serious mistake in movies. It rates a 6 out of 10 for me.

I am surprised that so many comments about this film are positive. Having read the book several times (and all the other historical novels by Mika Waltari) there is no way to say much good in this film. If I forget the origins of the story I might consider it a reasonably good epic. Of course to bring such a brick of a book to the big screen is a task not to be envied, but it could be done with class. I can't understand why even the name of Nefernefernefer had to be shortened to just Nefer. I love Peter Ustinov as Kaptah and Marlon Brando probably would have made a better Sinuhe but the overall attitude is too Hollywood to ever make justice to the book. Mind you Mika Waltari left the Premier of this film in the middle of the showing. That's how much he liked it.

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.

This was the second Cinemascope spectacle that Fox produced after the Robe. Notice how some of the Roman sets are redressed to pass for Egyptian sets. The film is produced with all first class elements, beautiful photography, stirring soundtrack (Alfred Newman and Bernard Herrmann - see if you can tell which composer scored specific scenes). However, the principal acting is a bit weak. Edmund Purdom seems to have a limited range of emotions and is uninteresting to watch. The best performances come from Peter Ustinov as the one-eyed slave and Polish actress Bella Darvi as the Babylonian temptress "Nefer". I find this movie in general to be strong on plot which is rare for these large spectacles produced at the time. All in all, the film does an interesting and entertaining job of social commentary on what Egyptian society might have looked like.

If you ever have read the book I'm sure you will hate this movie as I do. This movie is spoiled in it's Hollywood directing-style and for real, taking off the best parts of the book. The whole idea of the book is that Sinuhe's life in unhappy and everything goes wrong and in this movie it's not like that. This movie, in it's Hollywood glory sucks. Chraracters doesn't look like they're described in the book and they left half of the event off. I do understand that though as it's movie and it has to be under 3 hours long but still, why drop the most important ones off?

I can't honestly say anything good about this movie to anyone. It has nothing same than the characters as the book. Read the book and don't just watch this because it gives really wrong image of it.

"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.

The 1954 film "The Egyptian" is the type of film made to be seen on a huge movie screen. The film, directed by Michael Curtiz, spared no expense in cast, costumes, or photography.

Edmund Purdom stars as Sinuhe, a poor orphan in 18th Century Egypt, who becomes a physician and is given a palace appointment by the Pharoh (Michael Wilding). But Sinuhe's life will take many turns. He becomes obsessed with Nefer (Bella Darvi) and gives her everything, including his parents' house and burial tombs, only to be rejected by her. He has to leave Egypt when the Pharoh's daughter becomes ill and Sinuhe does not appear at the palace to tend to her. He and his self-appointed slave (Peter Ustinov) travel everywhere, and Sinuhe again builds his reputation as a physician, and his wealth. Eventually he returns to Egypt, where his friend Horemhob is now the head of the Pharoh's guards, and war is about to rage.

The star of this film was supposed to be Marlon Brando, but he didn't like anything about it, included Bella Darvi, so Purdom was cast. Purdom just wasn't an exciting actor, and he didn't warm up the camera. In a film that is paced slowly, his performance wasn't much help. There is, however, some wonderful acting from Peter Ustinov, Gene Tierney, Jean Simmons, and a boisterous performance from Victor Mature.

Bella Darvi as Nefer gives basically a one-note performance. She was a protégée of Darryl and Virgina Zanuck, and Mrs. Zanuck thought of her as a daughter. When she found out that her husband thought of Darvi as more of a girlfriend, she threw both of them out of the house. Darvi came to a bad end, committing suicide in 1971. Here she reminds me a little of Linda Christian. She is quite beautiful and speaks with a slight lisp.

Definitely worth watching, especially if you like this type of film.

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.

An engrossing historical drama, "The Egyptian" is the book-ended story of an elderly Egyptian physician, Sinuhe, who sets out to record his event-filled life for posterity. Like Moses, he begins his story as a newborn infant in a tiny reed boat tied with fowlers' knots adrift on the Nile. The abandoned child is found, adopted, and grows into a young man. In the desert, he and his carousing buddy, Horemheb, have a chance encounter with Pharaoh Akhnaton that changes their lives and leads the pair into palace intrigue and power plays among royals and priests. Based on a best-selling novel by Mika Waltari, "The Egyptian" has lofty ambitions that are not quite met. While definitely not high art, the film is not camp or guilty pleasure either. Directed by veteran Michael Curtiz, "The Egyptian" is more than competent, and the multiple plot lines and devious characters will hold most viewers' interest.

The cast is stellar for the mid-1950's, although the lead, Edmund Purdom, is probably the least well known and remembered of them. The film boasts Victor Mature, Gene Tierney, Jean Simmons, Michael Wilding, and Peter Ustinov among the usual sandal-clad cast of thousands. While Purdom can only be described as an adequate Sinuhe, seasoned performers like Ustinov, Simmons, and Henry Daniell hold their own. Even Victor Mature seems less wooden than usual as the soldier Horemheb. The film's one acquired taste is Bella Darvi, who likely won the role of the seductive man-eating Nefer on the producer's casting couch. While her Babylonian allure drew the men of ancient Thebes to ruin and despair, her Polish accent, thick features, and transparent motives are the film's weak point. Up against such legendary Hollywood beauties as Jean Simmons and Gene Tierney, Darvi's appeal is as mysterious as the pyramids. Where was Elizabeth Taylor when the role of Nefer was cast?

Filmed in Cinemascope by Leon Shamroy, who won the film's only Oscar nomination and would later film another Egyptian epic, "Cleopatra," the art direction is handsome, glossy, and of dubious authenticity. Two legendary composers, Bernard Herrmann and Alfred Newman, contributed the fine musical score, although the simplistic devotional chant to Aton is annoying and repetitious. At 140 minutes, the movie is not unduly long and only goes off course in attempts to suggest Akhnaton's monotheistic devotion to the sun god was a precursor to the Judeo-Christian religion. Wielding the Egyptian ankh as a quasi-crucifix and stating that the film's events occurred centuries before Christ may make some viewers uncomfortable. However, "The Egyptian" is generally well crafted, decently written and acted, and excellent, if undemanding, entertainment for rainy afternoons when only a sand-and-sandals epic will do.

This movie tries to depict itself as a historical movie based on ancient Egyptian literature. The props are quite bad, they use Roman style dresses (late ones) but it was typical for 50ies. They also depict history in a completely wrong way, it is so bad on so many levels! Basically it is Biblical story based on pure fantasy very vaguely based on ancient Egypt. In fact it is hardcore rape of both ancient Egyptian history and the ancient Egyptian literature.

First, story of Sinuhet is from The Old Kingdom. The movie takes place in The New Kingdom during the ruling of Achnaton, who was kinda crazy man who almost destroyed the country because of his forced approach to introduce new religion and abolishing of the old one. In the reality he did not care about the consequences and used terror to achieve his ends. In the movie, however, he is pictured almost as Moses, he is very wise, mild and kind. On the other hand, the general Haremheb who in reality managed to salvage the country from the ruins of the Achnaton's experiment is depicted as murderer and cruel dictator.

The country was not invaded by Hittites at the time of Achnaton as the movie depicts. The decay was based solely on the new religion that is not only admired because it was the first monotheist religion, but at the very end of the movie the reality is even more twisted to the incredible conclusion that the Amon was actually the God of the Christians! This is actually very wrong even by Biblical standards, because Aton was the face of the Sun. The ankh is compared to the cross which is completely wrong, because ankh is very ancient symbol of life whereas the cross is the symbol of death / sacrifice. The fact the pharaoh decides to sacrifice himself for some reason is displayed almost like Christ-style. It is blatant and deliberate lie. It is twist of reality comparable to making movie where Hitler is depicted as nice animal loving extrovert who is forced to fight the world in attempt to defend the freedom of people of Europe. It is THAT huge bunch of lies, really!

The pictures are nice. The message is sick. I really do not know what is worse there: The incredible preaching style lies or the fact the movie completely abused and destroyed interesting book of ancient literature. There is almost no similarity to the Story of Sinuhet including the ending that is absolutely wrong even in the style of the ending - the ending of original story is positive, Sinuhet is pardoned by pharaoh and he is even given a tomb which was very high honor. In this pseudo evangelic movie it ends "positively" also: Sinuhet is pushed into the exile, dies poor and alone yet almost screams the Christian preachings from his lips. There is zero respect to the Egyptian history. It is completely twisted just to create another pseudo Christian movie. This is so so wrong. So wrong!

It happens often, while growing up, a Hollywood movie impresses a youth. It not only lasts a lifetime, but inspire him to study ancient cultures as a career. Such was the case, with the 1954 film entitled "The Egyptian." Audience were awed with the sets, costumes and great acting of this film, so much so, other films soon followed in like vain. This is the story of a young Egyptian boy who was left parent less soon after he was born. With such a dubious beginning, it is not hard to wonder why he will spend his life, asking questions. The boy Sinuhe, (Sin-oh-way) which means, 'He that is alone'(Edmund Purdom) grows to manhood and continues asking why, even as he graduates from The School Of Life to become a physician. During his formative years he acquires a lifelong friend named Kaptah brilliantly played by (Peter Ustinov), and Horemheb (Victor Mature) who raises from a simple officer of the guard to Commander of the Armies. His life offers everything from a quick rise in social status to condemned criminal, to outcast, a wondering healer, and eventually to a station in life he never expected. Fine acting goes to Jean Simmons as Merit, Michael Wilding as Akhnaton, Bella Darvi as the temptress, Nefer, and John Carradine as a memorable Grave robber. Tommy Rettig, plays Thoth, the son of the Egyptian. In his final years, 'He that is alone,' finally discovers the answer he had been seeking all his life, which he bequeathes to his son, now in the care of his lifelong friend. Excellent Film! ****

Surprisingly entertaining potboiler despite the casting of bland Edmund Purdom in the title role. Victor Mature could have been better in a role that begged for roguish charm, and Jean Simmons is given little to do other than look on with an expression of concern and/or frustration on her face. Peter Ustinov is likewise wasted, but none of this detracts from the enjoyment.