Land of the Pharaohs

Here's a film hotly criticized by not only many who saw the film, but by director Hawks himself. It's true, there's a bit of the Hollywood glam element to the production, but I'd say no more so than a half dozen other Hawks films, including the much more often praised "Rio Bravo" and "Hatari!"! (which both followed directly after "Pharaohs"). And the plot of "Pharaohs" makes a lot more sense than that of Hawks' earlier film, "The Big Sleep," which I believe is over praised because of its cast.

As a grand epic from the era where they made them big and were not afraid to spend money where it would show up on screen, "Land of the Pharaohs" surpasses many other epics of its period and even many recent films dealing with a similar subject (1999's "The Mummy" comes to mind). "Pharaohs" has an impressive and very satisfying climax that makes perfect sense historically and dramatically.

Also, no one seems to have mentioned the marvelous handling of crowds, particularly in the lengthy building of the pyramid sequence. I'll even go so far as to say the way Hawks composes his crowds for the cinemascope screen - arranging his Egyptian workers and pharaoh worshipers in intricate patterns with complex movements - rivals even Fritz Lang's similar work in "Metropolis" (1926), famous for its handling of crowds.

I think one of the reasons the film keeps getting bashed is because people haven't seen it in its original widescreen format in many years. Until recently, no Region 1 DVD has been available, so in its cropped, pan and scan VHS incarnation, the film comes across as wimpy and ridiculous. As can be seen in the widescreen DVD release, the grandeur is stunning, its art direction, costumes, sets and locations all holding up marvelously.

It must be said that composer Dimitri Tiomkin probably never wrote a score as majestically spirited as this one, a vast canvas of antiquity and drama. The cast is very much of its time, and some of the dialog is stilted and dated, but with the passing of time, most films suffer from this. Time passes and acting styles change. But a good plot holds up, and "Pharaohs" has plenty of the devious vs altruistic characters that drove many of Hawks plots effectively.

The powers that be in Hollywood finally released the film on DVD, promoting it as a camp classic, adorning the cover with a cheesy shot of Joan Collins, the one thing they apparently consider notable and sell-able about the film. Too bad. Yes, "Land of the Pharaohs" does have an element of campiness, but there is true grandeur in the vastness of the production and the fact that its cast of thousands was indeed a cast of thousands, not CGI. Perhaps one day the wonders of this film will be given the appreciation it deserves. As time passes these epics seem to be acquiring as much antiquity as the genuine historical period itself.

Undoubtedly, "Land of the Pharaohs" is likely overlooked when film buffs consider what constitutes Howard Hawks's best work. It's rather giggle inducing when one thinks about the utter miscasting of most of the actors, and the utter silliness of so many lines. But that doesn't necessarily mean that it's a bad film. On the contrary, it's actually exquisitely made, on an obviously very impressive budget. Hawks and company work with literally thousands of extras in some scenes, and the production design and CinemaScope photography are among the best one will see for this genre.

Jack Hawkins plays an Egyptian pharaoh named Khufu, who wants to be extremely prepared for his "second" life. He desires the perfect pyramid to be built to house his body and his plethora of treasures obtained from war. He learns that one of his current prisoners, Vashtar (James Robertson Justice), is an experienced architect, and indeed Vashtar comes up with some ingenious ideas for crafting an impregnable fortress. Meanwhile, Khufu obtains himself wife # 2, a young princess named Nellifer (Joan Collins). And she's a greedy and conniving person who stops at nothing to get what she wants.

"Land of the Pharaohs" may be a challenge for some people to take seriously, but technically it really is well made, and it's consistently entertaining. Also in the cast are Dewey Martin as Vashtars' son Senta, Alexis Minotis as Khufu's loyal high priest Hamar, Sydney Chaplin as the traitorous Treneh, and James Hayter as Vashtars' friend Mikka. These people all do the very best that they can, but it's the ravishing young Collins who tends to steal the show - and whom the audience is likely to remember the most.

Among the heaviest assets that this can boast are Dimitri Tiomkins' rousing music score, the cinematography by Lee Garmes & Russell Harlan, the art direction by Alexandre Trauner. and the various costumes (especially those worn by Collins). Viewers may also get a big kick out of the fairly grim twist ending.

Seven out of 10.

Land of the Pharaohs is directed by Howard Hawks and collectively written by Harold Jack Bloom, William Faulkner and Harry Kurnitz. It stars Jack Hawkins, Joan Collins, James Robertson Justice, Dewey Martin and Alex Minotis. Music is by Dimitri Tiomkin and cinematography by Lee Garmes and Russell Harlan.

It falls into the filmic splinter of historical epics that thrived greatly in the 50s and 60s, where a cast of thousands are costumed up to the nines, the sets sparkle and location photography smooths the eyes. Land of the Pharaohs has all these things, what it does lack is a high end action quotient, the makers choosing to craft a picture about intrigue in Pharaoh Khufu's (Hawkins) court as the great pyramid is constructed. This is not to say it's a dull picture, it maintains interest throughout, with shifty shenanigans afoot, femme fatale connivings and plenty of slaves standing proud for their cause. While the big finale is devilishly potent.

However, one has to really close off the ears at times to avoid the dreadfully wooden dialogue, and some scenes are painfully misplaced, such as the sight of a miscast 45 year old Hawkins wrestling with a bull, I kid you not. Also miscast is Collins, undeniably sexy, but never once does she convince as an Egyptian princess, and her make-up is awful. There are stars in the film, but it does in fact lack star power. The real stars are Tiomkin, Garmes and Harlan, who each bring the spectacle of the production to vivid life. It was a minor flop at the box office and Hawks pretty much disowned it, but it's not without intelligence and in spite of its flaws it's a good watch for historical epic loving adults. 6.5/10

It's hard to know how to rate movies like this because the genre is so inherently cheesy. In the grand scheme of all cinema, it probably should only get a 6 out of 10, but within the "swords and sandals" genre, it surely rates a 10! There are many classic themes here: an aging man's wish to be remembered through a great monument, a slave's desire to win freedom for his people, an ambitious woman's lust for power at any cost. Of course, everything is overacted and obvious as hell, but the plot stays focused, unrolling inexorably to it's horror-movie ending. This is Saturday afternoon escapism at its best.

"Land of the Pharaohs" is on many Guilty Pleasure lists and deservedly so. You know it is only for entertainment purposes. Joan Collins as well as the character she portrays are over the top campy and not to be taken seriously. Her cruel, selfish Queen is utterly devoid of any redeeming qualities, utterly ruthless and wicked- in other words, delicious fun to watch.

Most of the acting is high-quality, especially the legendary Jack Hawkins who is magnificent as usual although Yul Brynner or Charleton Heston probably would have fit the role better.

Beautifully filmed with a very expensive look it is a movie with an obviously lavish budget. Despite the extravagance, I can fully understand why it didn't do well at the box-office. Focused on death and monuments it can be seen as somewhat depressing and has a grim, doomed aspect overall amid the splendor.

Unless maybe written by Edgar Allan Poe, how is a film about a tomb going to attract a great public to the theater? The answer is: it didn't. It is not an adventure about getting to a tomb such as Indiana Jones-type films, it is basically only a film about a tomb itself.

Death, murder, slavery, a tomb. If not handled just right these subjects can't succeed alone. Here they do, but just barely.