The Egyptian (1954) (1954)

Not one of Michael Curtiz' best films, "The Egyptian" is seen here in a serviceable print (and in widescreen) but somehow this transfer doesn't ring any bells. The film itself is a static, sometimes involving historical epic, and the cast is good. Edmund Purdom is fine (despite bad reviews at the time) and he's capably supported by Gene Tierney, Victor Mature, Jean Simmons, and Michael Wilding. But Daryll Zanuck discovery (and mistress) Bella Darvi, as the evil temptress, is a liability. Zanuck wanted Marlene Dietrich to play the sensual siren who leads Purdom astray--and though she might have been too old at the time, she'd at least have delivered her lines with some conviction and style. The film is slow at times, but it picks up in the last act, and is often affecting, despite the limitations of the script and direction. Other reviewers have stated they couldn't turn off the Korean subtitles: I had the same trouble, and I found them distracting. Chances are this film will be released someday in a restored print. I'd suggest hardcore fans wait for that edition, when it arrives.

This is one of the great epics... though for Fox was not a great box-office success at the time. On the DVD itself it is sad that 20th Century Fox seemed to have forgotten about their own DVD release and it is long overdue to those that still enjoy these old movies.

This import DVD edition has lost some of its superb color and sound in its transfer that a movie like this requires but at least it is an opportunity to enjoy a marvellous film though not historically accurate in any way. It is a wonderful classic with a familiar stable of classic stars of that time. At a good price, worth having if you can't hold out for Fox themselves to release it on DVD.

Buy The Egyptian (1954) (1954) Now

I am not going to review the movie, that has already been done. This review is about the Blu-Ray disc. Anyone who is a fan of this movie and has a HDTV/Blu-Ray setup needs to get this disc. Yes, the price is higher than most Blu-Ray releases, but it is well worth it. That is if superior picture quality (1080p) and superior sound quality (DTS 5.1) is important. The transfer is also in the original CinemasScope aspect ratio of 2.55, before CinemaScope went to 2.35 to make room for the duel Mag/Optical soundtracks on the film.

I was a little concerned at first, especially since the video resolution of 1080p and the type of 5.1 sound (DTS), was not included in the product discription. But I am glad I went ahead with the order anyway. I have been waiting a long time for a blu-ray release of "The Egyptian" and it has been worth the wait and the price.

It looked great in my home theater which is equipped with a 92" diag. screen,(which gives me a wall to wall picture presentation) 1080p front projector and 7.1 surround sound system. From the Fox/Cinemascope logo to the ending credits, this movie was great entertainment. If you enjoy the Fox "Sword and Sandle" series (ie. "The Robe"), include "The Egyptian", you won't be disappointed.

Read Best Reviews of The Egyptian (1954) (1954) Here

This is a marvelous epic film, the acting is remarkable, and Victor Mature is simply enchanting in this film. The three main characters interact gracefully, and the plot about an ancient Monotheistic Religion in Egypt is remarkably well written. The movie is partly based on fact, and partly romanticized. The bluray version is far superior to all of the other versions out on the market, as I purchased all of them available, and this version is simply perfect.

Want The Egyptian (1954) (1954) Discount?

The Egyptian (1954) [Blu-ray]Firstly let me agree with most of the other reviewers of the blue ray edition of this film by stating that finally justice has been done in both sumptuous picture and sound quality for this incredibly courageous biblical widescreen epic spectacular of the middle 1950's that until recently has been mostly ignored.

Why courageous? Because it was a major commercial release from a leading Hollywood studio in the early to mid 1950's when most of America was christian and conservative. Then along comes this film with its criticisms of the prevailing religion in ancient Egypt, the vicious & politically ambitious priests and highlighting a pacifist pharaoh who is radically different to anyone who preceeded him, obsessed as he is with his monotheistic or "one god" theory of religion. This radical departure from religious tradition obviously brings him into conflict with the ruling elite of the priests and he is targeted for removal by this elite priesthood. The main character, Sinuhe the physician, later meets a grave robber who insists that there are no gods & that every dead pharaoh has had their graves broken into and haven't preserved any of their material possessions in this life for themselves as gods in the next life. Sinuhe tends to agree with this atheist philosophy. Later at the movie's end he is converted to the religious beliefs of his weak & effeminate half brother (pharaoh Akhenaten) to the absolute bewilderment of all concerned as he has given up the chance to be pharaoh himself due to these religious beliefs. I don't really think 1950's audiences appreciated such an attack on conventional religion and also emphasizing that the supposed early christianity portrayed is being championed by such a weak & effeminate character like Akhenaten. Or that this religious philosophy will be carried on by a courageous loser like Sinuhe.

The film also highlights the relationship between the main character Sinuhe & the pharaoh Akhenaten (it turns out that they are half brothers--from the same father but different mothers) that comes perilously close to a thinly disguised homosexual love situation. I cannot remember any other major Hollywood release before this or even 15 years after this featuring one man saying to another man "the others lied to me but I believe that you really love me". Of course the Sinuhe character and we the audience know that these two are half brothers so its just a case of brotherly love. But the disturbing thing for 1950's audiences was that the character of pharaoh (beautifully played by actor Michael Wilding who was best known as being one of Elizabeth Taylor's husbands) does not know this and comes across as a weak & effeminate ruler and, even though he's married to the famous Queen Nefertiti and has many children, could well have some sort of bisexual attraction to the Sinuhe character.

The other aspect is that there is repeated criticism by Sinuhe of just about every ruler & government that he has ever come across---especially in the elite priesthood's willingness to remove the pharaoh from power by poisoning him, replacing him with a strong & more traditional ruler & weeding out all of the pharaoh's supporters. This could be read as a veiled criticism of the American House of Representatives Unamerican Activities Committee that prevailed in USA from the late 1940's to the mid 1950's. In ancient Egypt not long after he was deposed Akhenaten's image and any reference to him were deleted from the public monuments & public records. It was as though he and his period in power had never existed.

Which probably makes it easier to understand why this film was not a great box office success even though it was championed as a Cinemascope successor to the enormously successful "The Robe" of a year earlier. Most reviewers have stated that Edmund Purdom who, whilst having an excellent speaking voice that suits the part, just doesn't have the necessary power and charisma to convince as the main character Sinuhe the Egyptian. It's even suggested that Marlon Brando (the first choice for the role who arrived for rehearsals on the first day & then left the production later that same day) would have made a better main character. I think that Marlon's first instincts about the story & the so called weakness of the main character he would play were correct as it didn't really suit his style & he was correct to leave the film before he got involved. Had he become involved it would have probably turned out something like the 1962 "Mutiny on the Bounty" which basically flopped at the box office due to Brando's characterization of Fletcher Christian & his off screen tantrums when he didn't get his own way on the film sending the film's cost way over budget. Whilst most Americans generally think the 1962 "Mutiny on the Bounty" is a good action adventure & Brando's performance is fair enough (the same opinion I hold) most British viewers hated his performance in that film & regarded his characterization of Fletcher Christian as ridiculous. Which basically ruined the whole film for them. And Brando was first choice as T.E. Lawrence in "Lawrence of Arabia" by producer Sam Spiegel but director David Lean soon over rode that decision by first casting Albert Finney and when he cancelled then casting Peter O'Toole in the lead role. Again Brando as T.E. Lawrence would have polarized opinion of the movie & probably alienated British audiences. Brando later appeared in producer Sam Speigel's "The Chase"(1966) which was a resounding flop. As far as I am concerned Edmund Purdom puts in a rather convincing performance as a thoughtful & sensitive man caught up in the vicious world of ancient politics. I don't see his character as weak so much as sensitive. Like Brando's role in "Mutiny on the Bounty" if you can accept his central performance then you'll probably like the movie. If you cannot then its an uphill climb to like this movie.

The same can be said about the role of the Babylonian lady of easy virtue Nefer as played by producer Darryl Zanuck's protege (and then secret mistress) Bella Darvi. Most reviewers think of her, like Purdom, as unconvincing & badly cast and even, unlike Purdom, hard to understand when she speaks. Again if you cannot accept her performance as convincing or even reasonable then the whole movie is usually ruined for you. Those who like this film usually accept the performances of Edmund Purdom & Bella Darvi as both convincing and acceptable. Those who don't like this movie usually quote the performances of these 2 actors as spoiling the whole movie for them.

The supporting cast is quite excellent with an incredibly beautiful and appealing Jean Simmons (then 22 years old), a surprisingly convincing & impressive Victor Mature, a suitably alluring & devious Gene Tierney, an appealing rascal role for Peter Ustinov (similar to his later Academy Award winning role as Batiatus in "Spartacus") and a surprisingly effective & moving role for Michael Wilding as the mystic pharaoh Akhenaten.

This film is not so much an historical epic as an historical costume drama as there is not all that much action apart from the lion hunting sequence at the film's beginning & the massacre of the Aton worshippers (or sun worshippers) at the end. And as for historical accuracy the studio spent 3 years in pre production on this film & made strenuous efforts to get everything as accurate as possible whilst still adapting the source material (Mika Waltari's 1945 best selling novel "The Egyptian"). Not long after this film had ceased production the costumes & props were sold to Cecile B. De Mille for his forthcoming production of the 1956 "The Ten Commandments" (probably sold to try and claw back some of the production costs). So obviously De Mille didn't think these costumes & props inaccurate. As far as the sets go, apart from the royal palace interiors (which are very convincing), most of the taverns & doctor's surgeries look like reused sets from "The Robe" and are not all that convincing. They all have that 20th Century Fox Cinemascope epic film indoor set look that attempted some accuracy but couldn't quite convince & that even "Cleopatra" with Elizabeth Taylor suffers from (they all tend to look like a mocked up room built in a movie studio). The same cannot be said for the outdoor sets which are quite magnificent and are totally convincing. Where the film (and the book it was based on) do go astray in historical accuracy is in the weaving of too many fictitious characters with actual historical figures & also imposing a conventional religious explanation onto these historical events.

The pharaoh Akhenaten, despite what the book & film speculate, was probably not an early christian prophet long before his time & archeological history shows us that he was not that weak & powerless when it came to enforcing his monotheism theory on his subjects. And the inaccurate description of Thebes as the location where these events occurred instead of Akhenaten's especially chosen capital of Amarna situated in the desert beside the Nile hundreds of miles from Thebes. But the biggest inaccuracy is the complete avoidance of the next pharaoh--probably the most famous pharaoh ever--the boy king Tutankamun or King Tut (either Akhenaten's son or his nephew--archeological science has proven that they were definitely related). Horemheb became pharaoh a few years later. These historical facts do tend to grate against acceptance of the film's storyline however there is enough in the film to over ride these inaccuracies.

Lastly, and by no means least, are the technical details of the film. 20th Century Fox used its first class talent on this film to showcase it as a worthy Cinemascope successor to the enormously successful "The Robe of a year earlier. Which meant it had to be a biblical epic or at least a biblically-themed historical costume drama with exquisite costumes and inspiring sets. Which it was. The set designers and costume designers excelled themselves on this film (apart from my concerns over certain interior sets). Both films cost an unprecedented $5 million dollars to make (approximately $55 million in today's terms) but whereas "The Robe" made $17.5 million (or $193 million in today's terms) in USA alone "The Egyptian" made only $4.25 million (or $47 million in today's terms) in USA which did not even cover production costs. Leon Shamroy (the cinematographer from "The Robe") was Fox's premier cinematographer & did an excellent job on the visuals of this film. Even better was the contribution of composer Bernard Herrman & later in the production Fox's premier film music composer Alfred Newman to the classic musical score of this film. This musical score takes a very good to excellent film (with some flaws) and transforms it into a semi classic film. Even without the music certain sequences are hauntingly beautiful such as the Aton worshipper's (or sunworshipper's) sequences and the seduction of Sinuhe by Nefer the Babylonian courtesan. But with this classic musical score used to enhance these sequences they become absolutely unforgettable. And this blue ray version finally does full justice to the sound quality (the original 4 track stereo sound in DTS 5.1) AND picture quality (original 2.55:1 aspect ratio, ultra sharpness and glowing colour) so that you can assess these qualities and make an accurate judgement for yourself of this semi classic film in a version as close to (if not better) than the original release version. The film's score is also available as a separate track so you can listen to the score only if you wish and appreciate its merits.

Definitely recommended. If you cannot afford the steep price of the blue ray version then the dvd version (while not quite as good) is not half bad either. These reviews relate solely to the blue ray and dvd versions of "The Egyptian" produced by Twilight Time via Screen Archives Entertainment.