Posted on 08/20/2016 2:47:55 PM PDT by Kaslin
Or the Song Of Solomon?
Saw it at a drive-in. Fell asleep. Did he win the chariot race?
yes, but the Song of Solomon’s imagery is very old-fashioned hetero-sexual
Secret Mark is homosexual so HOLLYWOOD would positively LOVE it!
Right but leave it to Hollyweird to mess it up. Swap roles around, that sort of thing.
The new guy playing Ben Hur looks like a Ben Her.
Also the movie has Morgan Freeman (who likes sex with little girls) in it.
As an aside. Why are movies like this that take place a couple of thousand years ago have actors with perfect white teeth and look all nice and clean and spiffy like they just stepped out of a shower? Nice clean clothing and all?
#9 He looks a dime I got!
On the bright side, you probably didn't inherit his penchant for lipstick either. :-)
yeah, well....
that;’s right
i think the very best, or at least the very funniest...sex role treatment to have come out of Hollywood was probably the scene when Gene Wilder the psychiatrist has a session with a new client
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B94lP-fZyLk
and then Wilder the psychiatrist tries out his client’s lifestyle by checking into the fancy hotel with Daisy....(watch at your own discretion)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-N5jjexaZ0
morally orthodox? definitely not. BUT STILL VERY FUNNY, imho. (But most of Hollywood’s sex treatments are just garbage ... and, alas, usually not even funny either)
“I won’t watch any movie which has the racist Morgan Freeman in the cast.”
Me too. Besides, the 1959 Ben Hur won more Academy Awards than any other movie in history, especially during Hollywood’s Golden Age when movies were well done, and is considered the greatest movie ever made, except, maybe, Gone With The Wind. Why would I ever want to ruin my memories of a wonderful work of art with an odious piece of modern day garbage? No thanks.
I like the Charlton Heston version because the Roman Soldiers wore Timex watches.
Yeah! But, they wore Rolexes after the box receipts.
Everything. If it works elsewhere, it fails here.
We watched the movie in 3D today and thought it was outstanding. The scenes with Jesus were powerful and very faithful to Scripture. I suppose you could nitpick this or that, but we thoroughly enjoyed the movie. I repeat,every scene with Jesus was powerful and the crucifixion scene and falling down while carrying the cross scene are very intense. Go see the movie.
Both my wife and I feel that the movie is much better than the 1959 version. Way better.
As I recall, Lew Wallace was influenced by Robert Ingersoll, a well-known agnostic who regaled Wallace with an anti-Christian discussion during a train trip. Wallace left the meeting wondering whether what he knew of Jesus and Christianity was true and decided to investigate the matter. The result, 7 years later, was Ben Hur and Wallace’s conversion to the faith.
Did not know that.
Thanks!
Besides the 1925 and the 1959 version with Charleston Heston I don’t think you can count the 1907 version as it was only 15 minutes. I’ve never heard of the musical and the miniseries
You mean the 1959 movie staring Charleston Heston, don’t you?
Thank you Founding Father. I always intended to see it. I wanted the other poster to explain what was so bad about the film. It seems all he/she did was just make provocative statements against the film without giving any examples.
I’m glad to hear your positive review.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.