I inherited neither his looks, physique, or talent.
Posted on 08/20/2016 2:47:55 PM PDT by Kaslin
Ben-Hur Official Trailer #1 (2016) - Morgan Freeman, Jack Huston Movie HD
There’s a reason why the most classic films rarely get revisited. Paul Feig’s Ghostbusters reboot was probably doomed from the start, given the fact that most of the original film’s fans from its 1984 release are still around, even without the ill-advised politicization that took place after the mediocre trailers hit YouTube. I saw the new Ghostbusters a few weeks ago; it was not as bad as some say or as good as its defenders claim. It was a mediocrity, and an expensive one at that.
Even more so than a film like Ghostbusters, any remake of 1959’s William Wyler classic Ben-Hur, widely considered one of the greatest films ever produced by Hollywood, was going to be a heavy lift. The 2016 edition (the sixth version of the story to be made) will not make anyone forget Charlton Heston, Stephen Boyd, or even Haya Harareet. But on its own it makes for an interesting and entertaining film, if not always a convincing one.
The new Ben-Hur tells much the same tale as its 57-year-old predecessor, with some telescoping to save time. Judah Ben-Hur (Jack Huston) and Messala Severus (Toby Kebbell) are adoptive brothers, rather than best friends as in the 1959 film, but their differing heritages drive them apart. Messala goes off to serve in the Roman legions to overcome the stigma of a disgraced grandfather, while Judah lives to keep the peace among the Judeans in Roman-occupied Jerusalem. Messala comes back to serve Pontius Pilate, and an attack on the new prefect on his arrival forces Messala to send Judah into slavery and sentence Judah’s family to death. Judah spends five years at sea as a galley slave, only to be freed in a shipwreck and make his way back to Jerusalem with traveling sportsman Idlerim (Morgan Freeman). The only form of revenge Judah has at hand is to beat the undefeated Messala in the chariot race, to strip Messala — and Rome — of its pride.
The telescoping takes its toll in some plot and character development. The 1959 version ran 212 minutes, longer than the theatrical releases of the Lord of the Rings films. The 2016 Ben-Hur only runs 124 minutes, and that makes the consistency and pace a bit tricky. Even so, the role of Jesus (Rodrigo Santoro) is much more a part of the story, making the Christ allegory much more explicit, no doubt a deliberate choice from exec-producer Roma Downey, who has produced increasingly impressive Biblical entertainment. The ending is somewhat sunnier than the classic version too, part of director Timur Bekmambetov’s decision to focus more on forgiveness than vengeance.
One could get lost in all of the differences and contrasts to the 1959 version. Taken on its own, though, the new Ben-Hur is a watchable, entertaining film, although not without its own issues apart from the remake dynamic. The action sequences are impressive, although perhaps the movie has too few of them. Huston’s journey from privileged pacifism to oppressed hatred works pretty well, peaking at just the right moment at the start of the climactic race. Morgan Freeman’s turn as the wise and worldly Idlerim works a lot better than his narration, although he does seem at times to be channeling Oliver Reed’s Proximo from Gladiator. The narration becomes intrusive especially at the end, where it felt as though the filmmakers just ran out of patience for showing a story rather than telling it.
What didn’t work as well? That starts with Toby Kebbell as Messala. During the span of eight years, Huston’s Judah grows, matures, and changes; Messala seems emotionally frozen at the same point that the film starts, despite his years rising to command in the Roman army. That’s not a dealbreaker since Ben-Hur is really about, y’know, Ben-Hur … but rather than a cruel Roman commander in the latter half of the film, Judah’s bête noire still seems more like a moody teenager. The rest of the cast gave stronger performances, especially Nazanin Boniadi as Esther.
One other distraction is unfortunately all too common: Shaky Cam. This pretentious affectation has infected many an otherwise worthy film, and Ben-Hur wasn’t immune to it either. That technique makes sense in action sequences — although we don’t actually get much of it during the chariot race at the end — but Bekmambetov seemed particularly addicted to it. The scene where Judah and Esther are reunited after his escape from slavery will give audiences motion sickness, as Esther’s face revolves around the frame as if the scene took place on the ship rather than in a Jerusalem doorway.
The 2016 version of Ben-Hur won’t come close to eclipsing the Charlton Heston version from 1959. But moviegoers today don’t have to choose one or the other, and this Ben-Hur acquits itself well enough to justify buying a movie ticket. Even with its flaws, it’s still a better film than some earning bigger box office this summer, and one that will stay with viewers for longer than it takes to get back to the parking lot.
On the Hot Air scale, Ben-Hur gets a four:
Ben-Hur is rated PG-13 for violence and “disturbing images.” I’d have no problem taking my 14-year-old granddaughter to see it, and she might have enjoyed it.
Addendum: I like trailers as much as the next guy, but they ran 15 minutes’ worth of trailers ahead of this film. I began checking my watch, wondering when the film would start. Can we please cut that down to five? Maybe you’d get one more showing in for the day that way, filmmakers and theater owners.
Update: Fixed an incomplete sentence in the third paragraph.
the original Ben Hur was a pretty good flick, imho i doubt a new one from TODAY’s mostly-screwed-up Hollywood could be better
but i will try to see the new one and see, thanks
I found it A LOT easier to follow than the original.
It was great. The slave ship scenes are amazing. The race scenes are spectacular.
I spent the whole on the edge of my seat. 2 1/2 hours went by like a flash.
It had NONE of the liberal crap in it like Noah or Exodus remakes had.
I hope word of mouth picks up ticket sales to the point where a strong message is sent to Hollywood.
Are you talking about the 1907 short or the 1925 feature. :-)
The family and I thoroughly enjoyed the movie and will probably buy it when it comes out on disc.
Saw it and thought it was terrible. I also thought their “Son of God” was terrible. The reason movies of faith were so much better years ago in Hollywood is because most the directors and producers and stars, were men of faith. Now faith doesn’t exist in Hollywood. They worship the father of lies, Satan.
I am so tired of re-makes.
Roma Downey and her husband were involved in this remake. In “Son of God” they had Jesus going inside Lasrus’ tomb to talk to him.
I inherited neither his looks, physique, or talent.
You mean the silent movie, or the one with Charleston Heston?
I like the Charlton Heston version because the Roman Soldiers wore Timex watches with black straps during the Chariot Race.
So am I
Are you sure they weren’t Timex sundials?
I have the 50th anniversary collection staring Charleston Heston. I have seen the movie in 1959 or 1960. I have also read the novel by Lew Wallace.
You COULD change your FReeper name to Tijeras X Slim.
Kinda catchy!
oops, I meant Heston’s flick, thanks
oops, I meant Heston,s stab at Ben Hur, thanks
In Spartacus many of the extras wore Converse All Stars with brown lines painted on them to look like sandals.
The first sentence of the review shows he doesn’t know much about the movie he’s talking about. Ben Hur is one of the most remade movies in history, the 1959 version is the 3rd, there’s been 2 more since then, plus the play, the musical and the TV miniseries. The classics get revisited all the time.
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.