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 1959 movie was 3 1/2 hours and the new one is only 2 hours and 5 minutes. So they must have left a lot of scenes out.
Both the 1925 and the 1959 movies had excellent chariot races! No CGIs!
The 1925 version was great, the 1959 version was great the first time, but when seen again and again it was way-y-y too long! Kind of like watching THE ALAMO (1959) for the tenth time and wanting to just see the last hour, so I watch THE LAST COMMAND instead.
I got both on DVD so I can fast forward through them to the naval battle and the chariot scene.
Kind of like watching WAR AND PEACE, the Russian Version, in which soldiers in the background are armed with bolt action rifles.
The original was 2:23 so maybe 1959 was with added scenes.
By the way My friend and his parents took me to the Egyptian in Hollywood to see Ben Hur 1959. It was unbelievable. I was 12.
I’m still waiting for the other LEW WALLACE book THE FAIR GOD to be made! It was promised in 1963 from Warner Bros (SOON TO BE A MAJOR MOTION PICTURE!)
Still waiting!
It is the story of Cortez’s conquest of Mexico.
I am so tired of re-makes.
(Remake of post#7)
LOL. My third grade teacher did exactly that. Miss Moulton adopted a stray kitten and named it Benjamin. When Benjamin presented her with a litter, she renamed her Ben-Her.
Don't laugh! In 1960 or so the GARY MOORE SHOW did a spoof on Ben Hur with Derwood Kirby as BEN HIM! When Kirby turned around in his wig and getup the audience went wild with laughter! Kirby was actually embarrassed on the screen.
That my friend is a good analysis.
I saw it today, with my two daughters, and the review is pretty much spot on. I didn’t like the dark lighting through much of the film, but maybe it was the 3d glasses.
I came away thinking what a great actor C. Heston was, to carry a three hour epic. I think the story developed better in the 1959 version.
My wife and I saw Ben Hur last night. I thought is was splendid! More spiritual than the original. We intend to see it again which is our measure of a worthwhile film. Not many of those lately! I didn’t care for either of the leads, that notwithstanding, the message of forgiveness and redemption is powerful! I loved the original, however, I found this better in many ways. Great reminder about the power of good women to influence and touch the lives of others if we’ll just get out of the way. Jesus is well cast, very touching and realistic performance. “King of Kings,” indeed!
It was eight times as good as the Alan Brady Show...
Yes, one big difference was Ben-Hur’s rescue from the shipwreck. In ‘59 he saved the general and prevented him from committing suicide. The general thought they had lost the sea battle, but found out they (the Romans) had won. So he adopted Ben-hur and there was a great deal of development leading to the chariot race.
In ‘16 version, BH, by himself, washes ashore right where the arabs are training for the races. So the sequence from slave ship rower to chariot racer was greatly reduced.
I am definitely going to carve out some time this weekend to watch the original - I only recall seeing bits and pieces of it. I really need to buy the novel as well to see what artistic licenses were taken with the different films.
I remember the 59 movie as I was 11 at the time. I thought the music score was fantastic. There was an actual overture before the film began. Heston was utterly outstanding. The movie was so long it had an intermission. I remember looking at the back of the theatre and seeing a whole row of nuns in full habit.
More proof that Hollywood cannot make a good movie today.
Ben Hur was a perfectly good movie that needed no remake. Hollywood is so inept they can’t think of a good story without having to go back and make unnecessary remakes like this.
There is such a deep body of literature in the world, and all of it now known at finger’s reach on the internet, there is just no excuse for remaking a classic movie that cannot possibly be improved upon?
What’s next? Remake Casablanca for millenials? Who are you going to cast to top the original? How can you possibly top it?
Hollywood sucks. It jumped the shark decades ago. Every ones in a while a gem sneaks out but mostly it is pure crap today. Pure. Crap.
I agree with you 100 percent. Or the remake of Quo Vadis with Robert Taylor, Deborah Kerr, and Peter Ustinov as Nero
There was an animated version in 2003. The mini-series aired on ABC in 2010, and I don’t think the musical in 2009 ever managed to leave England. Classics get revisited, it’s part of being a classic.
ping
The Romans loved their baths, and had laundries and dry cleaners.
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.