Friday, August 19, 2016

Review of BEN-HUR (2016): Focus on Forgiveness

August 18, 2016




When you hear the title "Ben-Hur," you would automatically think of that  spectacular 1959 cinematic epic starring Charlton Heston in the title role. That classic film won a whopping 11 Oscar awards, including Best Picture, Best Director (William Wyler), Actor (Heston), Supporting Actor (Hugh Griffith), Cinematography - Color and most of the technical awards. Aside from this, there had already been a silent film version of this Lew Wallace's 1880 novel back in 1925. There had also been a TV mini-series version just recently in 2010. 

These facts begged the question: why do they even need to make yet another film retelling the at all even when there was already an iconic definitive film version? This new version is directed by Timur Bekmambetov (best known for "Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter"), with a script written by Keith Clarke and Oscar winner John Ridley ("12 Years a Slave"). Despite my misgivings that this would most probably be one foolhardy, misguided and needless fiasco, I guess it was curiosity out of anything else about how they would redo some iconic scenes with modern technology that compelled me to go see it on the big screen anyway.

The story was set in Jerusalem at around the time when Jesus Christ was still alive. Judah Ben-Hur is a wealthy Judean prince with his mother Naomi and sister Tirzah. His best friend Massala is a Roman orphan adopted by house of Hur, so the two boys grow up as brothers. One day, Massala felt he should prove himself and redeem his family name. He left and joined the Roman army, returning to Judea years later as an officer under the governor Pontius Pilate.  When Jewish zealots attempt to assassinate Pilate, the friendship of the two brothers was put to the extreme test.

Jack Huston had the unenviable task of stepping into the huge shoes of original actor Charlton Heston. At his prime as Ben-Hur, tall and muscular Heston looked formidable and almost superhuman. Jack Huston, a scion of the famed Huston clan of Hollywood, wisely did not try to outdo Heston in the physical aspect (which was obviously impossible). He did well by playing Ben-Hur in a distinctly more sensitive and realistic manner. He stood out from the rest of the cast in terms of screen presence, especially in the first half of the film. 

Toby Kebbell was unremarkable as Messala. He played a Messala who was dour and dull throughout the film. He lacked in physical charisma and emotional conviction, especially when compared with the Messala of the 1959 film, Stephen Boyd. He was never at any point a match for Huston's Ben-Hur.

Morgan Freeman (the only A-list actor in the cast) looked terrible with those dreadful dreadlocks he was made to wear as the African sheik Ilderim. This was the same role that Hugh Griffith won his Oscar for, and in this film the role seemed to have been expanded to suit an actor of Freeman's stature. 

British-Iranian actress Nazanin Boniadi as Judah's wife Esther as a strong and independent woman, not simply a suffering martyr. American Sofia Black D'Elia played Judah's sister Tirzah and award-winning Israeli actress Ayelet Zurer played his mother Naomi. The scenes involving Naomi and Tirzah were among the dramatic highlights of the 1959 film, but the impact of those scenes seemed lacking in this remake.

The look and feel of the film was familiar, reminiscent of "Gladiator." The first major scene sequence one would take note of are those set on the Roman warship where Judah was condemned to be a chained rowing slave in its galley. The sea battle of Romans vs. Greek attackers was also tense and brutal. However, the CG effects employed in these scenes were very obvious. 

The centerpiece scene in all the Ben Hur films is the big chariot racing scene pitting Judah vs. Messala. For this new film, this scene was also shot in the Cinecitta studios in Italy where the 1959 chariot race was also shot. This time, there was none of the pageantry that preceded the race proper seen in the original films, only a speech by Pilate. The chariots here were more compact and less grandiose than the ones seen before, although the horses were just as magnificent. The film crew now had the technical advantages of GoPro cameras to capture more of the frenetic action from all angles. The mixing of the bone and chariot crunching sound effects was excellent. The filmmakers supposedly did more physical stunts than CG, but the overly stylistic execution of the scene, while still exciting, sort of robbed it of grit and realism, making it look CG. 

The interaction of Judah and Esther with Jesus Christ were still packed a lot of dramatic weight. Rodrigo Santoro was a magnetic presence as Jesus Christ, a role also made more prominent in this new version, when compared to the 1959 version where the actor in the 1959 film was not even credited. The ending was totally different from the previous film. This new ending emphasized more the religious message of forgiveness and redemption. When I saw the names of Mark Burnett and Roma Downey (producer of "The Bible" TV series) in the credits, I then understood where this sentiment came from. 6/10


21 comments:

  1. I love watching historical movies! I haven't watched this one yet but I definitely would despite the ratings!

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's really a very difficult thing to remake a superhit movie. The bar is already set so high that more often than not, version 2 doesn't live upto.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sorry but I dislike movies that feature the time of Jesus Christ. I feel like the plot is just repeating and there's no excitement in the historical scenes.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I do also think it's kinda difficult thing to remake a superhit movie.Anyway would surely try to watch it out.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I don`t think I`ve seen the original version of this. I`m very interested to see this movie. Is this still in the theaters?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. It only opened last Wednesday so it should still be around.

      Delete
  6. I've heard about this movie on the radio and found out it was a remake. I don't usually watch old movies so I would probably enjoy watching this one. Especially out of curiosity. I like the message of the movie. It's something that people need to hear more often.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. I think those who have not seen the original film would like this new version. Then you will also want to go watch the old one too.

      Delete
  7. Nice review! Ben Hur is giving a good run at the mill to the suicide squad!

    ReplyDelete
  8. From the movie poster, I thought the film looked like 300 or Spartans. so this is about jesus! I love reading your review as a guide to whether I should watch it or not!

    ReplyDelete
  9. It seems to me that the film industry is running out of ideas, we're all about remakes and superheroes these days. It's disappointing to know that the film fell short. Thanks for the review though, I haven't seen the film yet!

    ReplyDelete
  10. It's really hard coming up with a period movie as it's a bit difficult capturing the interest. I would like to see the Jesus aspect in the movie.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Another interesting review of a movie. Though, it seems the movie does not potray the real picture of the poster. Thanks for sharing

    ReplyDelete
  12. I was supposed to watch this few days but i backed out. I feel like ill be sleeping inside the cinema. Guess my decision is right from your 6/10 rate lol

    ReplyDelete
  13. I have heard all nice things about the original from my Dad. Somehow, didn't feel like watching the remake.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Not a fan of this movie genre but my friends who are big in history and culture will definitely enjoy reading this movie review. thanks for sharing, Fred!

    ReplyDelete
  15. I'm so outdated, I saw Ben Hur at the cinema lineup and I wondered why it's being shown "again" haha. Now that you've informed me, I'm curious. I know I liked the old version, I remember laughing about he horses being introduced as "daughters" but I don't remember the rest of it. Maybe I'll consider watching this one.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Heard about this movie on radio & its poster seems to be movie like 300 !!
    thanks for sharing, Fred!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Remaking ancient movie stories isn't a bad idea as long as it features a bright idea in sending out the message in a fun, explicit way without creating any form of disgust to the public eyes. Such movies should attain a perfect grade review!

    ReplyDelete
  18. I am really interested to watch this movie despite of the rating is so so only. I wish to know more about Christianity.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Watched this movie here in Macau in 3D. Obviously the "reimagined" version could not compare with the original 1959 since its a pair of shoes difficult to fir the second time. Anyway, have the same sentiments as what you wrote here... While half of the casting was quite credible... the other fell apart starting from Messala.. and even Pontius Pilate who looked more Celtic or a British in Roman attire than a real hot blooded Roman warrior. As in all remakes, the in depth scrutiny of the characters, their secrets which lead them to the final race track would have been good materials for a mini series ala "games of thrones"... that would have been a better idea to help the views comprehend the ending!

    ReplyDelete