Remakes come in various shapes and sizes. Gus Van Sant's "Psycho" is a shot-for-shot remake. Ridley Scott's "Exodus" is his own statement of the iconic Biblical event, entirely different from Cecil B. DeMille's masterpiece "The Ten Commandments". Most interesting is Yoji Yamada's "Tokyo Family" which is an updated version of Yasujiro Ozu's immortal "Toyko Story", one so cleverly done that it is well worthy of the original (although some Ozu loyalist may disagree).
Timur Bekmambetov, whose claim to a place in the film industry is in his expertise in respectable zombie and vampire movies, is not in the same league as master William Wyler. Still, Ben Hur (2016) is not a total write-off provided that you don't waste any money on a 3D version.
Ben Hur (1959) was structured on three building blocks comprising two set pieces and the Biblical element. Of the two set pieces, the chariot race is unquestionably the highlight while the sea battle is extra entertainment. A "zealot" might have said that "Ben Hur" IS the chariot race. I have not mentioned the "human story" as that is supposed to be the basic building block of a vast majority of motion pictures anyway.
Still, let us take a look at the human story first, through the characters. I wouldn't bother with name of most of the actors. For the old one, they are mostly well known; for the new one, they are mostly unknown. The historical background and the love-hate relationship between Judah Ben-Hur and Messala Severus are essentially unchanged. The most striking change is in the role of Quintius which, played by Jack Hawkins, was pivotal as Ben-Hur's mentor in his return with a challenge to Messala. In the remake, while Quintius is still there, his importance is much dwindled and the character is out of the picture (no pun intended) after the sea battle.
The role of Ben-Hur's mentor is doubled up by Arabian chief and racing-chariot owner Ilderim. In 1959, this role earned Hugh Griffith his Best Supporting Actor Oscar. This year, Morgan Freeman is unlikely to aspire to any Oscar claim but that does not take anything away from his solid performance of a character that, in this movie, in addition to the name Ilderim, may also aspire to a nickname "God". That may even be one of the reasons Freeman is cast, as who can claim to be more qualified to play God, after his "Evan Almighty"? While on this reference to divinity, albeit on a figurative basis, just a quick mention that in 1959, the face of Jesus was never shown, if I remember correctly. This inhibition is of course long gone and Jesus, with appearances in only a few scenes, is played by Rodrigo Santoro.
There is really not that much more to say other than echoing my earlier comment that this movie is not a total write off. The key set piece, the chariot race, is quite well made. The acting will not excite you but are passable. The cast, other than Freeman, is relatively unknown but I would not leave out mentioning Ayelet Zurer who plays Ben-Hur's mother. You may remember her running all over the place with Tom Hanks in "Angels & Demons".
Oh yes, my summary line. You may find it difficult to hold back a chuckle seeing the fairy-tale ending slapped onto this movie.
Timur Bekmambetov, whose claim to a place in the film industry is in his expertise in respectable zombie and vampire movies, is not in the same league as master William Wyler. Still, Ben Hur (2016) is not a total write-off provided that you don't waste any money on a 3D version.
Ben Hur (1959) was structured on three building blocks comprising two set pieces and the Biblical element. Of the two set pieces, the chariot race is unquestionably the highlight while the sea battle is extra entertainment. A "zealot" might have said that "Ben Hur" IS the chariot race. I have not mentioned the "human story" as that is supposed to be the basic building block of a vast majority of motion pictures anyway.
Still, let us take a look at the human story first, through the characters. I wouldn't bother with name of most of the actors. For the old one, they are mostly well known; for the new one, they are mostly unknown. The historical background and the love-hate relationship between Judah Ben-Hur and Messala Severus are essentially unchanged. The most striking change is in the role of Quintius which, played by Jack Hawkins, was pivotal as Ben-Hur's mentor in his return with a challenge to Messala. In the remake, while Quintius is still there, his importance is much dwindled and the character is out of the picture (no pun intended) after the sea battle.
The role of Ben-Hur's mentor is doubled up by Arabian chief and racing-chariot owner Ilderim. In 1959, this role earned Hugh Griffith his Best Supporting Actor Oscar. This year, Morgan Freeman is unlikely to aspire to any Oscar claim but that does not take anything away from his solid performance of a character that, in this movie, in addition to the name Ilderim, may also aspire to a nickname "God". That may even be one of the reasons Freeman is cast, as who can claim to be more qualified to play God, after his "Evan Almighty"? While on this reference to divinity, albeit on a figurative basis, just a quick mention that in 1959, the face of Jesus was never shown, if I remember correctly. This inhibition is of course long gone and Jesus, with appearances in only a few scenes, is played by Rodrigo Santoro.
There is really not that much more to say other than echoing my earlier comment that this movie is not a total write off. The key set piece, the chariot race, is quite well made. The acting will not excite you but are passable. The cast, other than Freeman, is relatively unknown but I would not leave out mentioning Ayelet Zurer who plays Ben-Hur's mother. You may remember her running all over the place with Tom Hanks in "Angels & Demons".
Oh yes, my summary line. You may find it difficult to hold back a chuckle seeing the fairy-tale ending slapped onto this movie.