Judah Ben-Hur is a pacifist prince in a Jerusalem being overtaken by Rome, until his adopted Roman brother, Messala, returns from the wars and falsely accuses Judah of treason. After 5 years as a galley slave, a shipwreck and chance meeting with a chariot racing team in town for the opening of the new ‘circus’ (arena) gives Judah a chance for revenge.
I’d suggest that the trailers for Ben-Hur have been quite clever in ramping up the action – that shipwreck, the iconic chariot race – and yet utterly fails to mention to the unwary that this is, in fact, something of a religious movie. Because there happens to be a local carpenter in the area, telling anyone who’ll listen that “love is the way”…! I wonder if this is the reason so many reviews are so dire?!
But then, the movie offers plenty of reasons to rate poorly anyway. The CGI is rather obvious, as is the tale of redemption being played out. That said, the action and tension are reasonably well handled – right up until the preachy last act, sort of glued on after that chariot race.
Ah yes, the chariot race. It starts well, but to be honest the tension just didn’t last for me as it kept going. The necessary speed of the thing goes from ‘wow’ to ‘wait, did it finish?’. It doesn’t help that the CGI is quite in your face, nor the knowledge that the 1959 version is one of the classic scenes of cinema, ever – and was pretty much just done for real. This? Meh, in comparison.
Overall, though, it wasn’t actually as dire as I’d feared. I do like Roman history – even if it is horrendously brutal (more in suggestion than gore on screen, right enough, but still a bit of a shock for a 12A). Still, the story isn’t really presented as well as it could have been given the scope, alas, making the raison d’etre of the piece really just those two big action scenes. Hmm.
Released: 7th September 2016
Viewed: 9th September 2016
Running time: 125 minutes
Rated: 12A but quite gory and violent
My rating: 5/10
LittleFrogScribbles 
Did you ever see the old 50s version with Charlton Heston? It’s still quite a spectacle.
The religious angle in that film comes mostly from occasionally crossing paths with, or passing through the background of, a Biblical event. If you ever get a chance to compare it with the new version I’d be interested to hear your opinion!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Never all the way through, just one of those ones you catch a bit of on TV regularly – I might now watch the full thing for comparison. I knew going in what to expect, but was surprised it surprised people – but then, it’s a bit blatant at points and sort of out of step with the more ‘modern’ historic tone, so to speak.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So, recorded the Charlton Heston version before xmas, and got through all 4 hours (!) over a few sittings. And wow. The pace is clearly not for modern audiences, but as you say – quite the spectacle! New version makes some odd changes, and completely fails to live up to the original in any way at all. Okay, the story is tighter, and being a bit dumbed down does make it easier to follow, but… yeah. I was generous with that rating!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I kinda miss the pace of classic old films; I guess they were made in a time when people could pay attention for a few hours and not have to pause it every fifteen minutes!
(Of course the Heston version was itself a remake of a 1920s film…)
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think we have lost something in terms of attention spans, and/or maybe just feeling that we ‘can’ sit for 3+ hours without dashing off to do something more productive.
LikeLiked by 1 person