Ben-Hur - movie review
Ben-Hur
Plot: Judah Ben-Hur, a prince falsely accused of treason by his adopted brother, an officer in the Roman army, returns to his homeland after years at sea to seek revenge, but finds redemption.
Cast: Jack Huston, Toby Kebbell, Rodrigo Santoro
Director: Timur Bekmambetov
Rating: 12A (moderate violence, injury detail, threat)
Runtime: 2hrs 5 mins
Release Date: Wednesday 7th September 2016
Where to begin? For most, upon hearing the name of Ben-Hur you'd think of the 1959 epic classic starring Charlton Heston. Fifty seven years later, Hollywood put their hands back into the lucky dip to pluck out another classic to remake and thus we have the 2016 adaptation of Ben-Hur. As you can guess, I wasn't thrilled that it was being remade even though I've never seen the 1959 film, and with the trailers being unbelievably laughable, I went in with pretty low expectations. I left Ben-Hur thinking that it certainly wasn't as bad as I thought it would be but it's still not a good film by any means.
Taking the place of the renowned Charlton Heston in the titular role is Jack Huston. He's pretty much an unknown to most and hasn't really had that role yet to make his name become recognised. In all fairness, actors dream of this sort of role. Ben-Hur is a brilliant character where in one scene, he could be having an incredibly dramatic conversation showing off the acting chops and then that could switch to an intense action scene such as the chariot race. Unfortunately, I don't think Huston quite grasped the gravitas of this character as he plays most of the quieter story based scenes very blasé and then yells his head off during any fight. He was fine as a whole but I just think that for a character of this stature, Huston really needed to be on another level. Alongside Huston is the antagonist of Ben-Hur, Messala Severus, played by Toby Kebbell. I can't figure out what goes through Kebbell's head when choosing projects to star in. In my opinion, he's never turned in a bad performance, but he always gets himself mixed in with some really bad films. In just this past year, he's been involved with Fant4stic, Warcraft and now Ben-Hur. It's like he just wants to be in these bad movies so he can stand out as the only positive. But yeah, Kebbell as Messala is an intriguing character and most of that intrigue is due to his performance. Kebbell basically did what Huston should have done. He had me engrossed whenever he was talking and then he handled the action scenes like a pro. If there is one negative I have about Kebbell and his character, it's the ending. No spoilers, but it's such a cheesy and shoddy conclusion due to the confusing decisions by Messala.
Thrown in for good measure is Rodrigo Santoro as Jesus. Now, a rule that I think all remakes should abide by is that you should improve where the other falters. When I had heard that the inclusion of Jesus and his crucifixion was included into the story of Ben-Hur, it didn't make total sense to me. Whilst the scenes with him are mostly enjoyable, I never found that it served a real purpose until one final moment. Santoro was a fine Jesus but when you have a character of that significance, he either needs to be totally prominent or carefully sprinkled in throughout rather than dominating the odd scene or two. On a negative side, it's not all smiles and positivity when it comes to the performances. As the love interest for Ben-Hur is Esther played by Nazanin Boniadi. I don't want to say that she was absolutely terrible and had little to no range for the entire runtime, but she was absolutely terrible and had little to no range for the entire runtime. Sometimes the truth hurts. They try to go in one direction with her character by presenting her as a freedom fighter facing the oppression from the Romans but it's handled very lazily and as an audience, you care more about the conflict between Ben-Hur and Messala. To top it all of, Morgan Freeman plays a mentor to Ben-Hur after his stint in slavery, Ilderim. Addressing the elephant in the room, yes, his wig is as bad as it looks. It's so awful. It genuinely looks like someone plonked a mop on Freeman's head. Anyway, whilst looking dreadful, it's clear to see that he's just phoning his performance in to get a paycheck. I can categorically say that Morgan Freeman's career will never be defined by his role in the 2016 remake of Ben-Hur. If that day comes, then I will just give up everything.
Judging the story is a little difficult for a few reasons. Firstly, having been a remake, I'm basically picking holes in two films even though one may be superior. Secondly, I've never seen the 1959 adaptation of Ben-Hur so I can't tell what stayed the same and what is different. Taking all of that into account, the execution of this film can be judged and boy does it need to be sent to jail. Personally, I've never been a humongous fan of the swords and sandals genre. Gladiator stands out as the exception but it's just not a style that I've ever truly loved. Therefore, parts of Ben-Hur really bored me. Almost to sleep. And I hate sleeping during the day. The opening is intriguing for a set up and the finale is actually pretty cool but there's about an hour in the middle where it's so monotonous and dull that it's a chore to get through. Most films that are two hours in length often feel slightly shorter. This really does feel like two hours long and I felt every minute and second tick by. On the other hand, the movie does look very good in terms of how it's shot and the visual effects. I guess that when you hire Bekmambetov as a director (Wanted, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Killer), the story is going to be thin because of a precedence placed on how it looks. And of course, Ben-Hur is widely known for its fantastic chariot race. My worry was that whereas the 1959 chariot race was entirely practical to the point where a stuntman actually died filming it, the remake would just supplement it with unnecessary CGI losing the intensity. Thankfully, apart from some clear uses of visual effects which weren't too noticeable, the race was real. Whether it was the actors riding the chariots or their stuntman, at least there was a physical person on a real chariot being carried by real horses.
I'm hoping that this isn't an accurate representation of what the epic classic is like because whilst it's not the absolute catastrophe that I was thinking it would be, it's still bad. Some actors try whilst some just don't care. The budget was a little unnecessary considering how little it was likely to make at the box office. It failed as a remake but most of all, it failed as a film.
My Verdict: 4/10
If you like what you've seen here don't forget to share this post, comment below and check out my other reviews. Thanks for reading!
Comments
Post a Comment