First Take: Ben-Hur (2016)- remaking a seminal classic is never always a good idea

SYPNOSIS: 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.

Pour yourself a cup of the Earl Grey (other drinks are available), it’s rant time once again. The 1959 version of the now infamous tale is regarded by pretty much everyone I know as a solid foundation for the film industry as we know it- but for some reason Paramount and MGM thought that now was a good time to make a 2 hour version for more modern audiences.

Timur Bekmanbetov is the director tasked with making the complex story easy to follow for a 2016 audience, but he has made a film that suffers with some severe pacing issues and more of an emphasis on the spectacle rather than actual plot development. Performance wise, there’s nothing special, with Jack Huston playing a decent Judah, but unfortunately the presence of Morgan Freeman didn’t have the usual effect on a blockbuster film like this. It’s shot pretty much like a modern action film, and for a film of biblical proportions, this isn’t a smart move, but it does greatly enhance the chariot scene. Marco Beltrami’s score also adds to the flair of things, but unfortunately I left screen 3 feeling depressed that a remake of this caliber had been unleashed on a wide audience. 

THE VERDICT

The latest take on Ben-Hur leaves a lot to be desired. With some OK performances just about holding the film together, it clearly feels like the 1959 epic is the superior interpretation of this story. However, for audiences who haven’t seen the Charlton Heston version, this is a good starting point for people to engage with the story.

RATING- 2/5