Can Hollywood improve on the 1959 version of Ben-Hur?

The classic tale of revenge and redemption has been adapted for contemporary viewers

Juan Orellana | Oct 26 2016 | comment

Ben-Hur         Directed by Timur Bekmambetov
Starring Jack Houston, Toby Kebbell, Morgan Freeman
125 minutes

Most film purists would be rattled by the notion of attempting a remake of the 1959 classic Ben-Hur. However, the new film by Russian film director Timur Bekmambetov, who resides in the US, is not so much a remake as an adaptation of the novel by Lew Wallace.

Why would anyone try to improve on a masterpiece? It would certainly be presumptuous for this film to attempt to outperform its predecessor. But the fact that there is a generation of young people who have neither seen nor intend to see a film about Romans made nearly 60 years ago cannot be ignored. We are dealing with a new audience that, thanks to this film, will discover the intense and exciting story of Judah Ben-Hur.

There is nothing new in the story line although, as far as staging is concerned, the digital revolution provides some resources that were not available in 1959. Epic scenes such as the naval battles or the famous chariot race in the Roman circus are even more spectacular. There are slight variations from the classic version, but they do not stray from the original plot. Even the subplot about the Nazarene, which could have been succumbed to the prevailing secularism, sticks to the original Gospel message.

There is a considerable distance from the old version in regards to casting. Whereas the old version relied on the work of film stars like Charlton Heston, this new version opts for a second-rank cast, with names like Jack Huston or Toby Kebbell. The only star, Morgan Freeman, is one of the supporting actors.

The staging is conventional, typical of the adventure genre, but manages to entertain without lowering the dramatic tone required. A good film for the young ones.

Juan Orellana is a film reviewer for Aceprensa. Translated by Isabel Cullen.

New Media Foundation | Suite 12A, Level 2, 5 George St | North Strathfield NSW 2137 | AUSTRALIA | +61 2 8005 8605

Many years ago I attempted to read Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, a story set in what was known in the late 19^th century as the Congo Free State – "free" hardly being the word for what was a personal fiefdom of King Leopold of Belgium. I had to abandon the book at the point where Marlow, the narrator, describes a scene where Africans who had been forced into labour on a railway line lay spent, diseased and dying under the trees. “The horror” (Kurtz’s famous last words) got to me.

Ever since the colonial period, and despite gaining independence as the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the resource-rich country has been a byword for international manipulation, exploitation, internal corruption and bloody civil wars. And now violence threatens the long-suffering citizens of the country again, as Mathew Otieno writes in today’s lead article. His outline of the history of the Congo tends to confirm that self-interested Western interventions can take a lot of the blame for its continuing troubles.

The Patriarch of the Syriac Catholic Church of Antioch, Ignatius Joseph III Younan, has a similar complaint about his country.

Are we learning anything from the toll of suffering that mounts in the war-torn regions of the world?