Posts: 4837
From: Plymouth U.K
Registered: Dec 2003
posted August 21, 2016 03:30 AM
These sort of remakes also show a total lack of imagination to make new films, Can't think of anything, lets re-make another film. Classic films should never be re-made, & one on this scale was doomed from the start. Who in the hollywood world of accounts decided to even allow this sort of money to be spent on such a doomed project. What they should do instead of re-makes is just put some of the biggest films in history on a short re-release. They did it with Gone with the wind many times and it always did very well.
Posts: 955
From: Johnshaven Village , Montrose, Scotland
Registered: Jan 2015
posted August 21, 2016 04:48 AM
I have nothing against remakes as they are only trying to reimagine the narrative for a " modern audience ". Some remakes I like a lot such as Peter Jackson's KING KONG or even ALFIE. Granted some do fail and can never match up to the original versions.
However I never understood why they thought another re-make of BEN-HUR could succeed in today's 21st century secular Western World. As for me I prefer the original 1925 silent version of BEN-HUR to the later 1959 version. Of course I would say that given my own personal bias towards films from the silent era.
-------------------- " My equipment's more important than your rats. "
Posts: 826
From: United Kingdom
Registered: Jun 2003
posted August 21, 2016 05:55 AM
Looked at the trailer and reviews. It doesn't bother look that bad.
Pluses in ts favour at least it is just over two hours not a bum numbing 4 hours so it will pass quickly if bad.
Apparently its story is closer to the book so it does have a different slant to 1959 movie.
I would rather go to see ANY movie that doesn't involve a super hero or has any connection to Marvel or DC comics.
The negatives against it seems to be that the ones behind it haven't a brain cell in their head and have modelled it on their Bible TV series so don't expect the script to be up to much.
There are no actors worth talking about. Morgan Freeman is there for retirement fund. Might you big Chuck He with the booming voice wasn't exactly Olivier no matter how he tried.
I've heard CGI effects are a bit dodgy plus it seems to suffer the infamous multi edit approach plus a fast moving camera. Ideal for covering up CGI defects but instead of seeing a naval battle or chariot race you end up feeling you want to be sick while watching a movie on a fast moving roller coaster.
Who knows it I have the time I might give it a whirl or if pushed buy the DVD quickly give it a premiere in the home cinema and then sell on eBay if it stinks. Like going to the cinema for free. I actually enjoyed the remake of Clash of the Titans mind you the second one stank.
Posts: 955
From: Johnshaven Village , Montrose, Scotland
Registered: Jan 2015
posted August 21, 2016 08:51 AM
I too am keeping an open mind on this one. I never take any notice of what those " great movie critic gurus" think or say. I don't care about how well it does at the Box Office either. I make my on mind up by watching for myself.
-------------------- " My equipment's more important than your rats. "
Posts: 4554
From: New York, NY, USA
Registered: Jun 2003
posted August 21, 2016 08:53 AM
Since there's really no need to have 2 competing Ben Hur 2016 threads, let's stick with the one that was started first.
Doug
-------------------- I think there's room for just one more film.....