Reviews about the film "Ben-Hur" 2016 release were divided among ordinary viewers and critics. One camp speaks of failure, and the other of the success of the painting. A full review of this film based on all comments, a personal opinion with a detailed analysis of the game and the plot - all this can be read in the article.
Plot
Reviews of the film "Ben-Hur", which is the eponymous remake of the popular, but already very outdated masterpiece, must be evaluated only with knowledge of the plot. At the beginning of the film, we are shown the life of a prominent resident of Palestine Ben-Hur, who richly lives in the province of the Roman Empire. Everything changes dramatically when he meets the former comrade Messala, who received the post of tribune. At the first meeting, a quarrel arises between them, as a result of which Ben-Hur is arrested on fabricated evidence. He lost everything, was sold into slavery, where he suffered for many years. All this time, the main character was building up a desire for revenge. And now the moment to do justice has come. Now it depends only on his skills whether he can achieve his goal.
Critical Reviews
Reviews of the film "Ben-Hur" from professional critics in the world and Russia converged at around three to one with an advantage in the red. First of all, a lost connection with the original was noted, where the whole action was presented exactly the opposite. The original source focused on the heroism of the spirit, the victory over injustice, and even the appearance of Jesus. Timur Bekmambetov tried to make the remake more unique, but with an emphasis on psychological confrontation. Two ex-brothers grew up together, but one of them responded to kindness with a vile betrayal. Such topics affect many social problems, especially in the context of the presence of the Romans in Palestine. The problem is that the bulk of them are not disclosed or are lost on the background of mass rides with special effects. Chariot chases and ship scenes captivate the viewer visually, and if anybody had any serious problems, they quickly disappeared after such an action.
A number of minuses
Critics poured negative reviews of the film Ben-Hur not only because of the scenario with a simple plot and unsolved problems. Many masters also noted the production, which simply causes a suspicious sense of implausibility. Too much screen time went into showing dressed up people in costumes of that era and holding swords in their hands. This would not be a minus if it had not looked too played out. The atmosphere of the ancient era cannot be felt; instead, it seems that a theme party has gathered in Palestine in the twenty-first century. All in chic outfits, most residents smile, but rarely mention the Romans. It seems that the picture was not made a remake of the legendary classics, but turned into a cheap series. It turned out pathetic, but without a strong transmission of spirit and atmosphere, which was in the original. Hence the negative reviews about the film "Ben-Hur" from other critics.
Comparison with the source
It is worth noting that the reviews of critics about the film “Ben-Hur” were based on a comparison with the original, which received a record eleven Oscars at the time. At that time, William Wyler applied not only wide-format production, but also many interesting symbolic tricks. The main one is the appearance of Jesus, who helps people. His image was always shown briefly, was in the background and hinted that people should not feel, see and hear it.
Timur Bekmambetov showed Jesus as a carpenter, who at the right time joins the main characters and sets the right path. Symbolism is missing here along with a message for people. It looked like a simple appearance for help, but nothing more. The last drawback is Messala's mixed motivation, which in different scenes justifies betrayal from all sides. Here, devotion to Rome, and love for Ben-Hur's sister, and other religions look messy. The character seems to justify himself, and not defend his point of view.
Positive
It is worth noting that ordinary viewers are likely to enjoy the movie "Ben-Hur." Reviews of the film critics are designed to show its cons, which are not on the surface. Many professional reviews also focused on the positive aspects of the picture. The staging scenes with a ship collision and the chariot race are spectacular - all this is really breathtaking. The confrontation at the level of heroism of the revenge-obsessed protagonist and traitor does not fit into the context when compared with the original Wyler, but as a separate story is perceived quite cheerfully.
The appearance of Morgan Freeman in an interesting way for him and a good game of other actors do not make him turn away from the screen with the expectation of the end of a bad scene. The attempt could be counted if the shadow of the great heritage did not hang over its back. A remake of a work of this level was immediately apprehended with caution, and a wave of indignation from many moments scared people away from going to the movies. The result was a complete failure at the box office.
Positive feedback from viewers
Reviews on "Imkhonet" about the film "Ben-Hur" and on other similar resources on the Web (from the audience) mark many positive points. The picture was liked by people who tried to consider the context of philosophy and did not lose it behind many dialogs and scenes with special effects. The tension in the final scenes could grab many by the throat, and on the big screen this effect only multiplies. Even those who were not enthusiastic about the picture note competent combined shooting and the use of beautiful scenery. The transfer of the historical aspect found its fans who were unable to consider all the implausibility in costumes, as critics mentioned. All this looks pretty enough, which you can not doubt. If we ignore the original and see the story with beautiful special effects, then the movie can give some pleasure.
Reasons for Negative Reviews
Reviews of the film “Ben-Hur” by spectators and critics agree that the attempt to make a remake was unsuccessful. For some, the appearance of Jesus was not at all clear, because the symbolism was lost. The actors played well, but in their memory they simply did not want to stay in their actions and conversations. The musical accompaniment did not even try to emphasize the atmosphere of the era, although it also has its own problems. Weak motivation in the actions of the characters affects some scenes. There were those viewers who complained about the glut of special effects. Natural scenes turned out worse than exciting graphic moments. In the end, people just talked about a boring story that could not hold something. The emphasis is on the psychological problem of brother’s betrayal, but without motivation and the right images, she is forgotten. Only branded Hollywood phrases remain, and this may not please.
Bottom line: what critics say
Critics substantiated their negative reviews of the film "Ben-Hur." What was the story about - remained a secret for many. Someone will see here only a set of special effects in some scenes and will remain satisfied, but the story is played out too weakly. It was not possible to create the true spirit of that era, although the images were already taken from the original tape. They just had to be rewritten for the new format so that the remake came out at least more successful. This did not happen, and critics could not restrain themselves from comparisons with previous masterpieces. In all aspects, and especially the disclosure of problems with philosophical implications, the creation of Timur Bekmambetov was weak. Some masters even managed to defeat the main charm of this movie - staging using beautiful scenery. It turned out to be too ridiculous, and a failed rental during a time when competition was minimal only indicates this.
Viewers Verdict
For viewers who have not seen the original, but want an exciting movie with a historical touch, Ben-Hur is ideal. He presents a lot of dialogues, but stubbornly does not want to make people think about the problems. The characters throw us a thought, but immediately switch. The director seemed to be afraid that they would begin to think about his work from the side of philosophy or ideology. This could not be avoided in the context of a powerful original. People liked many colorful scenes, but the film was not supposed to be an action. Then it is necessary to “throw out” a lot of points, replace them with others, and even change the name. The remake provides a rethinking of the original creation, but here it is viewed only in moments. Otherwise, many viewers will agree that Wyler’s picture remains two heads taller.