Ben-Hur

Wonderful! Stellar Cast! Stellar direction! The acting first-rate from all of the actors and the costumes looked authentic, worn and extremely detailed. The look of the firm, magnificent! You get the feel of a big movie screen from times way past. This is what we pay for when we go to the movies: Beautiful vistas of the cities, oceans, landscapes. The directors took us to Rome and took us to historic Jerusalem with its old streets in the time of Jesus and gave us a view of a battle from a slave's point of view. This is truly an epic drama that younger people must learn to appreciate. I loved how the director interwove the events that took place in history (uprising of Germania, Spartakus), the Jewish rebel zealots, and the ministry of Jesus during the governance of Pontus Pilot. The main event was, of course, the chariot race, which symbolized good (white horses) against evil (the Roman Empire with its suppression). The director created extreme angles of the race which was very exciting to me. The events of the story did differ from the original with Charlton Heston, but the firm script was written where it maintained the integrity of the plot. A must see!

THE PLOT IS TERRIBLE COMPARE TO THE 59' ONE. THE PRESENCE OF JESUS WAS WEAK IN THIS MOVIE AND THE NARRATION AND PLAY BY MORGAN FREEMAN WAS MEDIOCRE. I THINK THE PRODUCERS WANTED TO GIVE FREEMAN A MAIN ROLE IN THIS MOVIE BY MAKING HIM AN AFRICAN CHIEF. IN THE 59' VERSION, JESUS PRESENCE WAS SUBLIME AND JUDAH HAD MORE STRENGTH OF CHARACTER AND AUTHORITY. THE END WAS WISHY WASHY SUPPOSEDLY BY HAPPY FAMILY REUNION, BUT IT WAS NOT REAL LIFE SITUATION RECONCILIATION, ONLY WISHFUL THINKING. TOO BAD THIS MODERN PRODUCERS CANNOT MAKE A BEN-HUR FILM WITH THE CALIBER AS THE 59' VERSION BY WYLER. REAL BAD PLOT AND JUNKY MOVIE, BUT IT WILL ENTERTAIN YOU FOR WHAT IS WORTH.

Will give this one about 3.5-4 out of 5 stars. Guess I was expecting something on the order of the 1959 version which I admittedly saw as a gradeschool kid in whatever cinema venue and in high-fidelity stereographic audio accompanied by technicolor no less. Which at the time was kinda' the penultimate in terms of entertainment experience. And the main negative I took away from the 1959 version was having to squirm around for the hours spent in a slightly uncomfortable theatre seat. That and nearly tossing my socks up during the uncommonly realistic leprosy scenes in the '59 version. But while the CGI enhanced chariot scenes(in the 2016 version) more-or-less eclipsed similar scenes in the '59 version I'd still have to rate the quality of performances(i.e. pathos)of a better quality than in the 2016 effort. My recommendation: see both versions and decide for yourself. But I still lean slightly more towards the '59 rendering even while I have to admit having been favorably impressed by other efforts by Bekmambetov.