What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Ben Hur...not that one (1 Viewer)

Ministry of Pain

Ministry of Pain

Footballguy
I understand they make Hollywood movies again when an entire generation or two have not seen a film...but with Ben-Hur you are asking people to recreate what many feel is one fo the greatest films of all time. If for some reason you have never seen this movie, you owe it yourself to find a copy and watch, it's really good and if you have even a shred of belief in Jesus or the Bible it will hit some major notes for you. 

Now it's never a good idea to rip a movie you have never seen but already this has a 32% RT score and there were no reviews until today, usually movies allow screenings a week or two ahead but this was a rush job of screening last minute so they weren't over confident in their product to being with which begs the questions...WTH did you make it to begin with?

Why do they even try if they cannot improve upon the original? Why not re-release the original with an updated something to entice movie goers to view something from the past that still is a high quality film even 60 years later. This is like Gone With the Wind for a lot of folks.

Help me understand why they would even try to release this film or what the audience might be? Young folks, teenagers, 20 somethings? Why would they think this is a good idea? No adult over 40 is going to see this I would hope even though people 40 yrs old would not be born for another 17 years after Ben-Hur was released.

This year at the movies never ends, they still have reboots for movies like Clue later this year. Pete' Dragon, Jason Bourne, Star Trek, it's just a reboot or sequel every week at the movies lately.    

Now get off my lawn!

Trailer

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with many of your points: people don't appreciate older things anymore (I'm a tcm nerd) and Hollywood depends too much on remakes/reboots/sequels. However I don't see how to criticize something like Ben-Hur that is a remake of a remake. First version was silent b/w, second was talkie color, new one is age of HD, digital effects and surround sound. It sounds like the new version is bad, but no fault in trying to update a movie 55+ years later.

 
Ilov80s said:
I agree with many of your points: people don't appreciate older things anymore (I'm a tcm nerd) and Hollywood depends too much on remakes/reboots/sequels. However I don't see how to criticize something like Ben-Hur that is a remake of a remake. First version was silent b/w, second was talkie color, new one is age of HD, digital effects and surround sound. It sounds like the new version is bad, but no fault in trying to update a movie 55+ years later.
Click to expand...
I don't count silent films much. You can say '59 is a remake but c'mon now...

Critics already not being kind to it, I'm sad to see they do a re-make and not improve upon the original. At least Star Wars last time around basically made a frame for frame of the '77 one and it seemed to be well received despite my less than enthusiastic opinion.

If you cannot make it better than don't try and make it to start with is what I'm saying. Stop wasting time and resources on crappy films, there are stories to tell. I've never seen such a dry run of terrible films as the last several years. The 10s/Teens or whatever the F decade they call these...worst ever for traditional films. 

 
Ministry of Pain said:
I don't count silent films much. You can say '59 is a remake but c'mon now...

Critics already not being kind to it, I'm sad to see they do a re-make and not improve upon the original. At least Star Wars last time around basically made a frame for frame of the '77 one and it seemed to be well received despite my less than enthusiastic opinion.

If you cannot make it better than don't try and make it to start with is what I'm saying. Stop wasting time and resources on crappy films, there are stories to tell. I've never seen such a dry run of terrible films as the last several years. The 10s/Teens or whatever the F decade they call these...worst ever for traditional films. 
Click to expand...
Why wouldn't you count a silent film? Do you count b/w films? That attitude is the same one that people use when saying a film made in 1959 is too old to bother with. 

 
Yeah I saw a commercial for this yesterday and asked myself the same thing,  "WHY did they remake this one? Who's going to watch it?" 

 
Ilov80s said:
Why wouldn't you count a silent film? Do you count b/w films? That attitude is the same one that people use when saying a film made in 1959 is too old to bother with. 
Click to expand...
1925 Trailer

Have a look and get back to me about the '59 remake  :lmao:

Gimme a break, and you're derailing the point here. 

The point is that the film in 1959 is better than whatever slop they plan on unleashing in 2016 in a few weeks, sorry this Friday actually. 

Todd McCarthy of THR might have said it best what were they thinking?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ministry of Pain said:
1925 Trailer

Have a look and get back to me about the '59 remake  :lmao:

Gimme a break, and you're derailing the point here. 

The point is that the film in 1959 is better than whatever slop they plan on unleashing in 2016 in a few weeks, sorry this Friday actually. 

Todd McCarthy of THR might have said it best what were they thinking?
Click to expand...
I've seen the entire 1925 movie. It's outstanding. One of the major films of the silent era. 

Ok. There's a bad remake coming out this week. At least someone tried making a mass audience film that wasn't another super hero movie. 

 
Ministry of Pain said:
asking people to recreate what many feel is one fo the greatest films of all time. If for some reason you have never seen this movie, you owe it yourself to find a copy and watch, it's really good
Click to expand...


- Just a point here - the original first remake of BH is meant to be seen on a BIG screen. It was not meant for square tv. I agree with real movie fans watching the original but if you can get a DVD and see it on a big wall mount that's the way to go.

Same for Lawrence of Arabia one of my all time favorites.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
- Just a point here - the original BH is meant to be sseen on a BIG screen. It was not meant for square tv. I agree with real movie fans watching the original but if you can get a DVD and see it on a big wall mount that's the way to go.

Same for Lawrence of Arabia one of my all time favorites.
Click to expand...
You mean the first remake,  right? 

 
Ilov80s said:
I've seen the entire 1925 movie. It's outstanding. One of the major films of the silent era. 

Ok. There's a bad remake coming out this week. At least someone tried making a mass audience film that wasn't another super hero movie. 
Click to expand...
In 1925 cars went 25 at top speed...outstanding? Maybe in terms of silent films but those are like trying to compare Baseball stats from the 1890s with say the 1950s, it's a totally different game. What they are putting out this Friday is not an improvement but I think we can all agree that sound and color plus strong actors made for a much better experience in 1959 than anything they could have mounted in 1925, almost a stacked deck for Charlton Heston and the gang. Fast forward another 55 years and one would hope there are advancements in film that will make a better movie but in fact as we are reading, this movie is in fact cut rate and inferior in every way it seems to the original, you can't say any of that between the '25 and '59 version, you see the point I'm making or are you just being obtuse? Now I acknowledged the silent film, please don't pretend there was any need for this horrible hatchet job entering the theaters on Friday, studio should be ashamed. 

Let's redo Wizard of Oz, the original and not some rebooted story prior to her arrival. Re-cast Dorothy and everyone, I'm sure they can improve on the original with all the new green screens.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ben-Hur won 11 Oscars in 1959, the most ever only to be tied by Titanic 1997 and LOTR/RotK 2003

How many will this Friday edition rack up?

 
Ministry of Pain said:
:lol:

Here we go, thanks 80s for confusing everyone with a film they will never see nor would think much of despite your enthusiasm. 
Click to expand...
Hate to break it to you but most people under 40 have no enthusiasm for Heston's Ben Hur either.  What's wrong with remakes? The famous version of The Wizard of Oz was a remake. Aretha's version of RESPECT was a remake. How many times do people keep remaking and reproducing Hamlet? Sometimes people attempt a remake and it fails. Sometimes remakes work. At least the filmmakers chose something worthwhile to remake.

 
Ilov80s said:
Hate to break it to you but most people under 40 have no enthusiasm for Heston's Ben Hur either.  What's wrong with remakes? The famous version of The Wizard of Oz was a remake. Aretha's version of RESPECT was a remake. How many times do people keep remaking and reproducing Hamlet? Sometimes people attempt a remake and it fails. Sometimes remakes work. At least the filmmakers chose something worthwhile to remake.
Click to expand...
OK but they didn't take it seriously. Look at the light weight actors trying to fill Heston's shoes. If you're gonna do this, you get 2 of the heavier actors in Hollywood and you get a great script and you pour a lot of money into it which they did in the original. They spent close to $15M in advertising to get folks to come out and see the film. That's a fortune in 1959, still a lot of money but they went all out and they had to so they could make folks forget all about that '25. 

And I disagree with you that folks under 40 do not like the '59 version. I've seen first hand that young folks will watch movies like Ben Hur, I've shown them in History classes just so they get a feel for what it might have looked like. The CGI stuff they throw together now looks like a video game. 

And the chariot race still holds water, they've tried to recreate it in many films and it's never as good. The opening scenes are believable and while I understand there is the Jesus element that doesn't sit well for some, it still is very powerful. Even if you are a doubting Thomas like myself, I don't like to say I'm atheist but the scenes with Jesus as the backdrop including the one where a shadowy man offers a thirsty slave a cup of water, that's a powerful scene. 

CGI destroys these movies, makes them little more than video games in the way they appear. 

 
That won't stop them from trying.  Lots of people will make money on the movie even if it is a total bust!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rove! said:
You shouldn't try to remake a a revered classic.  Take a mediocre film that had some nice elements and remake that into a classic....
Click to expand...
Then you never get DeNiro's Cape Fear, Bram Stroker's Dracula, Pacino's Scarface, the Coen's True Grit, The Fugees Killing Me Softly, Ike and Tina's Proud Mary, The Beatles Twist and Shout or Joe Cocker's With a Little Help From Friends. 

 
Ministry of Pain said:
And I disagree with you that folks under 40 do not like the '59 version. I've seen first hand that young folks will watch movies like Ben Hur, I've shown them in History classes just so they get a feel for what it might have looked like. The CGI stuff they throw together now looks like a video game. 
Click to expand...
I'm 33 and I didn't even know that Ben-Hur was a movie.

Btw, surely you see the irony (well, clearly you don't) in dismissing any movie that was a silent movie as not even being worth considering while at the same time finding it unfathomable that some people aren't interested in movies without modern effects, sets, production values, etc.

 
Ministry of Pain said:
This year at the movies never ends, they still have reboots for movies like Clue later this year. Pete' Dragon, Jason Bourne, Star Trek, it's just a reboot or sequel every week at the movies lately.    

Now get off my lawn!

Trailer
Click to expand...
My daughter enjoyed the hell out of Pete's Dragon.

BTW, do they not have possessives in France because it's called "Peter and Elliott the Dragon" there.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ministry of Pain said:
And the chariot race still holds water, they've tried to recreate it in many films and it's never as good.
Click to expand...
One of the greatest scenes of all time IMO.  Shot in 1 take, cameras rolling for 11 mins straight.  Doubt you see that done again.

Not sure I agree with you as vehemently but I do agree there are certain movies that do not and should not be remade (even is one is a remake already) as they are so good they can't possible be matched.    

 
The chariot race and galley battle are timeless action sequences but the rest of the 1959 remake is pretty melodramatic for modern audiences.  The actor who plays Pilate seems to have had a lot of fun with the role.  The matte work is very impressive.  If you look,it's not hard to see where the edges are but I doubt audiences from 50 years ago knew what to look for.

I suspect the 2016 remake will bomb but I'm totally out of touch with what sells at the box office.

 
Eephus said:
The chariot race and galley battle are timeless action sequences but the rest of the 1959 remake is pretty melodramatic for modern audiences.  The actor who plays Pilate seems to have had a lot of fun with the role.  The matte work is very impressive.  If you look,it's not hard to see where the edges are but I doubt audiences from 50 years ago knew what to look for.

I suspect the 2016 remake will bomb but I'm totally out of touch with what sells at the box office.
Click to expand...
It'll bomb because it doesn't have a superhero in it (well besides Jesus).

 
FreeBaGeL said:
I'm 33 and I didn't even know that Ben-Hur was a movie.

Btw, surely you see the irony (well, clearly you don't) in dismissing any movie that was a silent movie as not even being worth considering while at the same time finding it unfathomable that some people aren't interested in movies without modern effects, sets, production values, etc.
Click to expand...
It's hard to believe people haven't seen it or heard of it. 

Go see the '59 OG, it's awesome and defines the term epic IMHO...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't mind remakes for a new audience, but there are soooo many.  It squeezes out new production ideas.  Apparently they are a much safer bet though so I can see why they are being made.

 
Ministry of Pain said:
It's hard to believe people haven't seen it or heard of it. 

Go see the '59 OG, it's awesome and defines the term epic IMHO...
Click to expand...
When I think of epic films it's hard to beat Ben Hur and Lawrence of Arabia. Obviously Gone with the Wind is probably number one, but it's not my style of movie.

Seeing those movies in a theatre was an all-day event.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
massraider said:
Well, let's see, you haven't seen the new one, and hadn't heard of the original.  

Is it really that hard to believe?  
Click to expand...
No, but the 1959 Ben Hur is a true classic with 11 Academy Awards.  Plus, it's a flick that is suited for this audience.

I don't think I know anyone that really watches silent movies.

 
My wife and I go to WAY more movies than the average moviegoer and I haven't even heard of this. Didn't even see one trailer. What was the demographic here? 97 year olds? 

 
Capella said:
My wife and I go to WAY more movies than the average moviegoer and I haven't even heard of this. Didn't even see one trailer. What was the demographic here? 97 year olds? 
Click to expand...
I saw a trailer for it when I saw The Infiltrator (dog ####, don't bother).   About halfway through the trailer I told my wife "wait...is this a Ben Hur remake or ripoff?".  When they showed the title card I, rather loudly, said "oh for gods sake".

 
(slow exhale. Steel yourself.) 

I'm on MoP's side here. 

(good job,  you said it.  Good for you,  I know that wasn't easy) 

Who in Hollywood thought remaking this particular movie would be a financial windfall? When the 50's movie was made,  biblical epics were huge.  Today? Not so much. What possible audience did the studio see for this movie? 

Just a stupid decision to go ahead with with this movie.  Very few people are going to want to see it and,  if they do,  just watch the Charlton Heston version for a guaranteed better movie. 

 
Sconch said:
I saw a trailer for it when I saw The Infiltrator (dog ####, don't bother).   About halfway through the trailer I told my wife "wait...is this a Ben Hur remake or ripoff?".  When they showed the title card I, rather loudly, said "oh for gods sake".
Click to expand...
I was going to on demand that because of Cranston. Bummer. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

KarmaPolice
FBG Movie Club - DotM: Denis Villeneuve
2
Replies
57
Views
776
Ilov80s
Ilov80s
KarmaPolice
FBG Movie Club: DotM: Martin Scorsese
2 3
Replies
137
Views
2K
Keith R
Keith R
KarmaPolice
  • Poll
FBG Movie Club - DotM: Steven Spielberg
3 4 5
Replies
230
Views
6K
need2know
need2know

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top