• Home
  • Movies
  • Music
  • TV
  • Video Games
  • Wrestling
  • Topics
  • Latest Comments on Cult of Whatever
Search
Cult of Whatever logo
  • Movies
    Featured
    • The Living Daylights: Timothy Dalton as James Bond

      The Living Daylights is still awesome, thirty-five years later

      By Matthew Martin
      | March 28, 2022
      Movie Blogs
    Recent
    • Lethal Weapon: Danny Glover and Mel Gibson as Roger Murtaugh and Martin Riggs

      Lethal Weapon is still awesome thirty-five years later

      By Matthew Martin
      | August 9, 2022
    • Nope: Keke Palmer and Daniel Kaluuya

      REVIEW: “NOPE” wants to be more than it is, which is just good enough

      By Matthew Martin
      | July 22, 2022
    • Brave: Kelly Macdonald voices Princess Merida

      Ten years later, BRAVE remains Pixar’s most underrated film

      By Matthew Martin
      | July 21, 2022
    • A Nightmare On Elm Street 3: Heather Langenkamp as Nancy

      A Nightmare on Elm Street 3 is still awesome, thirty-five years later

      By Matthew Martin
      | July 20, 2022
    • Where The Crawdads Sing: Daisy Edgar Jones and David Strathairn

      REVIEW: Where the Crawdads Sing deftly blends genres to good effect

      By Matthew Martin
      | July 19, 2022
    • Thor Love and Thunder: Natalie Portman and Chris Hemsworth as The Mighty Thor and Thor

      REVIEW: THOR – LOVE AND THUNDER is an adventure of mirth and sadness alike

      By Matthew Martin
      | July 9, 2022
  • Music
    Random
    • Over Rhine Snow Angels Album Cover

      YOUR official Christmas 2019 LISTENING Guide

      By Matthew Martin
      | December 17, 2019
      Music Blogs
    Recent
    • The Beatles: Get Back

      What GET BACK reveals about the Beatles

      By Matthew Martin
      | December 15, 2021
    • Simon And Garfunkel at Feyenoord Stadium in Rotterdam1982

      The Boxer is a song about being conned

      By Matthew Martin
      | July 4, 2021
    • Lady Gaga: Chromatica Album Cover

      Lady Gaga’s discography is totally out of order

      By Matthew Martin
      | June 3, 2021
    • Michael Jackson Thriller Album Cover

      Thirty years ago music fans said “Nevermind” to Michael Jackson

      By Matthew Martin
      | March 21, 2021
    • Queen II Album Cover

      On Queen’s The Miracle, and the importance of track ordering

      By Matthew Martin
      | February 16, 2021
    • Linda Paul Mccartney 1976

      50 years ago, McCartney dropped “Lennon” and went solo…

      By Matthew Martin
      | June 5, 2020
  • TV
    Featured
    • Nancy Drew S03e01: Kennedy McMann as Nancy

      Nancy Drew S03E01 Review: The Warning of the Frozen Heart - Uh-oh!

      By Salome G
      | October 10, 2021
      TV Blogs
    Recent
    • American Horror Stories S02e04 Cody Fern and Seth Gabel as Thomas and Walter

      American Horror Stories S02E04 Review: Milkmaids – Very ambitious

      By Salome G
      | August 14, 2022
    • Roswell New Mexico S04e09: Allie Myers and Jeanine Mason as Shiri Appleby and Liz Ortecho

      Roswell, New Mexico S04E09 Review: Wild Wild West- Okay…

      By Salome G
      | August 11, 2022
    • Evil S03e09: Party Time

      Evil S03E09 Review: The Demon of Money – Dark moments…

      By Salome G
      | August 8, 2022
    • American Horror Stories S02e03: Bella Thorne as Marci

      American Horror Stories S02E03 Review: Drive – Unsettling experiences

      By Salome G
      | August 8, 2022
    • The Orville S03: Penny Johnson Jerald and Mark Jackson as Dr. Claire Finn and Isaac

      The Orville season three finale review: Don’t say goodbye

      By Matthew Martin
      | August 8, 2022
    • Roswell New Mexico S04e08: Michael Vlamis as Michael Guerin

      Roswell, New Mexico S04E08 Review: Missing My Baby – The truth hurts

      By Salome G
      | August 3, 2022
  • Video Games
    Featured
    • Arkham Knight

      Batman: Arkham Knight - A fitting end to a trilogy

      By Tom Farr
      | July 18, 2015
      Video Game Reviews
    Recent
    • Nintendo Switch Logo

      Looking ahead to the Switch 2: Predictions and Wants

      By Matthew Martin
      | August 15, 2022
    • Legend Of Zelda

      Can a Legend of Zelda movie work?

      By Matthew Martin
      | April 6, 2022
    • Super Mario 64

      Which system had the better launch: A battle of four Nintendo consoles

      By Matthew Martin
      | December 1, 2021
    • Luigi's Mansion

      Happy twentieth to Nintendo’s underrated gem, the Gamecube

      By Matthew Martin
      | November 18, 2021
    • Metroid Dread

      Metroid Dread – Post Game analysis and sequel needs

      By Matthew Martin
      | October 29, 2021
    • Mario Headphones

      The SNES Turns 30: A look at some of the system’s best soundtracks

      By Matthew Martin
      | October 22, 2021
  • Wrestling
    Featured
    • Wwe Payback 2017 Poster 2

      Your SO OF COURSE preview of WWE Payback 2017

      By Matthew Martin
      | April 30, 2017
      WWE Blogs
    Recent
    • AEW Dark: Ricky Starks (22/09/20)

      The future of the AEW World Championship

      By Matthew Martin
      | August 14, 2022
    • AEW Forbidden Door 2022: Claudio Castagnoli

      ROH Death Before Dishonor 2022 kickstarted a new era with a bang

      By Matthew Martin
      | July 25, 2022
    • Vince Mcmahon Stone Cold Podcast

      Vince McMahon is out as WWE chief. First reactions here…

      By Matthew Martin
      | July 22, 2022
    • AEW Double or Nothing 2022: CM Punk vs Adam Page

      REVIEW: AEW Double or Nothing 2022 delivered an up-and-down show

      By Matthew Martin
      | May 30, 2022
    • MJF on AEW Dynamite 17th November 2021

      Getting AEW to the next level…

      By Matthew Martin
      | May 29, 2022
    • Raw 210501: Triple H and Stephanie McMahon

      May 21, 2001 – A (forgotten) date that will live in WWE infamy

      By Matthew Martin
      | May 20, 2022
  • Topics
    • site logo
    Latest
    • Looking ahead to the Switch 2: Predictions and Wants
    • American Horror Stories S02E04 Review: Milkmaids - Very ambitious
    • The future of the AEW World Championship
    • Roswell, New Mexico S04E09 Review: Wild Wild West- Okay...
    • Lethal Weapon is still awesome thirty-five years later
    • Evil S03E09 Review: The Demon of Money - Dark moments...

    Ben-Hur (2016) and the falsehood of “new = necessary”

    By Matthew Martin
    | August 31, 2016
    Movie Reviews

    Ben Hur Poster 2

    Why was this movie made?

    I try to limit my reviews to either big blockbuster movies that everyone’s talking about, or smaller films that deserve support (like last year’s Mr. Holmes, or this year’s Kubo and the Two Strings). There’s really no reason to review a bomb or a dud unless the film is the source of great controversy (like last year’s Fantastic Four, or this year’s Ghostbusters).

    Ben-Hur is a dud and its pathetic box office output is no tremendous travesty. There aren’t people writing scathing reviews online or complaining about how the movie failed to live up to the 1925/1959 predecessors. For the most part no one cares. When the trailer was released it landed with a whimper not a bang. Midnight screenings were virtually non-existent. Its opening weekend total was a paltry 10 million dollars and less than a week after release it’s already bringing in less than a million per day.

    The movie was budgeted at about 100 million dollars and it will likely end its theatrical run with a domestic total of about 30 million dollars. Let’s be generous and say it will bring in about 50 million in the foreign market. That’s 20 million less than its budget, which doesn’t account for the advertising or the fact that the studio will only see about half that gross once other expenditures are taken into account (movie theaters generally get half the money generated). Paramount is going to take a major loss, perhaps as much as 100 million.

    But no one cares; there are other, more notable failures that have captured our attention this year. Batman v Superman under-performed, so did Star Trek: Beyond. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles brought in far less than its (inferior) predecessor, as did Ice Age: Collision Course. Independence Day: Resurgence only made a third what the 1996 original film brought in, and considering inflation and market expansion, that’s terrible. Meanwhile Ben-Hur is pound-for-pound the biggest loss of them all. But no one cares.

    Why? Because no one cared in the first place.

    Ben Hur Jack Huston Morgan Freeman

    All the previously mentioned movies belonged to franchises and, other than Independence Day, belonged to franchises with recent installments. They may not all have been “fresh” but they were at least “fresh on our minds.” There was context to them. Meanwhile Ben-Hur just dropped out of the blue, making everyone say “why?” At least with Ghostbusters you can see the idea behind remaking it: “Let’s redo the 1980’s classic, but with women!” Okay, fine. It was mediocre and I don’t think it needed a remake at all, but at least I can understand why it was greenlit.

    With Ben-Hur you’re dealing with a film based on a book from the late-1800’s that was adapted to film twice in the 1920’s and again—most famously—in the 1950’s. There have also been stage plays, made-for-TV movies and mini-series’ along the way. It’s been done. And once or twice it’s been done very well. In fact the 1959 version was done so-well it still holds the record (shared now with Titanic and Return of the King) for the most Academy Award wins ever. It nabbed every major achievement at the Oscars: Best director, writer, actor, supporting actor, cinematography, editing, and on and on. It is a masterpiece with an epic scale and a timeless feel.

    Having said that, with all its acclaim and all its legacy, it’s still a book that is 200 years old that no one is reading anymore (it’s not Frakenstein or Little Women) and is most famously thought of as a nearly-flawless movie that’s 60 years old but isn’t a staple on modern television (it’s not The Wizard of Oz or The Ten Commandments). It’s just this really old thing that is very very good but has no reason to be pulled out of the filing cabinet and given the old Hollywood once-over. Ben-Hur didn’t need a remake.

    It needed a rewatch.

    Particularly, it seems, by the people involved in creating the 2016 version.

    Ben Hur Jack Huston 2

    Unlike the 1959 classic, this film is bogged down by poor direction, flat cinematography, confused editing, passionless acting, and on and on the flaws are stacked. In fact, every single thing that is so good about the Charlton Heston film is undone in the 2016 version. The two highlights of the old movie were its epic scope and, of course, the breathtaking and climactic chariot race. It was filmed in 65 millimeter wide (wiiiide) screen as it was common in the late-50’s for studios to show off various widescreen formats (to combat the rise of home televisions and their black and white square images).

    But beyond just the camera, the cinematographer (Robert L. Surtees, who shot many of the “epics” of the 1950’s, including Oklahoma!) used a variety of wide angles to show off the scope of the production. This is best seen in the film’s best scene: the famous chariot race.

    In the days before CGI, stunts like the ones done in the 1959 film had to be done practically. It gives the movie a real authenticity that allows you to focus on the drama of the two former friends and their hatred for one another. There’s a moment near the end of the race when Messala’s carriage is damaged and he finds himself being dragged on the ground, holding on to the reins for dear life. The stunt was first attempted with a dummy but when that proved too phony looking, Stephen Boyd (the actor himself, not a stunt-double) slipped on some extra padding and did it himself.

    Listen to the way another stunt is described, according to a TCM behind the scenes look at the movie…

    Boyd and Heston really did all their own driving, although for the scene where Judah’s chariot flips over a crashed one, Canutt’s son Joe was brought in. Driving toward the wreck at great speed, the younger Canutt could not hear his father screaming “Too fast! Too Fast!” The chariot easily sailed over the wreckage but bounced hard when it came down, flipping Joe over the front and between the two horses. Luckily, he had instinctively grabbed the cross-bar on the chariot to keep from falling out and under the horses’ hooves, but he was still dragged for some feet. He was rushed to emergency care but suffered only a cut on his chin requiring four stitches. Marton called it the most spectacular stunt he had ever seen.

    That’s the kind of authenticity that isn’t necessarily noticed, but is definitely felt.

    The 2016 version, however, lacks all of the scope, gravitas and authenticity of its 1959 ancestor. Though the film is billed as an “epic” it runs only two hours long. Obviously there are few movies these days—and few directors to make them—that can get away with a three-four hour film, but if you’re going to market your movie as an “epic” it needs to actually be…epic, ya know? Instead the film feels small. It covers several years but apart from a little “three years later” and “eight years earlier” blurb that pops up every now and then you might think it only spans a few months.

    Whereas the 1959 film contained massive sound stages and lots of exteriors sets (and actually showed them off), this movie might as well be a BBC production. Everything is small-scale, and when it does spread its wings, it uses CGI-constructed vistas that do not fool the human eye. There’s a narration by Morgan Freeman that opens and closes the movie, and other characters talk over montages, but they only serve to shrink the film down further. Other “epic” films used narration to fill in gaps as the story progressed (as Cecil B. DeMille’s narration did in The Ten Commandments). Narration in this movie simply talked over the action and told the audience what they were seeing on the screen.

    When watching the 1959 classic, you never ask “why was this movie made?” No one ever said “the 1925 version was good enough.” There was an obvious reason to remake the movie; it was in full color and with sound. It needed to be (re)made and given a proper presentation. While watching the 2016 film, more than once you will ask yourself “why was this movie made?” You will think, more than once “the 1959 version is still good…and better than this.”

    In fact the 1959 version was more than good enough. It told the story as well as could be told, and there were no weaknesses in the special effects that would necessitate a second crack at it (which would justify a remake the way the 1959 version was justified). Movies like The Fly (1986) demonstrate why some movies needed to be made new. Little Shop of Horrors (also from 1986) is another one that was done right thanks to a bigger budget and advancements in special effects.

    Here, however, there was nothing that the original did that was improved upon in the remake. Some parts are at least as good as the 1959 version while others are far weaker. In the climactic chariot race, actual stunts and real drama (built up over the movie’s run-time), that the original did so well, are replaced by cheap CGI special effects and a soulless, manufactured drama where you feel nothing for either hero or villain. Their motivations are rushed at best and muddled to the point of non-existent at worst, making the race itself a boring bunch of nothing, not unlike the Pod Race in Star Wars Episode I. It’s special effects and noise, lacking in drama or purpose.

    Ben Hur Jack Huston 3

    So we return to the original question: Why was this movie made?

    Hollywood executives seem terrified to sink money into a big budget original property, so they have decided it’s safer to hitch their wagon to an established property and give it a “remake” or a “reboot” or a “long-delayed sequel.” But this summer, more than any other in recent memory, has proven that ticket-buyers no longer trust that a film will be good just because the name attached to it carries some respect. This summer, with its across the board slump in ticket sales, has proven that people are willing to pay money for a good movie, whether it’s an original idea, or a film that’s part of a franchise, or even a sequel/reboot, etc, but if the movie’s not good (whether it’s original, or a sequel, or a reboot), it’s probably not going to be the smash hit the studio needs to be, and may even die a quick death at the cinema. Hollywood lately has been pumping out no good movies left and right, and people have finally reached their breaking point. Ben-Hur is the perfect example of audiences rejecting the current film-making model of Hollywood.

    Sixty years ago Hollywood went bigger and wider to combat the new reality that TV’s were entering living rooms across America. Now people have access to high quality shows, films, mini-series’ and more, all at the push of a button, all from the comfort of their living room. The industry is going to have to adapt once more, and just slapping a big “name” onto a cheap and poorly-handled production is not going to cut it.

    Movie goers don’t care that a “new” version of an old movie is coming out. We can just watch the old version anytime we want on Netflix or HBO. Movie goers don’t care about “new;” they care about “good.”

    Ben-Hur is not good.

    Ben Hur Jack Huston Chariot Race

    5/10 – Ben-Hur is not good.

    Rarely is it ever terrible but even more rarely is it ever really good. It’s just…there. And considering the long history of adaptations this property has seen, never does it justify its place among those before it.

    Share this article:

    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Pinterest Share on Reddit

    Tags

    Action MoviesBen-Hur

    COMMENTS

    Please read our Commenting Policy before you join in with the discussion.

    Note: If you have email notifications enabled, please check your email spam folders to ensure emails are not missed.

    Subscribe
    Connect withD
    I allow to create an account
    When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
    DisagreeAgree
    Notify of
    guest

    Connect withD
    I allow to create an account
    When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
    DisagreeAgree
    guest

    1 Comment
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments
    paidimartinez
    paidimartinez
    5 years ago

    Ouch!!!!!!

    0
    Reply

    You might also like

    • Repeat Reboot: The Sequel

      By Henry Higgins
      | April 27, 2015
    • The other side of the Franchise Factory

      By Matthew Martin
      | March 9, 2016
    • Ghostbusters (2016) Review : My mother’s chocolate chip cookies

      By Matthew Martin
      | July 17, 2016
    • Review: Independence Day – Resurgence (explosions is love; explosions is life)

      By Matthew Martin
      | June 26, 2016
    • Suicide Squad Review: uh oh…

      By Matthew Martin
      | August 7, 2016
    • Review: Alice through the Looking Glass (no spoilers) – Sad Hatter.

      By Matthew Martin
      | May 28, 2016
    • Captain America: Civil War discussion and review (with spoilers)

      By Matthew Martin
      | May 4, 2016
    • Movie Review: Warcraft – Are you a fan of the game? You better be…

      By Matthew Martin
      | June 11, 2016

    FIND THE TOPICS YOU WANT...

    Movie Topics

    Recommended for you

    • Lethal Weapon is still awesome thirty-five years later

      By Matthew Martin
      | August 9, 2022
    • REVIEW: “NOPE” wants to be more than it is, which is just good enough

      By Matthew Martin
      | July 22, 2022
    • Ten years later, BRAVE remains Pixar’s most underrated film

      By Matthew Martin
      | July 21, 2022
    • REVIEW: THOR – LOVE AND THUNDER is an adventure of mirth and sadness alike

      By Matthew Martin
      | July 9, 2022
    • REVIEW: ELVIS beautifully mythologizes the King of Rock and Roll

      By Matthew Martin
      | June 25, 2022
    • REVIEW: Jurassic World Dominion – Here we go again…again

      By Matthew Martin
      | June 12, 2022
    • REVIEW: Top Gun Maverick is a sequel that soars!

      By Matthew Martin
      | May 27, 2022
    • Can a Legend of Zelda movie work?

      By Matthew Martin
      | April 6, 2022
    • Read the Book Instead: The most disappointing book-to-film adaptations

      By Oliver Johnston
      | September 20, 2021
    • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Affiliate Disclosure
    • Cookie Policy and Settings
    • Terms of Use
    • Photo Credits
    • RSS
    All Cult of Whatever articles, logos, illustrations and graphics are copyright CultOfWhatever.com. All other trademarks, logos and copyrights are the property of their respective owners. © 2021 CultOfWhatever. All Rights Reserved.
    • facebook
    • twitter
    wpDiscuz