Ben Hur

The 1959 version of "Ben-Hur" is without a doubt one of the truly great motion picture epics, so it was with surprise, and dismay, that I saw this 2010 re-make mini series appear on my local TV channel, and against my better judgment started to watch, what could only be, this travesty. To my surprise I found within 30 minutes I was totally hooked and engrossed by a deeply touching and superior Television experience. What it lacks in sheer magnificence of the 1959 version, it more than makes up in the human story of a family torn apart by terrible misfortune and fate. Wisely the makers chose a superb young cast in the leads, with Joseph Morgan (as Ben-Hur) and Stephen Campbell Moore (as Messala) not only doing justice to these epic characters but imbuing them with true human emotions. The story is very much the same as the original, and even though it was said the makers played down the religious aspect, I personally found that by doing this they actually heightened it in some respects to truly wonderful effect, especially during the last hour of the story which left this viewer with more than a few tears in his eyes. Naturally the sexual aspect is more explicit, but if one watches the original 1925 silent version you realize that is is something which has always been there but left and only implied in the 1959 version. The famous chariot race of the 1959 version can never be duplicated and the film makers obviously did not have the budget or tried to do so, but apart from that, if you have the opportunity to see this version, do yourself a favor and do so. I think, like me, you will be pleasantly surprised.

Judah Ben-Hur (Joseph Morgan) is a rich Jewish merchant in Jerusalem. He, his sister Tirzah (Kristin Kreuk) and Roman commander Messala (Stephen Campbell Moore) were childhood friends. Ambitious Messala returns from Rome pushing Judah to inform on the Jewish revolt. He tries to stop the demonstration. He gets betrothed to Esther (Emily VanCamp). While the Governor of Judaea Pontius Pilate (Hugh Bonneville) marches in, a tile falls onto him and starts a riot. Messala is demoted. Judah is sent into slavery and encounters Jesus Christ on his way to the crucification. He is pressed into rowing a gallery where he rescues Roman admiral Quintus Arrius (Ray Winstone) after a battle. Arrius adopts him naming him after his dead son Sextus Arrius. He returns to avenge Tirzah and his mother Ruth (Alex Kingston).

This is a solid TV mini-series. There are some great actors. The younger leads are mostly TV stars. Joseph Morgan has more youth but not quite the presence of Charlton Heston. The big action is compensated by the modern CGI. The gallery scene works well. The chariot scene is less epic. I like some of the early exposition laying out the political situation. This series may not be necessarily but it is an interesting addition to the '59 classic.

first impressive thing is the ambition to create a new adaptation to a classic book. than to look the best way to be more than a great movie remake.and not the last, to have success. result - an adaptation for new generations. not original but good. interesting, giving new nuances - Stephen Campbell Moore does a real seductive Messala, more credible than in 1959 version, Ben Cross is a realistic Tiberius and Joseph Morgan is far to be another Charlton Heston. but the last fact could be a virtue because it is Ben Hur of a new time, part of a chain of blockbusters who use the Greek- Roman mythology and histories.so, a good film. for script, cast but, more important, for science to present a story in right nuances. and that fact is important.

I love/loved this version! The cast is perfect. They all did a good job. I think more nominations should have happened with this one for awards. Defiantly love this version most.

if you ignore the parallel with the adaptation from 1959. because it is different. for the accent on ordinary people situation. beautiful cinematography, decent acting. and new nuances of a story who seems be well known but who becomes more seductive from a specific angle. because it tries to be different. not only for escape from comparisons but for the desire to give a nuanced message. not religious in significant measure. but interesting. and, maybe, useful for a new public.