De Mille-esque but without the histrionics and bad script

Rating: 10/10 (31 March 2001)

When a film director is well known, he usually specializes in one genre. Everyone knows that Alfred Hitchcock made thriller/suspense films, that Cecil B. De Mille made epics, and so on. Then along comes a director like William Wyler whose films include drama (These Thee, Jezebel), adaptation of a classic novel (Wuthering Heights), adaptation from the stage (The Little Foxes), comedy (How to Steal A Million), and even a musical (Funny Girl). It is said that Wyler decided to direct Ben-Hur because that would give him a chance to do a Cecil B. De Mille movie. Well, he does C.B. one better.
I have been a fan of the epic film since childhood in spite of how awful some of them can be. There's something about a film produced on a grand scale with a cast of thousands set in an exotic location that I enjoy. The problem with these films is that they are many times poorly scripted, historically inaccurate, and even though they run between 3 and 4 hours, the characters never seem to get beyond the Technicolor cut-out stage. Despite these flaws, they sometimes can be awfully fun to watch.
Ben-Hur is film that is extremely well scripted (there were a total of 3 writers working on the film, but only one got screen credit), well filmed, and well acted. Charlton Heston in the title role gives such a sincere performance it almost makes me forget what a jerk he has become in his old age. Stephen Boyd is great as the evil Messala, and Martha Scott does as good a job as Chucky's mother in this film as she did in The Ten Commandments, when Chucky was Moses.
The film's score by Miklos Rosza is perhaps the finest film music that he has ever written. It is somewhat leitmotific in technique, and goes on for much of the 212 minutes of the film -- always supplementing and accentuating the drama, but never overshadowing it.
Without giving any plot elements away to those who may have not seen this film, the story deals with friendship, betrayal, revenge, and redemption. The sets are massive, the costumes beautiful, and the characters are people that you actually care about. The film is one of those rare instances in cinematic history when a remake is as good as the original. (Ben-Hur was first filmed as a full-length film in 1925.)
This review is based on the newly released DVD edition, with which I have some negative views. The print itself that was used for the DVD mastering has some amazingly glaring color fluctuations. The color is also washed out in quite a few scenes, and in the scenes which are softly lit, there is a bluish or purplish haze over most of the screen. One would think that a better copy the film negative existed for its debut on DVD, but perhaps not.
The DVD is in widescreen letterbox format, which is the format that I prefer. However, because it was originally shot in MGM Camera 65 (an extremely wide projection) the viewable area on your television is a very narrow band. I suggest watching this on the largest TV you can find.
If you enjoy this version of Ben-Hur, take a chance and watch the 1925 version. You may be surprised how good a silent film can be.