 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Apr 14, 2019 - 7:15 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Howard L
(Member)
|
Today's viewing exceeded expectations, if that were possible. It built on what I felt during and after the 1st cinematic viewing in '98. Huge difference in sound, for example. Both dialogue and music were accentuated beyond the stars. I knew what was coming after the prologue and the blowing of the shofar and man, those horns segueing to the opening title were worth the price of admission alone. We're talking goosebumps territory. It never gets old.
I think the juxtaposition of themes in the oasis scene had never hit my awareness until this day. This is when the character of Balthasar (Finlay Currie) is introduced. And for me this is when Rozsa wins the Oscar. I was deeply impressed. As I was with all the various solo instrumental moments of the “Love Theme” but especially that of the cello during the scene when Miriam and Tirzah reveal themselves to Esther. It simply couldn't sound any better. Oh, my.
Another thing that stood out on this the biggest screen were the subtle nuances in performance. Even among the extras simple facial gestures, asides, whatever came through to a degree never experienced previously. I came away with a far greater appreciation for Stephen Boyd's performance. Sure, he had a sneer and a snarl for the ages that pretty well defined Messala but his crisp resonant delivery was abetted by body language that underlined unrelenting ambition with resolve and arrogance.
Oh and for the record, I wasn't sure if it was Khan or Scotty's nephew of which I was reminded most during Messala's final act of nastiness. His chewed up appearance was a wee too reminiscent.
Hugh Griffith's rambunctious “Sheik” was better than ever if that too were possible. Except I detected much darker make-up for the indoor set pieces vs. outdoors in the sunlight. Eh, maybe m'eyes were playing tricks but it sure seemed that way.
I also came away with a much greater respect for Martha Scott's work. No eyes playing tricks here. Hers was an anguished performance that tore me up at times, especially in that same scene mentioned above per cello. Anguish is anguish whether soft or hard. She handled both masterfully.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quick question for those who attended the Sunday screening. Did they actually have an intermission break like in initial roadshow screenings or did they just plow through the intermission/entr'acte like TCM does on TV showings? I ask because I'm really considering going Wednesday.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Apr 16, 2019 - 12:38 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
pp312
(Member)
|
Hugh Griffith was amazing and completely believable as the wily Sheikh. I am re-impressed every time I see him in the film. It was terrific seeing Ben-Hur again on the big screen, and I was moved repeatedly (and as always) by the "heart" of the film, not even talking about the size of the thing. Great film, never gets old (even if *I* do!)
Interesting that Heston later described Griffith's acting style as "snort and sweat". Accurate, but I wonder if he realized how great a performance he was witnessing.
Actually there's not a bad performance in the film. Jack Hawkins is rarely mentioned but is very fine--absolutely spot on in the intimate scenes. Even Haya Harareet, so often criticised, is very touching, even if her accent does occasionally stand out (maybe they should have ascribed her an origin in the dialogue, like Jean Simmons in Spartacus coming from "Britannia").
And yes, a truly great film, now preserved for all time in the underground archives against even nuclear attack. My favourite for all time. When I saw it in 1960 I thought, "Wow, if films are this good now, imagine how good they'll be in ten years." Unfortunately the most popular and acclaimed film around ten years later was Easy Rider. Hmm...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Apr 17, 2019 - 9:10 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Dana Wilcox
(Member)
|
I am glad to see you mention those performances. I've seen the criticism over Miss Harareet's too and have never bought into it. When she exclaims, "You've become Messala!" it was dramatic as if all the earlier "softer-spokenness" were a set-up. That exclamation was a gut-puncher.
Good point vis-a-vis Jean Simmons and Spartacus.
Judah's reaction at that moment and upon this viewing also dispelled any doubts as to whether his subsequent "conversion" was believable. Oh my was he humbled and he, in turn, humbled himself the rest of the way. This had never been as clear to me before. And it was punctuated with the subtle unfolding expression of humility when the Son raises his head to him on the Via Dolorosa.
This is when Heston wins the Oscar, for me. Same goes for Wyler.
Yeah, that look on Heston's face, initially when as a prisoner he is given water, and then later when he is the giver of water to Jesus, still gives me goosebumps, and proves both the greatness of Heston's performance and the sheer wisdom of the decision not to show Jesus' face. The face could not possibly measure up to the power of Judah's reaction to it! And I thought Haya Harareet was terrific, just perfect and completely believable through the whole of the picture. Seeing it again reinforces all the reasons I've loved this film since forever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Once again we are on the same page but speaking of "old" I's gots mo' t'say but am tired and have to go to work in the morning. At an age when I should be retired (retiring?). Latuh! 
