Lent Movie Reviews Week 3: Ben-Hur

  So I saw Ben-Hur this week for the first time in, well forever. I remembered it so little, it was almost like seeing it for the first time. So with that in mind here's my review.

  For those who don't know Ben-Hur was based on a book by Lew Wallace. It was released in 1959 was directed by William Wyler (The Best Years of Our Lives, Roman Holiday) and stars Charlton Heston and Stephen Boyd. It won 12 Oscars, a record not matched until Titanic in 1997 (and again with Return of the King in 2003). I started to read the book a long time ago but got tired and gave up on it, so I can't really compare the two. (Perhaps I'll pick it up again sometime)

  The film tells the story of Judah Ben-Hur, a Jewish prince and merchant living in Jerusalem, which is contrasted and intertwined with the life of Christ. It opens by telling the story of Christ's birth and visit by the Magi. Cut to 30 years later, when Roman citizen Messala, Judah's childhood friend and his sisters sweetheart, returns from Rome, now a tribune and in charge of the Roman Garrison in Jerusalem. Having developed an unfailing devotion to Rome and a craving for power in his journeys, Messala hopes to attain Judah's help in discouraging rebellion from Jewish zealots. Judah says he is willing to use his influence to discourage violent rebellion, but refuses to inform on Jews who are critical of Roman rule. This angers Messalla who declares that Ben-Hur is now his enemy. When the new Roman governor is nearly killed by a loose shingle that is accidentally knocked of Ben-Hur's roof, he is wrongly implicated. Messala, still feeling betrayed, refuses to intervene. Judah is condemned to the galleys and his mother and sister are imprisoned. Ben-Hur vows revenge on Messala. This zeal for vengeance, along with his faith in God and concern for his family, help him get through his years as a galley slave. During a battle with Macedonian pirates Ben-Hur saves the life of the Roman Consul, Quintus Arrius, and gains his favor. Years pass and Quintus adopts Judah as his son. He learns roman ways and becomes a champion charioteer. Finally, on learning of the appointment of a new Roman governor in Judea, Ben-Hur returns home. There he meets his former slave (and secret romantic interest) Esther. She, persuaded by Judah's now leprous mother and sister that they'd be happier if he remembered them as they were before, informs him they have died.  This news pushes Ben-Hur over the edge and he enters the chariot race in Jerusalem, knowing that Messala will also be in it and hoping to avenge his family's death. Messala is killed in the race when Ben-Hur breaks the wheel of his chariot. With his dying breath he tells Judah that his mother and sister still live and are now lepers. This causes Ben-Hur to plan revolt against Rome. Esther tells him of a new prophet, Jesus of Nazareth, who preaches of peace and forgiveness of enemies and attempts to dissuade him but he won't hear it. She decides to take his mother and sister to Jesus and Judah, reluctantly, helps her. At this moment however, Jesus is being crucified, Judah, on seeing him, recognizes him as the man who once saved his life by giving him water when he was being marched to the galleys and dying of thirst. He attempts to give Jesus water but is stopped by the Roman guards. When Jesus dies a great storm begins and Judah's mother and sister are healed of their leprosy. Ben-Hur, on witnessing Christ's forgiveness of his enemies, even in death, finally relinquishes his hatred and is reunited with his family.

  The great thing about this film's story is the way Judah's journey is paralleled with Christ's saving mission. For example: After winning the chariot race, Judah is crowned with a laurel wreath by Pontius Pilate, Christ, of course receives his own crown from Pilate, but it's not one of earthly glory but of scorn. And while Judah feels emptiness on receiving his crown Christ, by wearing his with humble acceptance, accomplishes a part of our salvation. I also think it's interesting that Jesus' face is never shown in the film, He's always shown in profile and it's others reaction to Him that allows us to know him. The reason for this I think is because the film is not about Christ so much as it's about the effect he had on others. Judah, though a good, God-fearing man, is part of the old covenant. Though he initially purports to believe in peace he turns to vengeance and violence (an eye for an eye) when brought to suffering. Jesus, in founding the new covenant, teaches not just the letter of the law but of inner holiness, of love not just of fellow Jews but even of enemies. He lives out this teaching in his passion. It's only when Judah witness Christ's sacrifice and accepts his message that he finds inner peace.

  The story's not the only great thing about this film. The score by Miklós Rózsa is spectacular, conveying the films epic scope while at the same time being appropriately subtle for the more dramatic scenes. The cinematography and set design are also superb. This film is a true epic and needs to be viewed on the biggest screen possible. It features two spectacular action set pieces. The sea battle, filmed using a mixture of miniatures and live size ships, is well staged and exciting, but the big attraction is of course the chariot race. Featuring nine real chariots, two of them actually driven by Heston and Boyd (for the most part) and the largest set ever built (up to that time); the race remains visceral and exciting after all these years. It was the benchmark for movie chase scenes for years afterward. The film's also filled with evocative imagery, Christ giving water to a thirsty Ben-Hur and the blood flowing from his cross into the water after the crucifixion (cleansing the world) are particularly memorable.

  Its not without it's flaws. The acting is a little over the top at times, and first half feels a bit rushed pacing wise. More prominent is the occasionally stilted dialogue, which can probably be attributed to the fact that some of the writers had experience writing mostly for the theatre. These flaws, however, are mostly overshadowed by the films many strengths.

  Ben-Hur is both a stirring drama and a massively entertaining epic. If you haven't seen it before (but who hasn't really), do yourself a favor and go rent it!

Score: 9/10

Lent Movie Reviews Week 2: Mother Teresa

  Last week I announced that I would post a movie review up every remaining week of lent. My first review was of Becket (1964) this week I'm reviewing Mother Teresa (2003).

  Mother Teresa is a TV movie released in 2003. It stars Olivia Hussey as the titular saint and was directed by Fabrizio Costa. It tells the story of Mother Teresa's life, from her early days as a nun to her death. 
  
  The real Mother Teresa was born Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu in Albania in 1910. In 1928, at the age of 18 she felt the call to religious life and joined the Sisters of Loreto in Ireland, taking on the name Teresa after her patron, St. Theresa of Lisieux. She was sent to the novitiate in Calcutta India a year later. For the next 17 years she would serve their as a teacher at St. Mary's Bengali Medium School. In 1946, on a train trip to Darjeeling Mother Teresa felt a second calling: to return to Calcutta and serve the poorest of the poor in the streets. This would eventually give rise to her order the Missionaries of Charity, as other young woman came to join in her mission. In 1950 the Vatican approved the official establishment of this congregation and in 1965 Pope Pious VI granted permission to expand it to other countries. By the time of Mother Teresa's death in 1997 it would grow to include over 4,000 members. The Missionaries of Charity continue to serve the poor all over the world to this day.
  
  The film is mainly about Mother Teresa's struggle to start the Missionaries of Charity and then later to build a leper colony she calls the City of Peace (Shanti Nagar). In order to start her congregation, Mother Teresa has to confront the Church's resistance initial to forming a new religious community as well as receive permission from the Archbishop of Calcutta to openly serve the poor in the streets. When trying to build the City of Peace she struggles to raise enough money and to meet the proper legal requirements. To complicate issues there are multiple scandals stirred up by a certain ambitious English journalist.  She faces these problems with unbounded trust in God and support from her friend Father Van Exam and later Father Serrano, a priest initially sent from Rome to determine the merit of starting Mother's congregation who decides to stay and help her. 
  
  The biggest problems I have with the film are its lack of internal struggles for the character and it's sometimes episodic narrative. Late in the film, Mother Teresa tells Van Exam that she is experiencing a spiritual dryness and feels abandoned by God. Than it skips to a few years later and she is finally relieved from this dark night of the soul. The struggle itself is never really explored. This skipping over many years happens alot in the film and accounts for the episodic feel I mentioned. According to Steven Greydanus' review, there were about 70 minutes cut out of the US version of this film from its original Italian release. That might go to explain alot. In addition to these pacing/narrative issues the film also has dialogue problems. Though admirably utilizing many actual quotes from the saint, much of the dialogue in the film comes off as stilted and uninteresting. 
  
  Despite these problems the film still fairly watchable, thanks large in part to Olivia Hussey's performance and also the inspiring nature of the story. It was certainly at least good enough to make me want to check out the Italian version. 

Score: 7.5/10

Lent Movie Reviews Week 1: Becket

  Given the slightly larger response generated by my last post as compared to my first one, I've decided to post stuff a little more regularly, at least for now. So I'm going to try to review a movie every week for the remainder of lent. In the spirit of the season these movies will be mostly, if not all, related to religion. This week I'll review the film Becket, which I recently saw for the first time.

  Becket was released in 1964 and was nominated for 12 Oscars (it won only 1 for best adapted screenplay). It tells the story of St. Thomas Becket (played here by Richard Burton), an English archbishop who was martyred in 1170. For any who don't know about him it here's a brief summary:

Thomas Becket was initially a friend and ally of King Henry II (portrayed in the film by Peter O'Toole), serving as his Lord Chancellor. He was a worldly man and accustomed to luxury. At Henry's urging and despite Thomas' reluctance, Becket was ordained a priest and became the Archbishop of Canterbury, a position which made him the head of the church in England. Embracing his new post Becket began pursuing a life of asceticism and rejected his previous worldly lifestyle, resigning his post as chancellor. He also began to recover and extend the power of the church in England. This brought him into conflict with the King, particularly over the issue of whether or not secular courts had jurisdiction over the clergy. This came to a head when Henry issued the Constitutions of Clarendon, which reduced the independence of the Church in England and weakened its connection with Rome. Becket refused to sign these documents and was compelled to flee to France, where he lived in exile for two years. Pope Alexander III, who was sympathetic to Becket's cause, sent delegates to impose a solution to the dispute. Henry worked out a compromise, allowing Becket to return to England. But more trouble arose as Henry wished Becket to absolve two bishops he had previously excommunicated for assisting at the coronation of Henry's son, which had taken place in defiance of the Pope's instructions. Becket again refused to comply and the King, on hearing this, cried out in a fit of rage certain words which were translated by some present as a desire to have the Archbishop killed. These four knights confronted Becket at Canterbury and demanded that he capitulate to the King's commands. When he refused they murdered him inside his own Cathedral. This act created much outrage in England and four years later Henry was compelled to make public penance for his acts. A year prior to that, Thomas Becket was declared a saint.

 The film follows the actual events fairly closely, though with exceptions. There are two main conflicts in the film. The first is the internal conflict of Thomas Becket . Before becoming Archbishop he struggles with worldliness and, though he does show that he has a conscious, he only follows it when convenient. He is shown assisting Henry with his extra-marital romantic entanglements and at one point he even allows the King to sleep with his own mistress. (This particular aspect of Becket's early life is not, to my knowledge historically accurate) The reason his conscious tends to lose in this stage is, in his own words, because he has no love in his heart, he has no passion or conviction strong enough to counter his desire for worldly comfort and pleasure. This conflict is resolved when Becket becomes Archbishop. He is very reluctant to take this position, fearing that he will be compelled to give up his comfort and security, but the king insists and on taking the position, Becket discovers a love for God, which is more powerful than any previous passion he's known. Consequently he sells all his earthly goods, telling the Lord that it all seems too easy. In all this, Becket's inner struggle is made apparent through the dialogue, which is a bit too revealing for my tastes, and also through Burton's performance, which is excellent. He really sells Becket's initial apathy and subsequent zeal for the Church.

  Becket's change of heart opens up the second, this time external, conflict, as Becket, no longer content to bend to Henry's often corrupt desire's, is placed in opposition to him. This makes Henry, who considers Thomas his only true friend, feel betrayed, and his love for Thomas is now mixed with a deep hatred. Like Burton, O'Toole rises to the occasion, giving an unforgettable performance and expressing, alternately, Henry's love for Thomas, his hatred of him, and his almost childish rage at not getting his own way. (Both Burton and O'Toole were nominated for best actor but lost to Rex Harrison for My Fair Lady) In addition to the magnificent performances and the complex exploration of its central conflicts, the film also boasts some wonderful locations, sets, and costumes, as well as stirring direction from Peter Glenville. Becket's martyrdom is particularly well shot and edited.

  The film however is not without its flaws. As I mentioned, the dialogue is often a bit too analytical for my tastes and often lacks subtlety. This is really frustrating because, for the most part, I understand what the characters are going through without them having to say it. There are also historical inaccuracies. As I already stated Becket's lifestyle before he becomes Archbishop is portrayed as being much more questionable than in real life.  Though this does serve to heighten his inner conflict it seems somewhat unnecessary and is troubling form an historical/faith perspective. Another major departure is the film's portrayal of Becket as a Saxon, which brings him much disdain from his Norman colleagues, while the real Thomas Becket was a Norman. Jean Anouilh, who wrote the play on which the film is based, wasn't made aware of this until after he had finished the play, so I don't mind it too much. There are other changes, but none of them are major and most serve to help the films pacing. The most glaring problem I had was with the score. Though the use of sacred chant was nice and fits the film quite well, the incidental music is often overly dramatic, which serves to decrease the tension rather than increase it.

  That said, most of these flaws are easily overlooked, and overall I think Becket is an inspiring, well made and very well acted film.

Score: 9/10

Next weeks review: Mother Teresa (2003)