Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is a significant difference in the characterizations of Masala and Judah that make this different ending plausible (necessary, in fact).
In the 1959 version, Masala totally embraces "the dark side" of being a Roman soldier and relishes his role as oppressor. Masala wants Judah as an informant purely for personal gain. Masala is clearly a bad guy and Judah is clearly a bad guy.
In the 2016 version, Masala is a reluctant oppressor honestly doing all he can to protect Jews in general and Judah's family in particular. He needs Judah to direct him to the zealots so that he can steer the vengeful Roman army to those Jews who are the actual terrorists--because otherwise the Romans will simply take revenge on innocent Jews.
When an attempt is made on the life of Pilate, the 1959 Masala knowingly frames Judah's family. In the 2016 version, it is a Zealot being hidden by Judah who commits the crime, and Masala pleads with Judah to direct him to the Zealot rather than allowing his own family to take the blame.
So in the 2016 version, "There ain't no good guys, there ain't no bad guys, there's only you and me and we just disagree."
There is a significant difference in the characterizations of Masala and Judah that make this different ending plausible (necessary, in fact).
In the 1959 version, Masala totally embraces "the dark side" of being a Roman soldier and relishes his role as oppressor. Masala wants Judah as an informant purely for personal gain. Masala is clearly a bad guy and Judah is clearly a bad guy.
In the 2016 version, Masala is a reluctant oppressor honestly doing all he can to protect Jews in general and Judah's family in particular. He needs Judah to direct him to the zealots so that he can steer the vengeful Roman army to those Jews who are the actual terrorists--because otherwise the Romans will simply take revenge on innocent Jews.
When an attempt is made on the life of Pilate, the 1959 Masala knowingly frames Judah's family. In the 2016 version, it is a Zealot being hidden by Judah who commits the crime, and Masala pleads with Judah to direct him to the Zealot rather than allowing his own family to take the blame.
So in the 2016 version, "There ain't no good guys, there ain't no bad guys, there's only you and me and we just disagree."
In the 1959 version, no attempt was made on the life of the Roman governor. And it wasn't Pilate. He hadn't yet been assigned to govern Judea. That came later in the story. Some of the tiles on the roof of the house were loose and fell when Esther leaned on them as the new governor passed underneath. It was an accident.
You did give a good review by the way of the newer version, but I'll stick with the 1959 movie.
Last edited by Michael Way; 08-21-2016 at 04:18 PM..
Female here. I was not into seeing this, however, my husband, I know, really wants to see it.
He did see the one from 1959 - was that on TV? He would have been mighty young for the real movie!
We'll plan to go next weekend, thanks!
The 1959 version of Ben Hur is on TV every year, usually around Easter. But sometimes TCM shows it at other times.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
RK - Thanks for the review!
