- Joined
- Feb 8, 1999
- Messages
- 18,272
- Real Name
- Robert Harris
Is the latest incarnation as bad as the reviews, 41?
I don't believe so.
Some decent, but never great performances, some very nice digital work, especially in the creation of the Roman era, beautifully shot.
What's the problem, then...
41?
The film feels as though it has no soul.
It's a interesting concept to attempt to create a new version of a film, based upon Lew Wallace's 1880 novel.
It's even more interesting when that novel is no longer mentioned in the credit block.
It becomes downright dangerous, when the book is known to have been the basis of a couple of extraordinary motion pictures.
While only cinephiles may be aware of Fred Niblo's 1925 silent version (at that time the most expensive silent film in history), far too many are aware of the William Wyler's 1959 epic.
Where is the problem with the new Bekmambetov version? To my sensibilities, it's the screenplay, primarily.
The new Blu-ray from Paramount and MGM, is of extremely high quality, as it should be, as it's derived from a DI.
Superb imagery and audio.
But it's not the 1925, nor the 1959, and if one is purchasing a Blu-ray, I'd go for the '59, and hope that the '25 will shortly come down the Blu-ray pike.
Image - 5
Audio - 5 (DTS-HD MA 7.1)
4k Up-rez - 5
Pass / Fail - Pass
RAH
I don't believe so.
Some decent, but never great performances, some very nice digital work, especially in the creation of the Roman era, beautifully shot.
What's the problem, then...
41?
The film feels as though it has no soul.
It's a interesting concept to attempt to create a new version of a film, based upon Lew Wallace's 1880 novel.
It's even more interesting when that novel is no longer mentioned in the credit block.
It becomes downright dangerous, when the book is known to have been the basis of a couple of extraordinary motion pictures.
While only cinephiles may be aware of Fred Niblo's 1925 silent version (at that time the most expensive silent film in history), far too many are aware of the William Wyler's 1959 epic.
Where is the problem with the new Bekmambetov version? To my sensibilities, it's the screenplay, primarily.
The new Blu-ray from Paramount and MGM, is of extremely high quality, as it should be, as it's derived from a DI.
Superb imagery and audio.
But it's not the 1925, nor the 1959, and if one is purchasing a Blu-ray, I'd go for the '59, and hope that the '25 will shortly come down the Blu-ray pike.
Image - 5
Audio - 5 (DTS-HD MA 7.1)
4k Up-rez - 5
Pass / Fail - Pass
RAH