Talk:Ben-Hur (2016 film)

Spelling question

"I wouldn't be surprised if some of Jack's many famous ancestors took part in an actual fight between Romans and Judaeans [sic] we depict in our film."

Why is "Judaeans" tagged with "[sic]"? It looks like a perfectly appropriate usage to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NadaRama (talk • contribs) 00:56, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

It's an American versus British spelling issue. The Latin ae is retained in Britain (encyclopaedia, paediatrician, Judaea); in America it is changed to e (encyclopedia, pediatrician, Judea). Since Wikipedia permits both spelling systems, the "sic" is unnecessary. I will remove it. — Lawrence King ^(talk) 06:26, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Ben-Hur (2016 film)

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Ben-Hur (2016 film)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "WSJ":

• From Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation: Morgenstern, Joe (July 30, 2015). "Mission: Impossible—Rogue Nation Review: High-Level Action". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved August 2, 2015.
• From Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice: Fritz, Ben (March 10, 2016). "The Great Comic-Book Movie Debate". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved March 12, 2016.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 19:37, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Removed claim of "praise" for the score from The Hollywood Reporter. Here's why.

The "Critical response" section had claimed of the review in The Hollywood Reporter,

"On the other hand, he praised the film's score (composed by Marco Beltrami) for reinforcing the original score of the 1959 version composed by Miklós Rózsa."

I removed this claim. Here is the corresponding line from The Hollywood Reporter's review, in context (emphasis added):

"Visually, it's on the grubby side, its compositions imprecise, the editing far too busy (hardly any shot in the chariot race lasts more than two or three seconds). None of the performances particularly register. As for the score, let's just say that the reputation of the late, great Miklos Rozsa, who composed the extraordinary music for the Wyler version, has just been strongly reinforced."

This is ambiguous enough that one can't be certain it's condemning the new version's score, but to claim that it is praise sounds deliberately obtuse. Hence my removal.

--Colin Douglas Howell (talk) 17:07, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Who thought making this was a good idea?

Morgan Freeman was badly cast as an African American! And he narrates as well which was incongruous.

The story has no emotion and it runs flat. The main characters have little energy and put in lack luster performances.

No Oscars here. The film will bomb.

Who thought making this was a good idea?

The 1959 film was amazing even given the lack of CGI. But the emotion and performances were there in spades. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.10.218.18 (talk) 18:04, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Quintus Arrius.

What happened to this character? It takes longer to say his name than he spent on screen.213.205.242.56 (talk) 18:57, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Morgan Freeman did not appear in the movie Ben Hur 2001:569:7D30:900:A136:716F:3544:646F (talk) 23:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)