MovieChat Forums > Ben-Hur (2016) Discussion > Better than friggin' "Gladiator"

Better than friggin' "Gladiator"


This version of "Ben Hur" is definitely more compelling and moving than the overrated "Gladiator" (2000), not to mention the arena scenes are palpably more convincing, as far as the outdoor auditorium and spectators go. The stunning galley sequence is superior to anything in "Gladiator," as is the thrilling chariot race.

"Gladiator" is great, as far as technical production goes, but it's hampered by a sluggish, un-engaging story, which just so happens to be the most important part of a movie.


My 175 (or so) Favorite Movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/

reply

CGI backdrops have certainly (and not surprisingly) improved a lot in the past decade and a half. They now just need to work on the physics a bit. Some of the flipped bodies in the chariot race were a little fake.

But, even including the dreary opening 40 minutes, I'd still rather watch this than Gladiator.

reply

I should add that I like "Gladiator" (like, don't love); I just never got the ridiculous hype that surrounded it ("Best Picture" of the year? Please), and the coliseum scenes looked artificial. Of course, the latter can be excused on the grounds that it was made in 1999, but that doesn't change that the story isn't all that engaging or compelling, although it's okay and the movie's worth catching. "Ben Hur" looks better, has a more engaging story and is just more kinetic.

My 175 (or so) Favorite Movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/

reply

You're probably right there

reply

I'm tired of trolls on IMDb . This film is no gladiator . Go troll on another website

reply

This film is no gladiator.

I know it's no Gladiator -- it's better, way better.

Don't get me wrong, I like Gladiator, but it's was always overrated. Best Picture -- seriously? The new Ben-Hur has a superior story, superior drama and superior action. It's just a significantly more compelling sword & sandal flick.


My 175 (or so) Favorite Movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/

reply

 You can't be serious. Gladiator is one of the best movies ever made. This movie is trash.

GO SIXERS!!!
Phillies
Fly Eagles Fly

reply

Thanks for your insightful exposition supporting your clichéd position. (That's sarcasm, in case you missed it).

How exactly is this version of Ben-Hur "trash"? And how is Gladiator "one of the best movies ever made"? Don't get me wrong, I like Gladiator, but it's not very compelling, particularly compared to Ben-Hur (whether this version or the '59 one).


My 175 (or so) Favorite Movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/

reply

Well. The score shows a lot of how people think of it in general. And you might be among the really few who thinks this is better than Gladiator. Good for you, but your own convincing drags with a task probably impossible.

I haven't voted yet myself. But I will when I've let it sink in a little.

reply

Well. The score shows a lot of how people think of it in general.


The IMDb grade is irrelevant to how the individual experiences the film. My wife & I saw both "Gladiator" and "Ben-Hur" in the theater and the latter is, by far, the better film, particularly in terms of engaging story & characters.

Yes, critics go on and on (on this thread) about how technically superior "Gladiator" is -- e.g. the sets & well-kitted cast -- but I thought "Ben-Hur" looked more than competent in comparison.

In light of this, the lousy IMDb score of "Ben-Hur" is likely the result of a fault-finding feeding frenzy, a quintessential example of the herd-mentality.

And you might be among the really few who thinks this is better than Gladiator. Good for you, but your own convincing drags with a task probably impossible.


Not impossible at all, my friend: I've seen both movies on the big screen -- and "Gladiator" two more times on DVD -- and "Ben-Hur" is decidedly the better sword & sandal film, to me. And that's all that matters.


My 175 (or so) Favorite Movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/

reply

One thing got me though. I think neither the surroundings of Jerusalem, or the roofs and town-outline from the inside has been captured this real before.

[The real location has been on many directors wish-dreams]

But. I do neither agree that the CGI was better in Ben Hur. It was astounding in Gladiator --- perfect actually. And the best CGI done today are only just as good in my opinion. Ben Hur was neither better or worse.

The most impressive CGI ever done I think was an explosion on a bridge in the the late Transformers movie, a film that lacks all kinds of things worth describing except exceptionally good CGI. And Transformer's producers still doesn't scoop how to create believable mass scenes with all the intricate small things in there.

reply

You like it better same as everyone else,because it has happy ending,even drastically changed from original,they all rode into the sunset...I forgive you because you wanted to kill my mother,i forgive you for messing up my leg...I mean seriously?

You didn't get enough fairy tales as kid?They all lived happily ever after...There you go,i told you one,now you can go back to harsh reality.

reply

You like it better same as everyone else,because it has happy ending,even drastically changed from original,they all rode into the sunset...I forgive you because you wanted to kill my mother,i forgive you for messing up my leg...I mean seriously?


You must have read my title blurb without reading the following post because that's not why I like Ben-Hur 2016 better than Gladiator. I favor Ben-Hur simply because it has a more engaging story. Gladiator just isn't that compelling, although it's decent.


My 175 (or so) Favorite Movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/

reply

I really enjoyed Ben-Hur, but Gladiator is a cinematic masterpiece. :P

reply

To each his/her own. I found the story in the new Ben-Hur more engaging and inspirational. Gladiator was rather flat by comparison. Not to mention the CGI is palpably superior in Ben-Hur. I still like Gladiator though (like, not love).


My 175 (or so) Favorite Movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/

reply

Engaging and inspirational, I'll grant you.

But as a writer, the screenplay of Gladiator, the exquisite dialogue, the metaphors, the symbolism, the psychology of the villain and hero alike, the understanding of Ancient Rome, came together to create perfection in my mind. Commodus is a villain you love to hate, but also feel empathy toward -- he's so sick, twisted, and ... injured.

I'd have given Ben-Hur an even higher rating had it included more about Messala's emotions and point of view. Never once did we get to see into his state of mind, and that disappointed me. But overall, I loved it.

reply

I appreciate your explanation. Gladiator takes the more low-key route and some prefer that approach.

Yeah, Commodus is a "good" love-to-hate villain. I always wondered if the producers named him after the commode. 


My 175 (or so) Favorite Movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/

reply

Lol apparantly you are alone in that opinion. This movie doesnt even come close to Gladiator. The acting is very bland (thought the directing might be a reason as well) the writing is worse even. The chariotrace was well made but very unbelievable.
But since you are comparing the cgi of almost 2 decades ago (wich is like a century in cgi terms) I can see why you are pretty much alone in that opinion.

reply

Lol apparantly you are alone in that opinion.


What do I care? Popularity at the box office is very important for people who's opinion of an artistic work needs validated by others (rolling my eyes).

A movie that doesn't do well at the box office isn't always an indicator that it's bad; it could mean something interesting is going on that's too far out of the norm for mass consumption. "Watchmen" and (believe it or not) "The Wizard of Oz" are good examples ("Wizard" bombed when it debuted in 1939).

As for this new version of "Ben-Hur," I'm at a loss as to why it wasn't more popular, although I'm sure the no-name cast didn't help. Or maybe the Christian subplot offended people; I don't know. And I don't care.

This movie doesnt even come close to Gladiator.


Very true; it's better, as far as interesting characters and compelling drama go. The action's superior as well. But, don't get me wrong; I like "Gladiator" (I just think the story's relatively dull and the CGI is cartoony).

The acting is very bland


I wholly disagree. But, speaking of acting, the no-name (but quality) actors might explain the downfall of "Ben-Hur" at the box office. "Gladiator" had 'giants' like Russell Crowe, Joaquin Phoenix, Oliver Reed and Richard Harris. The original "Ben-Hur" of course had a big-name cast as well.

But since you are comparing the cgi of almost 2 decades ago (wich is like a century in cgi terms) I can see why you are pretty much alone in that opinion.


Whether "Ben-Hur" is 16 years newer than "Gladiator" or a hundred years newer, the CGI is obviously superior. The point is valid in comparing a new sword & sandal flick with a hailed one from recent history.


My 175 (or so) Favorite Movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/

reply

Gladiator's opening battle was fantastic if you catch it in open matte format (HDTV)

Still the Rise and fall of Roman Empire was better cinematography-wise.






http://my-impressionz.cu.cc

reply

Gladiator's opening battle was fantastic if you catch it in open matte format (HDTV)


Yes, it was a well-done sequence.


My 175 (or so) Favorite Movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/

reply

Those of you who say this movie is better than Gladiator should not rate movies anymore. No need for explanation.

reply

Those of you who say this movie is better than Gladiator should not rate movies anymore. No need for explanation.

Obviously because you have no explanation whereas I explained precisely why "Ben-Hur" is the better movie.

Put up or shut up.


My 175 (or so) Favorite Movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/

reply

Figured something like that would be said. Let me explain.

Firstly, the introduction of the characters. In the beginning of the movie (before and after battle), the main characters are perfectly introduced and it is already clear who is who or what. Then how the story builds up step by step. The finest general of the roman empire who is respected by all and afterwards betrayed/framed and sent away immediately for execution. So basically the same as Ben-hur. Maximus is already lives up to his title by escaping the execution. I dont need to mention that these maximus scenes are goosebump level scenes since the beginning in gladiator :D Ben-hur basically escapes by chance after 5 years taking advantage of the battle. After his escape, before we know it, it is already the chariot race scene. Oh, and some little training scene before that :) whereas maximus was bought as a slave, turnes into a gladiator by force starting from the lowliest arenas and fighting to the top making a name for himself as a spaniard as expected from the finest general of the roman empire and fights and kills even the emperor himself after being severely wounded. We all know the story. You can now reimagine it and compare it to what you have seen in ben-hur. As for the fighting scenes, although gladiator was made more than 15 years ago, fighting choregraphy is way better. Consider this also. Maximus was directly up against the emperor whereas ben-hur against his adopted brother who had men under his command. In ben-hur, as he soon as ben-hur took the blame on himself for that NOBODY who was the cause of ben-hurs struggle, it was basically for a gtfoh movie :) and at the end, everything is settled with a chariot race game. And this movie is better than gladiator you say? It is possible that you are a comedian...

P.S. you explained precisely why ben-hur is better? man dont make a fool of yourself. You just said its more compelling and moving but didnt explain why and also just mentioned the arena scenes with a sentence

reply

Firstly, the introduction of the characters. In the beginning of the movie (before and after battle), the main characters are perfectly introduced and it is already clear who is who or what. Then how the story builds up step by step. The finest general of the roman empire who is respected by all and afterwards betrayed/framed and sent away immediately for execution. So basically the same as Ben-hur. Maximus is already lives up to his title by escaping the execution. I dont need to mention that these maximus scenes are goosebump level scenes since the beginning in gladiator :D Ben-hur basically escapes by chance after 5 years taking advantage of the battle. After his escape, before we know it, it is already the chariot race scene. Oh, and some little training scene before that :) whereas maximus was bought as a slave, turnes into a gladiator by force starting from the lowliest arenas and fighting to the top making a name for himself as a spaniard as expected from the finest general of the roman empire and fights and kills even the emperor himself after being severely wounded. We all know the story. You can now reimagine it and compare it to what you have seen in ben-hur. As for the fighting scenes, although gladiator was made more than 15 years ago, fighting choregraphy is way better. Consider this also. Maximus was directly up against the emperor whereas ben-hur against his adopted brother who had men under his command. In ben-hur, as he soon as ben-hur took the blame on himself for that NOBODY who was the cause of ben-hurs struggle, it was basically for a gtfoh movie :) and at the end, everything is settled with a chariot race game.


I give you credit, Alucard, for backing up your opinion with actual reasons for preferring "Gladiator" to the new "Ben-Hur." Thank you.

And this movie is better than gladiator you say? It is possible that you are a comedian...


Nope, I'm totally serious. I saw both films at the theater and I've seen "Gladiator" two more times on DVD since. I can honestly tell you that, in my opinion, "Ben-Hur" is the better movie in terms of story and characters, but also action and message (and the aforementioned CGI).

I find it funny that you deem it so incredulous that someone thinks "Ben-Hur" is superior to "Gladiator." Such an attitude is just arrogant, even condescending, like "Gladiator" is this incredible masterpiece by the great auteur Ridley Scott; and "Ben-Hur" is just rubbish by comparison. Why sure!

So I did a little test: I asked my wife which film she honestly thought was a better movie, as far as all-around sword & sandal entertainment goes. Like me, she saw both films at the theater (with me), and also viewed "Gladiator" at least one other time on DVD. I should add that she's the polar opposite of me. Without hesitation she said "Ben-Hur."

So quit acting like it's so unfathomable to prefer "Ben-Hur" over the overrated "Gladiator." You're probably just a Ridley Scott aficionado who can't bear anyone saying your idol isn't all that. Don't get me wrong, I generally like Scott's filmography (like, don't love), but his screenwriters are typically weak; such was the case with "Gladiator," "Kingdom of Heaven" and "Robin Hood." Which isn't to say I don't like these movies, particularly their awesome look & gritty feel, but they're no where close to having the kinetic storytelling of "Ben-Hur" or, say, "Troy" and "Last of the Mohicans."

You just said its more compelling and moving but didnt explain why and also just mentioned the arena scenes with a sentence


The story's more engaging and the characters are more intriguing. Crowe's character in "Gladiator" is a quality protagonist, but he's a grim bore by comparison; in fact, most of the main characters are glum wet blankets, although the ones played by Oliver Reed, Djimon Hounsou and Ralf Moeller are memorable, but their roles aren't that big. The action scenes in "Ben-Hur" are also more dynamic & captivating, e.g. the stunning galley sequence and, of course, the thrilling chariot race. No action scenes in "Gladiator" compare. Furthermore, "Ben-Hur" has the more potent moral. For more details, see my reviews of both movies.

You obviously disagree and feel "Gladiator" is a vastly superior movie. That's great; more power to you. But quit acting like your opinion is law and that it's so incredulous that informed cinephiles with taste would prefer the new "Ben-Hur." It's for this very snobbery that I started this thread.


My 175 (or so) Favorite Movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/

reply

In the land of computers 16 years is like 100 years compared to most other things man. *beep* 16 years ago you couldn't get a smart cell phone, computers were far inferior to what they can do today.

One of the best looking games of the year was Zelda: Majora's Mask which compared to modern video games looks nothing like current games. All this stuff impacts your claim that "The CGI sucks so the movie is weaker." It's pretty damn unfair to compare movies that came out in different years in the visual departments. I mean what's next ripping into Citizen Kane because the movie is in black and white? Calling the 1960 Magnificent Seven poor because it doesn't have ultra violent and extremely realistic combat scenes?

reply

All this stuff impacts your claim that "The CGI sucks so the movie is weaker." It's pretty damn unfair to compare movies that came out in different years in the visual departments.


The year 2000 was still the modern era and, like I said, it's only 16 years ago. "Jurassic Park" came out in friggin' 1993 and its F/X are better than dinosaur movies made 20 years later. So, yes, it's still a valid criticism to compare the CGI of the new "Ben-Hur" with "Gladiator." If I was comparing it to the F/X of, say, the 1959 version of "Ben-Hur" then that would be ridiculous.

But forget about the freakin' CGI. The main criteria for evaluating any drama-based movie is the quality of the story and the characters and, by that barometer, "Ben-Hur" is noticeably superior to "Gladiator." It has better action too.

But if you're a Ridley Scott devotee and deem "Gladiator" an untouchable masterpiece that's great.


My 175 (or so) Favorite Movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/

reply

that's just your opinion, nothing more.

reply