Book Of Eli (spoilers)

senordingdong

Went to see this yesterday and have to say was quite let down by it.

Knew nothing about it going to see it...all I had seen was an action packed trailer.

Started off well, with good, (not great but good) performances from Washington and Oldman but at about the half way mark, upon Mila Kunis' arrival, it went slowly down hill.
Wasn't too bothered by the lack of action through the first act as the movie was quite interesting, premise included.

The rivalry between Washington and Oldman for the control of the book, was also quite good...as both seemed to want it for good reasons and both had different interpretations of its power.

But as Oldmans true colours were revealed, his character descended into mediocrity.

The ending left alot to be desired and the twist, although genuinely surprising, I found to be rubbish.

Anybody else see it?

tba

The "twist" was bs

sure he got a shock from seeing the guy who hung himself in the cupboard

senordingdong

Yeah, you're right...completely forgot about that bit.

And...

how could he have read his ipod menu?

norrie rugger

senordingdong wrote: »

Yeah, you're right...completely forgot about that bit.

And...

how could he have read his ipod menu?

the voices told him

Rubbish religious propeganda

tba

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1072911719621

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1072913679670

some extra stuff

tba

norrie rugger wrote: »

the voices told him

Rubbish religious propeganda

I don't think it portrayed religion in a good light at all. To say it is propaganda is a bit off the mark.

humanji

To be honest, in terms of religion it was kind of pro-religion but against organised religion.

I didn't think it was too bad. I thought the twist was good until tba pointed out that bit. I guess that explains the kind of film it is: you watch it then don't give it another thought.

Galvasean

I have no intention of seeing this movie, but I said to my friend the other day that I bet

the book is a Bible

Was I right?

Handsome Bob

Galvasean wrote: »

I have no intention of seeing this movie, but I said to my friend the other day that I bet

the book is a Bible

Was I right?

Twas. It was okay, saved by Washington and Oldman. Anyone alse think the whole setting and atmosphere was alot like the post apocalyptic world in Fallout 3?

sprinkles

saw it yesterday. Thought it was ok, nothing special and to be honest. Acting was decent, from everyone. The action was well scripted and it didn't drag too much depite large gaps between the action scenes - although the fading shots of Denzel in the desert started to annoy me a bit - OK WE GET IT!!!!!

While I love Mila she just isn't the heroic large knife wielding type. The twist was surprising and I'm sure another viewing would reveal a lot more but to be honest I don't think I will bother. A decent way to waste a few hours.... but only if you haven't seen up in the air!

Saw it at the weekend and enjoyed it. The story was fun, some good performances and a number of small touches that put a smile on my face, such as the poster for A Boy and His Dog in the room Washington slept in.

Stylistically it all looked very nice but the repetitive use of shots especially when showing the characters traveling was poor. Also the amount of slow motion walking scenes was unbeliveable, every 5 minutes we were treated to almost porn like scenes of Washington looking cool as he traversed a deserted highway in slow motion.

Mila Kunis was completely miscast, I got the feeling they wanted Milla Jovovich but she was busy on Resident Evil 4.

On thing I did like was the leisurely way they ended the film. I was expecting Oldman to go after them and it all to end in a slow motion filled shootout. Instead it was a rather more satisfying and believable end with both men getting what was coming to them. Shame then that they tacked on that last bit with Kunis suiting up to kick ass.

DrumSteve

tba wrote: »

The "twist" was bs

sure he got a shock from seeing the guy who hung himself in the cupboard

yeah but he may have

smelt the death in the air. and he kept hitting the same button on the ipod when the battery went probably indicating that eh didnt know the battery was gone. it was probably on shuffle anyway :pac:

As for the twist,

I assume that God or whatever high power had given him the gift of sight in order to complete his quest. It is obvious throughout the film that some higher power is looking out for him, the scene where Ray Stevenson fires on him a number of times and he suffers no injuries.

norrie rugger

tba wrote: »

I don't think it portrayed religion in a good light at all. To say it is propaganda is a bit off the mark.

It protrayed religion in a great light but not man orientated religion.

He becomes this prophet, who hears voices telling him where to go, is all but invincible and survives point blank gut shots, can take on over a dozen men in a fist fight or gun fight and to top it all off is blind. All this luck/karma/superpower is given to him, so he can deliver the bible.

The game also seems to be a semi-Fallout rip,

with his meeting the origins of Brotherhood of Steel, on the west coast

tba

The fallout series is a definite influence, the writer is Gary Whitta, the former Editor of PC Gamer Magazine UK & US and he is a big fallout fan.

I have to say the film was well paced with a nice amount of action and not to obvious a plot, for those interested he has written the screen adaptation for Akira too.

norrie rugger

tba wrote: »

The fallout series is a definite influence, the writer is Gary Whitta, the former Editor of PC Gamer Magazine UK & US and he is a big fallout fan.

I have to say the film was well paced with a nice amount of action and not to obvious a plot, for those interested he has written the screen adaptation for Akira too.

I wonder if

Malcolm McDowell's

appearance had anything to do with that?

pixelburp

Well I had a look at this tonight, mostly on the back of being released against The Road (even if the similarities are purely cosmetic, I thought the parallels were still there).

It's also somewhat nice to see I wasn't the only one to sense a distinct "Fallout" vibe from the film. Equally it's cool to read it wasn't mere coincidence either; from the atmosphere, to the setting & even into the characters & factions presented, The Book of Eli could well have been an adaptation of the Fallout series. Certainly I thought the most overt character nod was

crazy old Michael Gambon living with his dotty wife in their house (utterly bizarre moment as that was).

As for the movie itself? Well to be fair it didn't do a whole lot wrong in its 2 hours running time. It was all a neat little package; we were presented a setting & a lead character. We are then introduced to his goal & his adversary, both physical & philosophical. A few side characters fleshed out his interactions & a conclusion is advanced via some action set-pieces & mild exposition. If that sounds clinical it's because not much else was examined in the film. A few moments suggested more depth but they were brief (eg, Ray Stevenson's character suggested there was some kind of inner conflict going on, but it wasn't explored).

Based on what moments were there & I could interpret - specifically the main theme of religion - I don't think this movie can be glibly labelled as some "propaganda" for organised religion, or even simply as a justification of its existence.

To be fair I think the movie was trying to say that in a devastated, ruined world - where civilisation has vanished & basic survival is all there's left - religion could offer the moral cog to keep people from tipping over into savagery, or it could be used instead to control all that's left. This if course was all clunkily presented, for example, Oldman's character reading a bio on Mussolini was bit much.

On the other hand, leaving the cinema I did find myself thinking that perhaps yes, in a post-apocalyptic scenario, some kind of organised spiritualism would offer that vital spark and formalised humanity & I couldn't see how humanity would keep going without it (in a similar vein of how in foxholes, there are no atheists).

Oh, but the ending was still bad:

The revelation that Eli was blind all along just didn't sit right, divine intervention or not. Plus the discovery of the Brotherhood of Steel enclave (in all but name) was a bit too pat. On the other hand, if the movie did set out to show some signs of God I have no problem with that. Afterall, if it's ok for Indiana Jones to have God zapping Nazis, why not other in other cinema? Or is it only ok when it's the Wrath-of variety?

senordingdong

Wish I could have put it that well.

Haha.

pixelburp

senordingdong wrote: »

Wish I could have put it that well.

Haha.

Ha, well perhaps I overdid it a little; it's more than I have usually spent commenting on a movie just seen

Galvasean

Hmmm, question re: the ending:

If God/higher power went through all this trouble to guide a blind man with a book, make him bulletproof etc. would it not have been easier to just move the book and cut out the whole Eli guy?

BopNiblets

It wasn't spectacular or anything, but it wasn't too awful, maybe if Denzel and Oldman weren't in it, Oldmans always a good badguy.

And was the book supposed to be a secret? Ha, I thought they showed it one of the trailers

Also I understood he was half blind or partially blind or something, otherwise most of the things he did would have been impossible, although maybe that's why it took him 30 years to walk across the USA, lol am I goin west yet?

Stercus Accidit

You don't have to be blind to read braille, you do have to be able to see to shoot people, dodge bats and knives and walk in the middle of a road for 10 metres let alone across a country. Eli may as well have been a wizard with a magic wand, utter dross.

If the twist really is he was blind all along, I am sorely disappointed, what rubbish, and doesn't fit in with a single thing in the film. Oldman would have had little trouble deciphering braille either, each character represents a letter, a few days would have him sort out the braille alphabet.

And anyway, in a world being rebuilt after nuclear war, what use is a book about stoning adulterers and killing homosexuals 2000 years previous?

The film had some promising start themes, the desire to burn bibles as a blame for the war, let down by eli's own faith. Oldman wanting to use the bible for power and control, as it has been used since it was written, and then the weak ending where the bible provides the hopeful happy ending.

I am let down by the film in many ways, fallout and post apocalyptic sub genre fan that I am, I wanted better.

An enjoyable film, I just cringe slightly at some of the above, others have covered the positives already.