Escape to the Movies: Book of Eli

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT
 

AntiFate:
Bob, you know what, I've realized you're just a wannabe jaded hack who needs to stop spewing his "humble" opinion and go back to fapping to his comic books... Not once in this review did you address anything other than the one single plot mechanic that this movie failed to deliver, no story, no dialogue, no acting... just you bashing god... I'm so sick of your reviews...

Quite unnecessary. If you don't like them, don't keep watching them.

PlasticLion:
You're still here?

It's over.

Go home.

Go.

Just because you say it's over doesn't mean it is. Seeing as Bob has been responding, sporadically, but responding, the argument is not over. Until there is no more to be discussed, it is never over. What you have just done is bumped your post count and contributed nothing to the conversation at all. If it is over for you, just leave it alone. Just because you have no interest in the topic anymore, doesn't mean everyone else has left it too.

Gxas:

AntiFate:
Bob, you know what, I've realized you're just a wannabe jaded hack who needs to stop spewing his "humble" opinion and go back to fapping to his comic books... Not once in this review did you address anything other than the one single plot mechanic that this movie failed to deliver, no story, no dialogue, no acting... just you bashing god... I'm so sick of your reviews...

Quite unnecessary. If you don't like them, don't keep watching them.

PlasticLion:
You're still here?

It's over.

Go home.

Go.

Just because you say it's over doesn't mean it is. Seeing as Bob has been responding, sporadically, but responding, the argument is not over. Until there is no more to be discussed, it is never over. What you have just done is bumped your post count and contributed nothing to the conversation at all. If it is over for you, just leave it alone. Just because you have no interest in the topic anymore, doesn't mean everyone else has left it too.

(sigh) If you don't know the quote, then I do apologize. Please understand I was merely trying to be light-hearted because the comments here have gotten so heavy. Sorry.

I have a post count?

PlasticLion:
(sigh) If you don't know the quote, then I do apologize. Please understand I was merely trying to be light-hearted because the comments here have gotten so heavy. Sorry.

I have a post count?

Pardon, I was actually really pissed at the other guy I quoted. I guess I let some (read: most) of that rage transfer into my response to you. I understand your motive.

EDIT: Hardly :P

The comercials always reminded me of Fallout1/2. So i'll catch it on DVD, just not in theatres.

I left before the end for similar critic Bob did. I was like, really? it really about the bible? That shallow wannabe deep crap movie with all those inuendo of see what happen when you don`t believe in God, you stupid atheist!

MovieBob:
Voltaire would be pretentious and nonfunctional - you'd have to explain to at least half of the audience what the significance of it was.

Playboy would be silly, unless it tied into the plot somehow (i.e. people had forgotten about sex or something, I dunno.)

I have no objection to the MacGuffin being a Bible BECAUSE it's a Bible, I object to it being a Bible in the context and tone of this movie.

Excellent points about the two books, although going around with a Playboy might make those long wasteland journeys a little less lonely.

MovieBob:
See, the whole "last book/movie/song/whatever on Earth" thing has been done A LOT; and when it works there's generally some level of irony or at least commentary at play in terms of what "it" is.

True again, but I think that the irony is that one fights a butt-load of Bibles being sold left and right and in every household. Whether the irony was good or not is up to interpretation. I think that carrying a Bible around would have more to story listeners than if he carried around The Mona Lisa, which much fewer folks have had interactions with (it's actually smaller than one would think).

MovieBob:
This is aside from the fact that the film's ultimate pointlessness undermine's itself by serving as a perfect example of why God (as opposed to agents thereof) doesn't really "work" as a character in non-Biblical stories. By the end of the film, it's 100% clear that God has been an active participant in the film, meaning that our story ultimately boils down to this: God decides to save mankind from the apocalypse by putting a Bible in the hands of one guy and having him wander westward for 30 years killing people with a sword. I'm sorry, "mysterious ways" or not, that's just poor plotting.

Good point, however I think that if we were to relate a post-apocalyptic world to some other time in history, it would probably be the dark ages. In this time, there were a lot of cases in which people did pray for salvation, forgiveness, protection, etc. and never got it. People were likely to die left and right at the hands of Vikings from the north, Muslims in the south (though Spain), bandits on the road, or even your (fellow Christian) lord who kills you because your daughter is pretty. No protection, which is why this time sucked.

I think that when people see a movie with an all powerful deity that is also invisible, they might want to see that deity actually do something. For some this film would have impressed them, for others not. Now that I see that your arguments are purely about the movie, I'll attempt to lift any imperious tone that I had (unintentionally) and say thanks for responding, it was pretty late in and I didn't think you'd get to it.

I love the reviews by the way, keep it up man!

thornussell:

Undercover:
I already know what I was babbling about...

Even if religion was removed (pretty much impossible) the world would find something else to fight over. And you complained about people trying to shove god down your throat well i have met atheists who try even harder to shove nothing down my throat.

I completely agree with you on both points, although "complaining" might be a bit to strong a word, as it implies that I give a shit what people think. As far as Atheists trying to shove "nothing" down your throat, (well put by the way) people like that are just as bad as hypocritical Christians.

I am entitled to my beliefs just as you are entitled to yours, and I don't try to force what I believe in on anyone, I simply lay out the facts as I know them and you decide for yourself.

I have studied your beliefs in depth, what do you know about mine? Do you even understand why I don't believe in your God, or are you just going to write me off as "misinformed" or "lost?" Because I am neither. Read Christopher Hitchens, then get back to me.

Badassassin:

Undercover:
Once again, getting attacked for my views...

really? do you also walk into the ghetto and say "i am part of the kkk!!!"

and do you realize that if you say your an atheist, people don't try and force god down your throat (at least most normal people) but if you tell an atheist your religion he'll try to convince you how idiotic and how bad religion is. so please, don't go into your rant about religion, because its so tired and samey as all the other atheist speeches we've heard here.

I beg your pardon? Where are you getting your "facts" from? Firstly, you have no idea who I am or what kind of person I am, so to make a statement like your "KKK" one only proves your own ignorance, and has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It made no sense at all.

If you would be so kind as to explain why you said that to me, I would appreciate it.

And as far as walking around telling people I'm an Atheist is concerned, just who in the hell do you think you are making blanket statements like that? So you're saying that in all the research you've done (I'm assuming that you've done extensive research into Atheism, otherwise making a statement like that was very foolish) you can conclusively say that all Athiests will try to force their beliefs on other people, even to a greater degree than religious types doing the same, and indeed will do so with condescension and insults?

I'd like to see where you got that information from, unless of course you just made it up and are basically talking out of your ass. So which is it, fact or fiction?

And as far as my "rant" is concerned, my friend you have yet to hear one from me. Not once have I ever called someone an idiot for their religious beliefs. Misinformed and misguided perhaps, but I would never stoop to such juvenile statements.

I could spend all day talking about how religion poisons everything, and back up every statement with histortical and proveable facts.

How about you? I've already said it once, if you want to get into it with me you'd better be prepared.

Attack me again, see what happens.

Wow, someone has a problem with religion. Did a priest touch you or something?

Atheists are such tolerant people.

Armored Prayer:
Just as I suspected... it was going to be boring.

Well at least I saved myself 20 bucks.

20 bucks? where the fuck do you see movies at? the death star?

overall the movie wasn't bad, if your looking for a super deep plot then dont see it, but for some sweet action and denzel washington being badass its pretty good, i think it just got overly hyped

hamster mk 4:
So the person with the last copy of "Love thy neighbor" goes about slaughtering people with a sword? Is there any part in the movie where the main character acknowledges the irony of his actions? From the trailers I didn't think the book would be the bible, but now that I know it is, this movie seems a whole lot less interesting.

i have seen it, and yes he does a few times, he spits a few lines out here and there about that, overall the movie isn't some super christian based movie trying to get you to believe in god so overall i enjoyed it alot

image

This has a point, which I will now explain. Something I am surprised Bob didn't touch on, to be honest.

The Book of Eli is essentially a remake of Zardoz, which was a film released in 1974 featuring this hunk of Scottish asswipe that is Sean Connery in this bondage getup (and other things).

The team behind Eli have already stated this was their intention, and indeed many things have parallels between the two films - the setting is similar (Zardoz is actually set a couple hundred years after the apocalyptic war) both characters are carrying a book for "God", both get involved with a certain type of bad guy and some women linked to him in some way. You will need to watch both films to draw the actual comparisons - of which there are more than I mention.

The bad guys both want this book in order to control other men in some way.

The issue is that Eli misses the point. The reason why Zardoz worked so well in telling the story can be summed up with the ending, which I will now explain in this spoiler bracket.

The entire message of Zardoz is that any idea can be turned into a religion or controlling mindset, no matter how fanciful that idea is. It is not about the content of the book, but the book itself.

Eli misses the point, it seams, by making the book The Bible. While it can be argued that the point still stands in the film, I personally feel that making the book be the actual book that is the basis for one of the worlds major religions just turns it from a remake of one of the most underrated and off the wall commentaries of the mindset of mankind (in that we all follow some kind of belief if the promise is better than what we have) into essentially a telling of how a man wants to become a pope for his own gain, and how Eli is the saint that stops him.

This is my view, I will leave it to you if I am right or wrong.

i dont understand how movie bob can be nice to surrogates and 2012 while bashing this movie...

so God's in it. Who cares? It made sense in a way, and was quite fun. There are hundreds of movies way worse than this, and i would gladly see this again.

After learning that the book is, in fact the Bible, I want to see it even more. Throughout the review Moviebob kept saying how he thought it would be symbolic, hollowed out to contain a cure, or have some weapon hidden inside. I thought that too and thank God I was wrong; because the Bible has already been used countless times to either present a form of symbolism or hide something.

I've seen Bibles and Crucifix necklaces block bullets, knives, and fists. In Spider-Man 2, Aunt May held on for dear life to the arm of an angel statue. Religious symbols collapsed in the 2012 movie. Angel wings have fallen off statues. Churches have been set on fire to leave only the charred Cross hanging in the back of the ruined structure. The Bible has been hallowed out to hide pistols, potions, and everything, except Christian text. Yet Moviebob says that because "it's just a Bible" is trite? What hasn't been done before? Nothing. The Bible's been used in movies more as a shield and a utility box then it has ever been used as a book.

When was the last time it was just a Bible? In a secular movie no less. Now what is the problem with it being a Bible? The Bible is one of the oldest texts to still exist; no other book has had more controversy; and no other historic text has a history as bloody as the Holy Bible.

The movie takes place in a post-Apocalyptic world and the Bible STILL hasn't been wiped off the face of the Earth. Isn't that symbollic itself? Not even the Apocalypse itself could destroy the Bible while other text was lost to ages, but not the Bible. The Bible doesn't need any symbolism to stress the gravity of its presence. History alone shows that no other book is able to survive countless wars, persecutions, burnings, and gruesome punishment to all who followed it's teachings.

For example, Bloody Mary, Queen of England, went on a bloodthirsty hunt to find every single Protestant Bible. If a Bible was found in a house, the entire family would be placed on their knees and have their throats slit over the Bible one at a time. The blood-soaked Bible then would be ripped to shreds and tossed into the streets as a warning. However the very next day the torn pieces would be gone, why, because the residents of other houses gathered the pieces of the Bible from the street and would stitch it back together.

Another thing to say it's a 'cheesy message', which makes me wonder what presuppositions Moviebob has towards the Bible.

Plus there IS symbolism in the movie. In Ephesian's 6, the Bible is called the Sword of the Spirit. We have a man determined to fight off the legions of darkness in a world filled with despair, suffering, and hate; he's equipped with something so valuable and rare that he must protect it's very existence. He's a knight only equipped with a sword to save the people. If it falls into the hands of evil men it will be perverted to benefit their own wicked desires and lead countless astray (in other words a "false prophet").

Moviebob, I respect your opinion, but disliking a movie because it wasn't what you expected along with a controversial stance according to the modern world opinion doesn't provide ample or professional opinion. It was more personal.

consolidation...

jboking:
Oh wow, sad day. I was hoping this might actually turn out good. Thanks for the heads up Bob.

CloggedDonkey:
damn. I had some hope for this movie. ho well. I hadn't bought a ticket yet, and if you couldn't see the "it's a bible" thing coming, you are blind.

BloodyThoughts:
Wow, I haven't ever seen Bob this bored while reviewing a movie.

I think I might skip this one. I have already seen too many Apocalyptic films. Plus to me anything that just has one guy carrying the one last...Thing, to the one last place to keep it safe is boring, besides it being cut up by action scenes.

Scrythe:
I know this probably sounds cliche over the internet and all, but I can honestly say that I actually felt physically ill watching this review.

Then again, this isn't surprising, considering that this one is done by the fucking Hughes brothers - the same assholes responsible for Menace II Society. Also, the guy who's credited for writing this apparently was involved in Duke Nukem Forever, which is good enough to fucking lynch the bastard.

Xyphon:
I was expecting this movie to be pretty bad, and apparently I was right. I rarely laugh at a movie trailer, but this one made me laugh at how dumb and unoriginal it seemed.

THIS MOVIE DOES NOT SUCK.

Don't go in expecting the movie version of the messiah, but please, do NOT let this review scare you away from a film that was fun to watch, and honestly quite easy to enjoy.

MB does the movie no justice, and God does not even have a slight role in the movie. He doesn't speak, make himself known, or send angels down, and you sort of forget about the whole God thing anyway. Again, I would recommend this movie. I'm no critic, but I think I can safely say this movie would be fun for most, regardless of religious affiliation. (Unless you're hardcore... like REALLY, REALLY hardcore)

likalaruku:
Who knows, this could be 2010's first contribution to the 100 worst movies ever made.

Have you even SEEN this movie?

Undercover:

Badassassin:

Undercover:
Once again, getting attacked for my views...

really? do you also walk into the ghetto and say "i am part of the kkk!!!"

and do you realize that if you say your an atheist, people don't try and force god down your throat (at least most normal people) but if you tell an atheist your religion he'll try to convince you how idiotic and how bad religion is. so please, don't go into your rant about religion, because its so tired and samey as all the other atheist speeches we've heard here.

I beg your pardon? Where are you getting your "facts" from? Firstly, you have no idea who I am or what kind of person I am, so to make a statement like your "KKK" one only proves your own ignorance, and has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It made no sense at all.

If you would be so kind as to explain why you said that to me, I would appreciate it.

And as far as walking around telling people I'm an Atheist is concerned, just who in the hell do you think you are making blanket statements like that? So you're saying that in all the research you've done (I'm assuming that you've done extensive research into Atheism, otherwise making a statement like that was very foolish) you can conclusively say that all Athiests will try to force their beliefs on other people, even to a greater degree than religious types doing the same, and indeed will do so with condescension and insults?

I'd like to see where you got that information from, unless of course you just made it up and are basically talking out of your ass. So which is it, fact or fiction?

And as far as my "rant" is concerned, my friend you have yet to hear one from me. Not once have I ever called someone an idiot for their religious beliefs. Misinformed and misguided perhaps, but I would never stoop to such juvenile statements.

I could spend all day talking about how religion poisons everything, and back up every statement with histortical and proveable facts.

How about you? I've already said it once, if you want to get into it with me you'd better be prepared.

Attack me again, see what happens.

1) i said that because if you throw that sort of stuff out into the wind, your just going to get it right back in your face. i don't care what you think but you just don't say things like that, its just rude.
2)it is a blanket statement based on my expierience. yes i have seen religious people come down on atheists for their lack of faith, but i've seen more atheists to come down on religious people for their faith, and with a much more pretentious and condescending arguement, probably because theirs is more informed. with people i know, atheism is just a way to feel high and mighty.
3) "misguided" and "misinformed" are just more condescending ways of calling someone an idiot.
" no no, i didn't call him retarded, i called him mentally challenged, because that's so much better."

MovieBob:
Not that it should matter, but I'm not an Atheist ;)

My issue with the use of religion in this movie is that it's heavy-handed yet also profoundly silly. Christianity in "Eli" is used like magic spells are in "Harry Potter": Eli teaches a person who's NEVER even heard of religion before to say grace, and immediately they're a better, more confident human being than before. The bad guy wants The Book for the same reason: "The Words" will give him power (and the movie agrees with him.) Aside from being a flat-out distortion of the religion in question, that's just GOOFY - especially in a movie trying so hard to be gritty and "real."

FWIW, here's the part that I DIDN'T want to spoil in the review (click at your own risk) that more or less colored why the particular treatment of religion in the movie didn't work for me:

How the exactly is it 100 percent clear God was a participant? There was no divine intervention, no Gabriel and Moses with shotguns, and Eli didn't sprout wings and start flying,

He had bad eyesight but wasn't completely blind. His other senses were honed to near perfection, and I didn't see some dude with a white beard whispering in his ear what was happening.

Sure some scenes had religious undertones, but so many other movies do the same without explaining "God". IE: He was shot in the gut but lived. In MANY other films protagonist is shot or stabbed, but lives. If that person were praying before they had died, methinks you would hate it.

Almost all who saw the film defend it. Nearly everyone else now doesn't want to see it because you didn't like the religious premise.

Turtleboy1017:

THIS MOVIE DOES NOT SUCK.

Went and saw it anyway(it's the weekend. I was bored) and it's not terrible, but I wouldn't say it's very good. it's just kind of meh. Some of the faster paced scenes were nice, but I disagree about god not playing a role in this movie. It was his main motivation. If you once stopped in the movie and asked, "Why is he even doing this?" You would realize how much of a role god/faith played.

Badassassin:

Undercover:

Badassassin:

Undercover:
Once again, getting attacked for my views...

really? do you also walk into the ghetto and say "i am part of the kkk!!!"

and do you realize that if you say your an atheist, people don't try and force god down your throat (at least most normal people) but if you tell an atheist your religion he'll try to convince you how idiotic and how bad religion is. so please, don't go into your rant about religion, because its so tired and samey as all the other atheist speeches we've heard here.

I beg your pardon? Where are you getting your "facts" from? Firstly, you have no idea who I am or what kind of person I am, so to make a statement like your "KKK" one only proves your own ignorance, and has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It made no sense at all.

If you would be so kind as to explain why you said that to me, I would appreciate it.

And as far as walking around telling people I'm an Atheist is concerned, just who in the hell do you think you are making blanket statements like that? So you're saying that in all the research you've done (I'm assuming that you've done extensive research into Atheism, otherwise making a statement like that was very foolish) you can conclusively say that all Athiests will try to force their beliefs on other people, even to a greater degree than religious types doing the same, and indeed will do so with condescension and insults?

I'd like to see where you got that information from, unless of course you just made it up and are basically talking out of your ass. So which is it, fact or fiction?

And as far as my "rant" is concerned, my friend you have yet to hear one from me. Not once have I ever called someone an idiot for their religious beliefs. Misinformed and misguided perhaps, but I would never stoop to such juvenile statements.

I could spend all day talking about how religion poisons everything, and back up every statement with histortical and proveable facts.

How about you? I've already said it once, if you want to get into it with me you'd better be prepared.

Attack me again, see what happens.

1) i said that because if you throw that sort of stuff out into the wind, your just going to get it right back in your face. i don't care what you think but you just don't say things like that, its just rude.
2)it is a blanket statement based on my expierience. yes i have seen religious people come down on atheists for their lack of faith, but i've seen more atheists to come down on religious people for their faith, and with a much more pretentious and condescending arguement, probably because theirs is more informed. with people i know, atheism is just a way to feel high and mighty.
3) "misguided" and "misinformed" are just more condescending ways of calling someone an idiot.
" no no, i didn't call him retarded, i called him mentally challenged, because that's so much better."

Ok its obvious that I can't have any kind of intelligent discussion with you as you continually spout opinions rather than facts, and seem to be more interested in putting yourself on a pedestal and insulting me than you are in coming up with any cohesive statements that don't involve belittlment, and I have no respect for people who put words in my mouth, nor can I take seriously the words of someone who still hasn't mastered the art of spelling & punctuation.

You obviously didn't read my post all the way through, or even comprehend what I was saying because it seems that you were too busy formulating more insults. For someone who thinks Athiests believe themselves to be "High and Mighty," you are most certainly the pot calling the kettle black. Your circle of friends (or lack thereof) does not constitute universal opinion or belief.

Don't waste any more of my time and don't bother quoting this message or even writing any more, as I have no interest in hearing you talk to yourself. If it matters that much to you then go ahead, but you need to ask yourself, does it matter if you have the last word if noone's listening?

jboking:

Turtleboy1017:

THIS MOVIE DOES NOT SUCK.

Went and saw it anyway(it's the weekend. I was bored) and it's not terrible, but I wouldn't say it's very good. it's just kind of meh. Some of the faster paced scenes were nice, but I disagree about god not playing a role in this movie. It was his main motivation. If you once stopped in the movie and asked, "Why is he even doing this?" You would realize how much of a role god/faith played.

But that's the thing, who cares if faith played a huge role in it? In a movie where the hero rescues the girl, is it not the same? God didn't directly do jack-shit in the film... He was MOTIVATION. The same as a king wanting to free his people or a man wanting to rescue his wife.

The movie was in no way amazing... but it was at the very least entertaining. MB bashing the film for having God in it was retarded, since you could have replaced God with his dead wife and the bible with hi wedding ring... and something tells me that if something like that was indeed the case, he would have liked it a LOT more.

YoUnG205:
The Bible!... I do not see myself going to watch this one.

This is exactly the problem with your review, Bob.

Demagoguery.

Saw the movie yesterday. Was it revelatory? A life-changing experience? Fuck no. But it was enjoyable.

Was it Christian propoganda? AGAIN: fuck no! In fact, the exchange that stuck out to me was: Solara - "what's the book say?" Eli - "Do to others as you would have them do to you... at least, that's what I got out of it." And that is the MOST religious discussion in the whole damn thing.

Does that really sound like proselytizing to you??? REALLY?!?

No, but you portray it as such.

Does God ever come down in a burning bush and manifest himself and say "ELI! YOU ARE MY MOST AWESOME WARRIOR! CARRY DA BOOK AND I WILL PROTECT YOUUUUUU...."

No, it doesn't happen: even if you intimate as much. In fact, there was absolutely nothing in this movie that could not be explained away by dumb luck, regardless of how unlikely it might be... (of course, to me, that was the subtlety of the Hughes Brothers: yeah, you could claim 'that was so unlikely, it obviously was the Hand of God.', allowing those poisoned against religion could view it as a bad thing, while religious zealots could view it as a good thing, while those of us in the middle could be... torn...)

Again, this is a relatively moot point, however:

The issue I have had with your review from the beginning (I will repeat it one last time for those Escapist members who might be a bit slow) is that you spent a good deal of your review ridiculing the movie simply because it involves religious elements that make YOU uncomfortable.

I found the movie to be an interesting distraction, and certainly worth a DVD rental, even if I wouldn't run out and see it in the theaters, but your review would seem to say that it's religious propaganda on the level of fucking Left Behind which is PATENTLY FALSE.

Seriously, I see no reason that an areligious person, or a Muslim, or Jewish, or Hindi, or Pagan or whatever couldn't enjoy this movie as a tale about the sustaining power of faith. Yet, I ask you, what would most people take away from your review?

I don't think I'm far off to say that it would be: "It's an absurd movie about a guy protecting a Bible."

Actually the described plot of the movie is pretty much what I thought it was all about. Simply put it was about an act of faith, and really I don't see that as being a bad thing. Plenty of movies in a very similar vein have been done.

Truthfully Moviebob kind of dropped the ball here. "The Book Of Eli" basically strikes me as being what Steven King's "The Stand" should have been. "The Stand" basically being about the end of the world, with the surviving people rallying in two camps of good guys, and bad guys. The good guys pretty much wind up undergoing this test of faith that is "The Stand" where they head off accross the remnants of society, get captured, and the leader of the bad guys (Randall Flag, a recurring demon in Steven King's mythology) tries to get them to renounce their faith. They stick to their guns and the hand of god comes down and pwns all of the bad guys. That's the short version. It's kind of profound in a way, and about the power of faith (as many of Steven King's stories are), but really you kind of expected more.

I get the fact that a lot of people are even less spiritual than me, and have no belief in god (or anything spiritual at all) I really get that. I do not think that just because your an atheist you need to attack any spiritual message, or a story about faith.

I still respect Moviebob (I wouldn't bother to post almost every week if I didn't), but really I think he kind of got so focused on his dislike of the premise that he missed the obvious comparison.

Oh and one final point, just because god is involved does NOT nessicarly mean the resolution is beyond doubt. Stories about faith, are not always just about the conflict itself but also about the possibility of the person losing faith, or failing in the face of temptation. This is incidently a KEY element of Arthurian mythology, and how things finally play out for example. Even looking at versions like "The Once And Future King" Lancelot's fall from, and return to grace is a KEY element of the story. It's so classic that we all know what's going to happen before even reading it nowadays, but now pretend you read some of these stories without that knowlege.

To again also invoke Steven King, he involves god in a lot of the things he writes. One of his stories called "Desperation" featured a storyline about god fighting to protect humanity and stop the incursion of an evil godlike force known as "Tak" (to put it simply). He chooses a boy as his champion, and he basically becomes a saint. But the thing is that god seems to have his hands tied without sacrifice. He rarely gets involved apparently unless it's really important, and one of the key themes was basically about how god is cruel (not that he wants to be), but he's also VERY strong, and both a good guy and on humanity's side. It dealt with issues of sacrifice, the greater good, and picking one's battles. It was interesting because it managed to do a good job of making God into a force of good while both managing to stay fairly true to both the Old Testament version and the more forgiving New TEstament version (to state it in terms most Christians will get, I am Christian but don't subscribe to any existing faith, which I won't get into again right now).

At any rate, Moviebob is welcome to his opinion, but I think he should have done more with this review even if he came out aagainst it. Not trying to say he should like something he obviously didn't (tastes vary) just be a little more fair.

That was a pretty slick post, Theru. In retrospect, 'The Stand' comparision really works! Kudos!

solidstatemind:

YoUnG205:
The Bible!... I do not see myself going to watch this one.

This is exactly the problem with your review, Bob.

Demagoguery.

Saw the movie yesterday. Was it revelatory? A life-changing experience? Fuck no. But it was enjoyable.

Was it Christian propoganda? AGAIN: fuck no! In fact, the exchange that stuck out to me was: Solara - "what's the book say?" Eli - "Do to others as you would have them do to you... at least, that's what I got out of it." And that is the MOST religious discussion in the whole damn thing.

Does that really sound like proselytizing to you??? REALLY?!?

No, but you portray it as such.

Does God ever come down in a burning bush and manifest himself and say "ELI! YOU ARE MY MOST AWESOME WARRIOR! CARRY DA BOOK AND I WILL PROTECT YOUUUUUU...."

No, it doesn't happen: even if you intimate as much. In fact, there was absolutely nothing in this movie that could not be explained away by dumb luck, regardless of how unlikely it might be... (of course, to me, that was the subtlety of the Hughes Brothers: yeah, you could claim 'that was so unlikely, it obviously was the Hand of God.', allowing those poisoned against religion could view it as a bad thing, while religious zealots could view it as a good thing, while those of us in the middle could be... torn...)

Again, this is a relatively moot point, however:

The issue I have had with your review from the beginning (I will repeat it one last time for those Escapist members who might be a bit slow) is that you spent a good deal of your review ridiculing the movie simply because it involves religious elements that make YOU uncomfortable.

I found the movie to be an interesting distraction, and certainly worth a DVD rental, even if I wouldn't run out and see it in the theaters, but your review would seem to say that it's religious propaganda on the level of fucking Left Behind which is PATENTLY FALSE.

Seriously, I see no reason that an areligious person, or a Muslim, or Jewish, or Hindi, or Pagan or whatever couldn't enjoy this movie as a tale about the sustaining power of faith. Yet, I ask you, what would most people take away from your review?

I don't think I'm far off to say that it would be: "It's an absurd movie about a guy protecting a Bible."

This!

honestly, i thought bob was way off on this one. he totally blew it out of proportion. which is wierd, because he usually is a good reviewer.
Besides, all his reviews done is spark a religious debate (which i took a part of... woops) and nobody wants that.

it was entertaining, it wasn't the best movie ever but it had a good story and was relatively deep

I know I'm sort of on the opposite of Moviebob here but....is this argument still going on?

Like...really?

Forgive me if I'm repeating someone. Actually, I kinda hoping I am, but the movie was like a mix of the book The Road and the game Borderlands. The postapocalypticness of TR and the desert and fighting of Borderlands. There is definately a higher connection between them, but to avoid confusion through details I'll leave it at that.
At the very least the movie was entertaining though. Then again MMOs can be considered entertaining, so it just depends on what you like. If you don't like faith driven plots, then you might like the fight scenes. But if you want a movie to make you think really hard then it mioght not be the best. It's possible though if you look at it from certain viewpoints.

Wrds:
I know I'm sort of on the opposite of Moviebob here but....is this argument still going on?

Like...really?

you are absolutely right.

i hate disagree with Movie Bob but the whole plot did kinda take a big twist and i dont want to ruin it because i recommend people see it, the movie is about the journey, just like the road, not some mad character arc its a solid movie love it for what it is and dont compare to something else.

Moviebob just kinda...idk. His whole "review" consisted of "RAWR i hate this premise God is silly derpy derpy doo".

It just didn't seem professional to me. I'm not saying I could do better, but he should try to avoid ranting on a single topic for the majority of the "review".

But again, it's just my opinion. Versus his. :P

Well, I just saw the movie and I enjoyed it. My friend didn't really know if she liked it or hated it. Just kinda left her with a "Huh?" sorta feeling.

Personally, I think the story behind it is pretty interesting. Also, shows you how much of a strong influence the Bible has in society. One of the first books that stand against trials and tribulations is the Bible. I agree with an earlier poster about how the Bible is so symbolic and significant on its own. It didn't need a gimmicky, hollowed out anything to change the context of how important his mission was. Yes, the main theme of the story was testing one's faith. Even when things look bleak, he still continued on. That's a very strong character trait for anyone to have. It's also very hard to maintain when things are falling apart around you, but you stand strong on your faith. Which was the true premises of the movie, in my opinion.

In the end, the review was pretty "meh" and didn't really review the movie well at all. Sorry MB, try again next time.

haruvister:
Really, everyone should watch (and read) The Road instead of this. No kung-fu, but loads more going on - a moral core not based on some dumb book, for a start.

So... Instead of getting our moral codes from an old book, we should get our moral code from a new movie and the book it was based off of?

Well, this was an interesting review, though I have to honestly say I liked the movie. I would say spoilers, but since the review already had spoilers, those reading this probably wouldn't care now, so I might as well not bother... though I guess don't read it if you some reason still don't want to know:
For a good half of the movie, all you really do know is that he is carrying a bible (or the last one) West, and determined to not get stopped. You really don't figure out that he says he was told by god or "A voice he heard" until a little after mid-movie. By then it didn't really bother me much, since he doesn't mention it much more until almost the end of the movie. I would honestly say I liked the movie, even though there was the whole "I was told by god to deliver this".

Turtleboy1017:

jboking:

Turtleboy1017:

THIS MOVIE DOES NOT SUCK.

Went and saw it anyway(it's the weekend. I was bored) and it's not terrible, but I wouldn't say it's very good. it's just kind of meh. Some of the faster paced scenes were nice, but I disagree about god not playing a role in this movie. It was his main motivation. If you once stopped in the movie and asked, "Why is he even doing this?" You would realize how much of a role god/faith played.

But that's the thing, who cares if faith played a huge role in it? In a movie where the hero rescues the girl, is it not the same? God didn't directly do jack-shit in the film... He was MOTIVATION. The same as a king wanting to free his people or a man wanting to rescue his wife...
with his dead wife and the bible with hi wedding ring... and something tells me that if something like that was indeed the case, he would have liked it a LOT more

I'm inclined to agree with you. You see, if it was his wife there actually would have been personal backstory to talk about that could have enriched the overall story. As it stands, when he outlines his motivation is to essentially move the bible to some place safe everything is out on the table. You know the motivation before he can even say anything about it. Using the bible was a weakpoint for this movie. Plain and simple. There were many others, like a few of the characters being kind of flat or predicatable by script, though the actors did a good job with what they had (and I know bob complimented the actors), but using the bible as a crutch for the story was the biggest weakpoint in the whole film.

The movie was in no way amazing... but it was at the very least entertaining.

That's...arguable. It was predictable and used just about every cliche in the book for action movies. It was just...meh. Not entertaining really, just meh overall.

MB bashing the film for having God in it was retarded, since you could have replaced God with his dead wife and the bible with hi wedding ring... and something tells me that if something like that was indeed the case, he would have liked it a LOT more.

We could end this with, it was his opinion of the movie and if he couldn't get over the fact that the bible was the main motivation then there are probably others that won't be able to either. This time you just happened to disagree with him. I mean hell, you guys could do what I do. That is, watch Bob's reviews, keep in mind what he said, and go see the movie anyway.

And this is why the PS3 sucks...

Don't take me to seriously

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here