-
⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
Film & Television
Welcome Guest
⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ -
⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
Forum Rules Film Chit-Chat Recently Watched Best Documentaries ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ -
Film & TV Moderators: ghostfreak
Film: The Book Of Eli
- Thread starter Ds
- Start date
tambourine-man
Bluelight Crew
I'm going to have to watch this film again and get some answers.
^then please add that to the shutter island thread
although i agree that this film bashes bibles far too much like td said, i don't buy his above nsfw conclusion. not that it just makes it ultralame, there is simply no sign of it being like that. it was a good idea, but i was waiting for something more to happen, and it never did.
2/5
although i agree that this film bashes bibles far too much like td said, i don't buy his above nsfw conclusion. not that it just makes it ultralame, there is simply no sign of it being like that. it was a good idea, but i was waiting for something more to happen, and it never did.
2/5
nioreh0422
Bluelighter
I knew what it was from the beginning and didn't even know anything about the movie. I think it was pretty obvious that the book was going to be the Bible. What other book has the power the bible has when it comes to controlling people and possibly manipulation. I'm surprised so many people are offended by the Bible and Christianity.
countless works by philosophers, politicians and other faiths can be just as useful for both good and bad.
TheDeceased
Ex-Bluelighter
I'm not at all offended by the bible. In fact, I've read the Old and New Testament, the Aquarian Gospel, the Book of Mormon and the Apocropha. If anything I'm fascinated by ancient religious texts.
However, I'm not a big fan of organized religion and I'm certainly not a fan of how they (particularly Christians) try to recruit people.
Obviously Jesus wouldn't approve of the Book of Eli, but who gives a shit, right? Maintaing a theocratic monopoly is far more important than actually adhering to the ideals that your religion perpetuates. (The number one and only priority appears to be recruitment.)
Maybe the Mormon church should make an unltra-violent film about the Gospel of Joseph Smith... Or Muslims could produce a film about an axe-weilding Mohamad?
Mixing religious propaganda with comic book violence isn't clever, and it's still propaganda.
Personally, I'm not that easily bought by slick cinematography and a meaningless violence.
I see what this film is.
It doesn't fool me.
However, I'm not a big fan of organized religion and I'm certainly not a fan of how they (particularly Christians) try to recruit people.
Obviously Jesus wouldn't approve of the Book of Eli, but who gives a shit, right? Maintaing a theocratic monopoly is far more important than actually adhering to the ideals that your religion perpetuates. (The number one and only priority appears to be recruitment.)
Maybe the Mormon church should make an unltra-violent film about the Gospel of Joseph Smith... Or Muslims could produce a film about an axe-weilding Mohamad?
Mixing religious propaganda with comic book violence isn't clever, and it's still propaganda.
Personally, I'm not that easily bought by slick cinematography and a meaningless violence.
I see what this film is.
It doesn't fool me.
Wyld 4 X
Bluelighter
The first time I saw this movie I was flying to Taiwan a little over a month ago so I missed a few parts due to sleepiness. Although I got a connection between Eli and religion, I did not think anything of it. A couple weekends ago when I was visiting the family, my sister bought the DVD and we watched it with our father on Father's Day. While my sister and I were out shopping for it, my sister was telling me the connections with the film, the bible, the characters, etc. As I watched it again that afternoon, I still did not think of it as Christian propaganda even with all the info from my sister. I think it is a good film, not a great film and I disagree with the perception of it as being an overtly religious movie. I could understand where one would think that it is but then again, that is one's own projection.
2.5/5
2.5/5
TheLoveBandit
Retired Never Was, Coulda been wannabe
Meh, finally wateched it, and did indeed thoroughly enjoy the 'fallout'-esqueness of the flick. The religious associations were things I caught, but in no way did I feel like it was a religious movie or trying to send that message, other than 'the book' being 'the bible', but how else are you going to give any book enough weight to be the center of a film unless it is one that can strike the chord that the bible would?
Then again, I suppose if 'the book' had been the Torah or Koran, I would indeed have taken it as a religious propaganda type movie, so maybe my Christian upbringing is blinding me to this in this instance.
That said, the story itself left me feeling like the film worked at about an 8 for graphics, and maybe only a 5-7 for actual story and characters. Denzel was good, the chic Solara was okay, and Gary Oldman always plays a good asshole.
spoiler talk
I did appreciate the personal struggle Eli went thru after leaving the woman and hearing the biker gang catch her - where he's telling himself to stay the path. But that was one of the only places where he's questioning himself, struggling. The rest of the film, he was God's sock puppet - granted a kick ass one, but still, straight plain doin' the job.
I *might* watch it again, to clarify for myself about Eli's sight - but really I wouldn't be getting much deeper revelations or interpretations about the character or the story overall. So, no, probably won't watch it again.
Then again, I suppose if 'the book' had been the Torah or Koran, I would indeed have taken it as a religious propaganda type movie, so maybe my Christian upbringing is blinding me to this in this instance.
That said, the story itself left me feeling like the film worked at about an 8 for graphics, and maybe only a 5-7 for actual story and characters. Denzel was good, the chic Solara was okay, and Gary Oldman always plays a good asshole.
spoiler talk
NSFW:
I did appreciate the personal struggle Eli went thru after leaving the woman and hearing the biker gang catch her - where he's telling himself to stay the path. But that was one of the only places where he's questioning himself, struggling. The rest of the film, he was God's sock puppet - granted a kick ass one, but still, straight plain doin' the job.
I *might* watch it again, to clarify for myself about Eli's sight - but really I wouldn't be getting much deeper revelations or interpretations about the character or the story overall. So, no, probably won't watch it again.
tambourine-man
Bluelight Crew
Watched it again.
In retrospect, I think people are taking the supposedly surreptitious 'sales pitch for god' a little too seriously.
There's plenty of fantasy-theme films that have magical elements to them. A film with Christian elements is really not much different.
Editing and scripting was a little poor in places, probably intentionally, so that the final 'reveal' wasn't given away.
Yep, the guy is blind, but endowed with Jesus-O-Vision.
There's plenty of fantasy-theme films that have magical elements to them. A film with Christian elements is really not much different.
Editing and scripting was a little poor in places, probably intentionally, so that the final 'reveal' wasn't given away.
TheDeceased
Ex-Bluelighter
Agreed but the term "Christian elements" downplays the extraordinarily blatant religious propaganda in this film, IMO. It doesn't contain "Christian elements". Home Alone 2 has some Christian themes or elements or whatever. The Book of Eli is literally about the bible. It is like another story of the bible (see the title of the film), yet to be written. It is so extremely Christian that I found it unpleasant to watch.
I felt like I was in church.
I very rarely, if ever, have made that comment about any other film I have ever seen.
Ds
Bluelight Crew
well i'm into all post-end of the world movies.
the part when u find out he's blind.. now that shit gave me chills.
the part when u find out he's blind.. now that shit gave me chills.
Droppersneck
Bluelighter
the sequel is coming out soon; the book of jacky
tambourine-man
Bluelight Crew
TD,
After I finished watching the film for a second time, I thought about some of the comments in this thread, yours in particular. To me, films like The Lord Of The Rings trilogy immediately sprung to mind - chock full of the Christian symbolism and metaphorical references to the eternal struggle. Indeed, Tolkien himself had stated that the books were "a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision".
I do accept your point, though, that there are few western films that are so literal in their religiosity or designed, as you put it, "like another story of the bible yet to be written". And the LOTR films certainly don't fall into that camp. But how about the slightly less metaphorical, though entirely faith-affirming films like Stigmata? End of Days? The Seventh Sign?
Aren't these extensions of the Christian faith? Dressed up in modern finery for the deadened tastebuds of today's flock?
I initially accepted your point that the film is unique in that it tries to recruit people to the faith by "mixing religious propaganda with comic book violence".
But I'm not so sure. For two reasons:
1. I would say that a very high percentage of the the martial art films I've seen over the years have made overt and lingering references to Taoism or Buddhism. They frequently cite stories of deities and historical folk-heroes. The premise usually centres around the belief that by relinquishing earthly desires (and, in effect, giving yourself to the religion or its principles), one can become a kung-fu/samurai/ninja super-happy-kill-kill-machine, capable of wiping out armies with a blade of grass. It's so overt that it practically became a cliché in western adaptations.
To me, this does fulfil that criteria: comic book violence with what you termed religious propaganda. I think the only real difference is that, in the West, in the midsts of our existential drudgery, we have a justifiable downer on our religions and treat them with a certain amount of contempt and suspicion. Particularly when they're positively depicted in celluloid.
2. At least one of the Hughes brothers is an unabashed atheist. I just don't see the film being part of an intentional attempt to propagandise or make Christianity palatable (or cool). I think, like myself, they merely saw it as a means to an end. Allen Hughes (not the atheist one) actually referred to the use of the Bible in the film as "their sacred MacGuffin". :D
HoneyRoastedPeanut
Bluelighter
I have to agree with the others that this movie was not so much Christian propaganda, but rather used Christian mythology as the lens through which to focus its message. The New Testament could have been replaced with any other holy/philosophical text and the message would have been the same, only the twist ending might have been a little less plausible.
Eli is certainly not a missionary, he goes out of his way not to convert anyone throughout the movie, the exception being the girl who forces it on him. The bible is called the most important book in the world in the film by two characters, really: Eli, who is its last devout follower, and the villain, who sees it as the best tool to convert and mobilize the masses to his cause, which is violent expansion and conquest. Perhaps there is no more effective text in the world for this particular purpose, I doubt you could really do it with a Torah or Buddhist texts for example.
I think the fact that it's set in America has a lot to do with the focus being on Christianity, as it's surely the most sympathized religion in this country. It also provides a well-known mythological character that fits in with the story they wanted to tell. None of this really points to "blatant Christian propaganda!" to me.
Pretty good film aside from all this, too.
Eli is certainly not a missionary, he goes out of his way not to convert anyone throughout the movie, the exception being the girl who forces it on him. The bible is called the most important book in the world in the film by two characters, really: Eli, who is its last devout follower, and the villain, who sees it as the best tool to convert and mobilize the masses to his cause, which is violent expansion and conquest. Perhaps there is no more effective text in the world for this particular purpose, I doubt you could really do it with a Torah or Buddhist texts for example.
I think the fact that it's set in America has a lot to do with the focus being on Christianity, as it's surely the most sympathized religion in this country. It also provides a well-known mythological character that fits in with the story they wanted to tell. None of this really points to "blatant Christian propaganda!" to me.
Pretty good film aside from all this, too.
TheDeceased
Ex-Bluelighter
tambourine-man,
The best propaganda tries not to appear to be propaganda. The film has purposely been made far enough away from the bible bashing Jesus freaks that we all despise. Hence, Denzel and the violence. If you lump all films together, more or less, that contain religious themes, then it's impossible to differentiate between art that happens to mention religion and religious art. But there is a difference, isn't there?
(2.) It wasn't written by the Hughes brothers.
(1.) I don't think the religious themes in The Book of Eli can be directly compared to your average Kung Fu flick. Martial arts are commonly related to religion, so a lot of films that have martial arts make references to religion. This isn't propaganda. That's where you lost me. Eli, on the other hand, paints a picture of a post apocalyptic world destroyed by man where a blind man must travel through the forsaken world in order to save humanity with the Bible. I fail to see how people don't connect that to Christianity. Eli is painted as a prophet. The name is directly from the Old Testament. Eli, a priest, gradually went blind.
In the same way that the Coen brothers A Serious Man (I loved this film) is an adaptation of The Book of Job (my favorite story from the Torah), The Book of Eli is an adaptation of a small story in The Book of Samuel about a man who gradually went blind while delivering the word of God.
The difference, as I see it, between Serious and Eli is that the former realizes the point of the analogy it is adapting and it delivers that message of faith in a general sense, despite being in a Jewish context. While the later takes a story out of context from a larger story and adapts it into an ultra violent tale about how great the Bible/ Jesus is, replacing Eli's trials and tribulations with an assortment of gun toting maniacs.
It is, perhaps, the most blatant religious propaganda I have ever seen in a commercial context.
Indeed. (But they are not quite as bad.)
The best propaganda tries not to appear to be propaganda. The film has purposely been made far enough away from the bible bashing Jesus freaks that we all despise. Hence, Denzel and the violence. If you lump all films together, more or less, that contain religious themes, then it's impossible to differentiate between art that happens to mention religion and religious art. But there is a difference, isn't there?
(2.) It wasn't written by the Hughes brothers.
(1.) I don't think the religious themes in The Book of Eli can be directly compared to your average Kung Fu flick. Martial arts are commonly related to religion, so a lot of films that have martial arts make references to religion. This isn't propaganda. That's where you lost me. Eli, on the other hand, paints a picture of a post apocalyptic world destroyed by man where a blind man must travel through the forsaken world in order to save humanity with the Bible. I fail to see how people don't connect that to Christianity. Eli is painted as a prophet. The name is directly from the Old Testament. Eli, a priest, gradually went blind.
In the same way that the Coen brothers A Serious Man (I loved this film) is an adaptation of The Book of Job (my favorite story from the Torah), The Book of Eli is an adaptation of a small story in The Book of Samuel about a man who gradually went blind while delivering the word of God.
The difference, as I see it, between Serious and Eli is that the former realizes the point of the analogy it is adapting and it delivers that message of faith in a general sense, despite being in a Jewish context. While the later takes a story out of context from a larger story and adapts it into an ultra violent tale about how great the Bible/ Jesus is, replacing Eli's trials and tribulations with an assortment of gun toting maniacs.
It is, perhaps, the most blatant religious propaganda I have ever seen in a commercial context.
Indeed. (But they are not quite as bad.)
Last edited: