Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
That Eli gives the book to Carnegie is indication 2. If it was really a holy artifact would the hero hand it over? The physical book didn't matter because Eli had the text memorized and he knew that. The book was just a vessel and not an actual artifact.

“It's not total bible fanboyism because look it says that the text is the important part not the book”.
Yeah, sure, but it's the text that makes it a bible, not the physical book…

God you are all over the place. The bible isn't important in the movie. Some characters think it is, but ultimately the physical bible isn't important because Eli memorized it, and the memorized bible isn't important because it doesn't do anything meaningful at the end of the movie besides sit on a shelf.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
That the bible is shelved next to the torah and quran and other texts indicates that it isn't special.

Or… that those other books are special too?

How does the movie show they are special? The 5 second shot of them on a shelf in a big ass library that no one will read?

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
1) Carnegie doesn't know the bible.

Like many Americans, Carnegie has no idea what is in the bible .

K, not sure what the feth that has to do with anything?

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
Carnegie was probably a "dirty atheist" like you and me, knowing that religion could be a useful tool but not knowing enough of the metaphysical aspects to make a production.

But the people that make the best cult leaders aren't the one that knows the religious text best. Charles Manson got a pretty dedicated cult going, he use the freaking Beatles lyrics as his holy scripture. When I said Carnegie could use anything written on paper that was literal.
And yeah, someone good enough to control a whole town would know it.

Cool. You'd make a better Carnegie. Doesn't change the fact that based on the story as presented there is no indication Carnegie knew enough of the bible to work up his own religion.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
Do you actually know anything about the screen writer(s)?

No, do you?

I just said I didn't. I also don't go around making claims about them either, or their motivations for writing. So knock it off unless you have something relevant to add to the discussion.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
I don't so this isn't a gotcha moment, but I agree with greatbigtree, I think your prejudice is showing. Along with your hate boner.

So, what exactly is my prejudice? And why did I get this “hate boner”, exactly?

That you can't see anything with the bible in as something more than religious propaganda. That you can sit through a movie with, at best, a conflicted view of religion and declare it a bible thumping indoctrination piece is pretty fething telling.

To the acting in the movie, I think all characters were realistic in their place. Washington as the lonely knight, Kunis as the squire with a troubled past, Oldman as the callous tyrant seeking to grow his power.

The magical talisman, the power wasn't in the talisman, it was in you all along. The torch is passed. Lots of classic story elements in a post apocalyptic world. I enjoyed it.

If HSoO dislikes Eli so intently, it's probably worth watching - added to my queue!

I like anything post apocalyptic, to be fair. I liked Mad Max as a kid, L.O.V.E.D. Fallout when I was a teen, and have always been attracted to stories set in any kind of post apocalypse setting.

That said, there is nuance to be found in TBOE. You could replace the book with any piece of "history". Just like how in 40k, people put significance in something they don't understand. For myself, that was key to my enjoyment of the film.

 greatbigtree wrote:
I like anything post apocalyptic, to be fair. I liked Mad Max as a kid, L.O.V.E.D. Fallout when I was a teen, and have always been attracted to stories set in any kind of post apocalypse setting.

That said, there is nuance to be found in TBOE. You could replace the book with any piece of "history". Just like how in 40k, people put significance in something they don't understand. For myself, that was key to my enjoyment of the film.

Have you seen a lot of the classic post-apoc films of the 80's, like Death Race 2000 and Cherry 2000 and A Boy And His Dog and the like?


Edit: Mega Force was not the movie I thought it was.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 greatbigtree wrote:
I like anything post apocalyptic, to be fair. I liked Mad Max as a kid, L.O.V.E.D. Fallout when I was a teen, and have always been attracted to stories set in any kind of post apocalypse setting.

That said, there is nuance to be found in TBOE. You could replace the book with any piece of "history". Just like how in 40k, people put significance in something they don't understand. For myself, that was key to my enjoyment of the film.

Have you seen a lot of the classic post-apoc films of the 80's, like Death Race 2000 and Cherry 2000 and Mega Force and A Boy And His Dog and the like?

A Boy and His Dog still messes with my head. Love that ending!

I have not, but it sounds like something to check for!

I rewatched Book of Eli, just finished. I really can't comprehend a "pro Christian" vibe from the movie.

The movie makes a point of suggesting the "Big Flash" was caused by religious tensions. Hence the reason all the bibles were burned following the big flash, and why Eli's bible is so significant.

The main protagonist, Eli, is not actually "old". Nor is Carnegie. The DVD has a bonus feature of a snippet of Carnegie's childhood, during the war but before the Nukes. He's an early teen, at the oldest. I'd guess 12, but it's hard to guess with "animation". I'd ballpark Eli and Carnegie to be roughly 45 to 50, tops. So they would have been early teens-ish when the bombs dropped, and it's been 30 years since. 30 years of living in squalor. No "society" just memories of the time before. I think that may be why I thought it was so much later. They were children, and the way Eli talks of the nukes as being, "The sky opening, and the Sun shone down and burned everything" evokes a kind of mythology about the war that I thought was passed down, but is apparently first hand.

I also noticed a little egg this time around, with the backpack he carries with him having a "My name is ELI" inside. Presumably from his young childhood. So Eli might be 40ish, instead. Hard to tell. In reality, I know the actors are older, or appear older, than that, but in P-A world, people would appear to age faster.

Thanks to the bonus footage, I can assert that Carnegie's fascination with Christianity is due to televangelism. His mother (?) was sending cheques to the ministry, despite their poor living conditions.

Carnegie specifically wishes to use the Bible, and the "Words" within as, "Weapons! Weapons aimed right at the hearts and minds of the weak and desperate!" (Close-to-quote). He's not in it for the holy rolling. He very clearly wishes to use the bible maliciously to increase his power. He doesn't know why the words had such impact on his mother, but he knows that they did. He knows that the words would be even more powerful now, as his own family was better off than the crap-fest that is the post-apoc.

Remember, Carnegie was a child when he saw this. He may not realize the words had power because of the presentation. Maybe he thinks he could do the showman thing and rake it in. The point is, Carnegie is a petty tyrant with aspirations to build more towns and increase his power (Carnegie knows where the old water springs are and water is life in the wastes) and if he could talk people into sending him money / resources because they WANTED to, rather than strong-arming them, he knows that it would make him exponentially more powerful.

Most of the adults, born after the nukes, are illiterate. 30 years is an entire generation that was born and raised without society.

Anyhow, I'm on the fence about it being a "Classic", but I do remember seeing it shortly after being released to DVD, and I have actually thought about the movie between now and then, more than once, so it has stuck with me. I think amongst other things, it presents a fairly even handed view of the power of religion. The good, the bad, the ugly, so to speak. There's a good nod to classic westerns in this movie, as well. The shootouts in the streets, for example.

Anyhow, really enjoyed it, again.

EDIT: Damnit. I'm coming down on the side of it being a classic. Or deserving to be, anyhow. Oldman plays such an excellent badguy. I mean, top notch. And the even-handedness of the power of religion deserves a note just for that. Neither for, nor against, just presenting. The more I think of it, it really is a modern western movie, set in the PA future. Carnegie's last scene in the movie is a tremendous payoff. Like I said, I've thought about the movie, between now and 8 ish years ago, more than once. I guess that speaks to it having moved me and made a notch in my brain where it hangs out.

Ive only seen the movie once. Correct me if im wrong, but isnt it very heavily implied that Eli was on a divine quest from god to get the book to the place that was preserving all the books and after getting it all transcribed from memory he dies a matyr?

The christianity there is pretty heavy <removed> handed if thats the case.

Please do not circumvent the swear filter - BrookM

I was really impressed with BR2049, but of course you can expect that from me. Surprised to see any discussion at all of Sucker Punch in here. I mean I kind of liked it, in the same way I liked the heavy metal cartoon from way back in the day. But i'm not sure it was a good movie, much less a classic. Drive though...for me is a modern classic, I have little doubts about that one.

Mad Max FR was good, I mean its about as good a reimagining as any considering the source material it's derived from. I didn't like it as much as a lot of other people though. It didn't really scratch that certain itch that I need. I generally don't like action movies though, that might be the problem.

The LOTR trilogy for me rivals the original Star Wars trilogy. And as time passes I think I might start liking it more. There are a lot of little things Lucas did to the current versions of the OT that irk the hell out of me, Vader screaming nooo! is high on the list. Talk about screwing up a scene that needed no improvement whatsoever.

But back to modern, anything NWR has done is in my eyes cult level...he just has a way of creating an atmosphere and has an eye for visuals. His movies also aren't too wordy or babble on and on with exposition or dialogue.

Hardware

The head of a cyborg reactivates, rebuilds itself, and goes on a violent rampage in a space marine's girlfriend's apartment.

 greatbigtree wrote:
That said, there is nuance to be found in TBOE. You could replace the book with any piece of "history".

Except for stuff like Eli saying grace and generally being understood as a holy man through the movie. Would be weird to have the one good guy being the only using Christian prayers if he was carrying a Quran, or the Necronomicon, or a DVD copy of Grey. Somehow feels less of a coincidence when he is carrying a bible.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
If he had a religious background, yes, he probably could have written his own bible and conned people into following him, but he doesn't have the ability to galvanize people with religion because he wasn't religious.

Yeah, but Charles Manson didn't have a particularly religious background either, neither did Ron Hubbard. I'm telling it again: having the bible wouldn't have helped Carnegie, and he should have known it.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
So, to address your point. Cult leaders have access to knowledge. Scientology was created by an author who was most certainly a reader of other texts. Other cults are formed by charlatans who take religion and twist it to suit their needs.

Charlatans don't take pre-existing religion because it is well written or particularly powerful. They do because it's what people already believe in, so it's easier. When other people don't know said religion, it doesn't help.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
In Book of Eli Carnegie was trying to do that, but 30+ years of scavenging and societal collapse took away the foundations of knowledge necessary to craft a cult. That. Is. Why. Carnegie. Wanted. The. Fething. Bible.

You. don't. need. a. bible. for. that. actually. it. will. just. make. things. more. complicated.
Cults don't take a lot of civilization to appear. Cult leader is likely the old profession known to mankind.

 Lance845 wrote:
Correct me if im wrong, but isnt it very heavily implied that Eli was on a divine quest from god to get the book to the place that was preserving all the books and after getting it all transcribed from memory he dies a matyr?

That's exactly how I remember it, yes. Plenty of camera shot framing him in a messianic way, him regularly being shown not just as "some hardass who happens to carry a bible" but a devout holy warrior.

 greatbigtree wrote:
You seem unwilling to accept any praise of this movie on the basis that it's just "bad Christian propaganda" because a central prop happened to be a bible.

It's more than a prop. See just above. If I felt like it was a prop, if I had the impression, like you, that the bible in there was just some interchangeable prop that could be replaced by any piece of history and that the significance that people put into it was framed as unreasonable, then I wouldn't have a problem with the movie. But it wasn't the case. And honestly, it's pretty much never the case, because the bible holds way too much symbolism for people.

Yeah, I am fairly certain that with the implication that Eli, who is blind, was being guided on a divine quest to ensure the bible was transcribed and survived, says that within the movies universe not only is there a God but it is specifically the christian god who has a vested interest in the continued existence of the bible.

That is not bad on it's own. But you cannot talk about the bible in the movie as being interchangeable with any other book or simply a prop when the whole point of the movie is that you are actually watching a pilgrimage by a man who is literally guided by God to do Gods work.

And taking that as fact within the universe, the villain wanting the bible to use as a weapon of control takes on a very specific meaning. He couldn't just make up any other thing or use any other book. When your God is real and has real effects on the world it's not some interchangeable thing.

Consider the Transformers. (It's relevant trust me). They are all super religious. They have a divine book (the Covenant of Primus). A Real God (Primus, who is Cybertron). A real devil (Unicron) and real saints (The first 13, created by Primus to defeat Unicron and end their endless stalemate). When their god really exists their religious texts and divine figures cannot just be swapped for any other thing. Megatron takes his name from Megatronus, one of the first 13, known also as the Fallen. You coudln't just name him anything and have it carry the same meaning. Because Megatronus is real, and Primus is real, and the Covenant is real.

The bible isn't just a book in the universe of TBOE. It's an actual divine text with the messages of a real God. And Eli is more or less his latest prophet. Thats not something you can just swap out.

I'll concede that upon rewatching, the bible can not be swapped without changing Carnegie's fascination with that particular "power."

Eli is not completely blind. He has cataracts (cloudy eyes, as seen at the end) but not completely blind. He wears dark sunglasses in the light to make it easier for him to see.

Eli believes he's on a divine quest, yes. He believes he heard a voice when he was young, suffering from PTSD from surviving the bombs and the destruction of the world. He is a religious man, which is more characterization than anything.

The movie does NOT give any overt sign of Eli being protected by divine intervention.

Carnegie's desire for the book is not religious. He does not have faith, as shown in his and Eli's final confrontation. He asks Eli to pray for him. "No, really, please. Pray for me." He wants to become a demagogue. He cares nothing for the reality of a God that exists or doesn't.

The movie does not give the viewer the impression that a God exists in this world. Not this viewer, anyhow. Only that there are people that believe in that God. And people that don't. And people that are unaware of that God because reference to that God has been scrubbed from the Earth.

This is what I mean by even handed. The movie lets the viewer see all sides of the faith spectrum. Yes, the hero succeeds on his quest. That's how fiction works.

I disagree that the Bible is an "actual divine text" with a real God. I did not get that impression, from rewatching it last night. Truly, more is said about the dangers of blind faith than anything. Eli's personal faith stengthens him, but the "Faith of the Masses" is pretty clearly blamed as the source of bigotry and hatred that lead to the end of the world. There is no shortage of blame laid at the feat of the Christian faith, for the fate of the world.

Wow. I haven’t even seen Book or Eli, but just from the discussion, it’s easy to see Hybrid’s view on it is just because he hates anything Christian. “The bad guy doesn’t need the book, he can write anything he wants...blah, blah, blah”; in ANY film, bad people want things they think can enhance their hold and power. That’s such a common trope that if you MISSED it, you’re intentionally being ignorant just to flame it for being a Christian themed movie. Your attitude speaks loudly, and is disgusting.

 greatbigtree wrote:
I'll concede that upon rewatching, the bible can not be swapped without changing Carnegie's fascination with that particular "power."

AND Eli. I cannot be changed to a Quran because then Eli being the only one who says grace and stuff wouldn't make any sense.

 greatbigtree wrote:
Eli believes he's on a divine quest, yes. He believes he heard a voice when he was young, suffering from PTSD from surviving the bombs and the destruction of the world. He is a religious man, which is more characterization than anything.

A religious christian man. Not some weird post-apocalyptic religion he made up himself that has all kind of weird ideas, worshiping things that seemed mundane in the pre-apocalypse world. If he WAS into this kind of post-apocalyptic religion, then sure, you maintain the rational that "the book isn't special in our world, and is misunderstood in post-apocalyptia". But no. It's special to Eli not as an artifact from before the nukes, it's special just in the same way as it is "special" for billions of people today.

 greatbigtree wrote:
The movie does NOT give any overt sign of Eli being protected by divine intervention.

No overt sign, yes. There is no Deus Ex Machina where Jesus walk on the land to bring the blessed to even. But there is plenty of symbolism though.

 greatbigtree wrote:
The movie does not give the viewer the impression that a God exists in this world. Not this viewer, anyhow.

It did that viewer.

 greatbigtree wrote:
The movie lets the viewer see all sides of the faith spectrum.

If "evil atheist want to use it to manipulate other people but is in no way encouraged by the actual religious dogma to do those bad things" and "good christian is a good person who is cool and wins at the end" are the only two side, then yeah, sure, all sides!
Certainly missing the whole "good and well-meaning person being pushed to do bad things in the name of religious dogma" angle but hey I guess it doesn't exist or something?

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Your attitude speaks loudly, and is disgusting.

Sue me. For emotional damage or something. I'm a very bad person with very bad opinions!

Well - I hope this discussion encouraged some people to see TBOE and see for themselves that it is not a propaganda piece. It's just a neatly written post apoc genre film - with some BA Denzel Washington scenes...and ofc Mila Kunis.

If you are a religious person - you might see it as a "God works in mysterious ways to create miracles"

If you aren't you will probably just see a mystic BA on a quest to save his message in a Post Apoc world destroyed by religion and bigotry.

Book of Eli I found interesting, as mentioned by others the Bible itself isn't important it's the knowledge, wisdom and hope inside Eli that's precious and what gets passed to next generation. The post apoc setting has lost the laws and wisdom of civilization and is ruled by cruelty and barbarism, they have knowledge but they don't have wisdom which is a very different thing. The people of the post apoc are simply living as animals but they crave to be brought back into the enlightenment of what was before the fall and so they clutch at whatever remains they can find and even if it's just scraps that gives them the ability to rise up over other men. Carnegie rules over the wasteland but it's not an empire, he wants more and the only way to have that is to piece together the things from before the fall and he feels that if he can find that bible and use it to further his ambitions then it grounds it in providence or greatness which he cannot capture just scratching his way through the rubble. He isn't seeking it for a spiritual or religious reason but because it serves as a tool that he can't simply make for himself.

Like it or hate it the Bible is the cornerstone foundation of western civilization and shaped laws and society for thousands of years so it can't simply be replaced with made up mumble jumble. Because of tradition people often venerate it even if they don't know it well or even understand the messages, which gives it a unique power since It can be twisted and used as weapon but you still have to fall back on it for the original words, those words are what are believed to be it's power. Cults might spring up over a leader creating something but the truly powerful ones that gain the largest followings are ones that springboard off the older big religions. Sure Manson might have had a few dozen people in his Beatles drug cult but they can't hold a candle to some of the truly massive cult sects that have spun off from the big three religions which have created followers in thousands or even millions. Heck, even Hitler tried to give strength to his movement by tying it to old traditions and twisting ancient religious symbols and beliefs. There's something with creating connections to past tradition and history that grants sway over people as it gives an air of legitimacy and legacy even if none properly exists.

The library at the end of the movie symbolizes the hope that the world can be reborn through mankind rediscovering wisdom and order. It's not a Christian message being rammed down your throat, because if that were the case the Bible would not be placed alongside the others but would have been placed on it's own as the only truth. Instead it is placed alongside the others which like the Bible each form the cornerstones of civilization in other areas of the world. The library is the seeds for the future generation and while the light of civilization has been darkened there's still hope that it'll one day be returned by those serving as the caretakers. HSO I think you are so caught up in you anti-Christian boner you're not looking at the larger picture. Yes it plays a large part with Eli's character but it's only one portion of the collective whole that makes up humanity's wisdom that's symbolized by the library.

Can’t sue, and wouldn’t. But I can block you and report your toxic posts. Which I’ve now done both.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
I don't think the Nolan Batmans will be considered a classic by comic book movie fans, but they probably will be by the broader moviegoing action-blockbuster crowd and the critics because they're the poster-child for that whole "you can't translate comic books to the screen with any depth or maturity unless they're, like, super-dark and, like, super-deep brah" school of thought that prevailed until the MCU really took hold.

Uhhh.... that's what Burton's Batman was, following the TV show. super dark and super deep. By comparision

Some peopel do ignore that most of the groundwork was done way before Nolans films by Burtons excellent Batman film - the sequal was a bit of a mess sadly and degenrated as the series went on.

But IMO Tim Burtons Batman is a true classic

It's interesting that even Nolan aped the Burton batsuit. It wasn't until BvS that Batman wore something more comics-accurate instead of the black rubber/armored suit. My preference would be that they stick with a grey suit with armor underneath going forward, mind you.

It's also interesting that Burton's Batman plays pretty campy now. It was a much darker take at the time, given that general audiences were more familiar with the ultra-camp TV show than the comics. But when I watch it now...my tastes have evolved. Marvel movies tend to be quip-fests -- and some are almost straight-up comedies -- but I don't know that I'd categorize most of them as campy.

 Blackie wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
The story of running away only to return to exactly where you started? Just so you can have giant semis being chased by buggies with flame throwers?

The story is lame IMO. Visuals are good but that doesn't impress me anymore. If it didn't have Tom Hardy in it I don't think I would have even finished the movie.

Mad Max Fury Road is entirely about the emancipation of women, a strong matter that is basically never portrayed in cinema with the exception of some boring biopics, and I never understood while americans love biopics so much that every year tons of them are released in theatres.

Those women returned to the same oasis that they escaped from but not as slaves; they also realized that there were no other places to live since the prosimed land they seek dried years before. Also the hobbits come back to their land at the end, and they continue to live there exaclty as they did before their adventure. Does it mean that The Lord of the Rings has no point?

IMHO The Book of Eli and Oblivion were both at Waterworld's level, lol.

The hobbits come back to the Shire after saving Middle Earth from it's greatest evil. They actually accomplished something where they went giving the journey meaning. Just saying the story is lame - could have done anything and their best Idea is to run away from first first half of the movie and run back. I guess it's actually really smart - this has 95% of the film being on a road with semis and flame throwers (this is what the movie is about) that is great if you want action. I'd like a little more progression? Not starting all over mid film to do the exact same thing over again. That is boring.

 stanman wrote:
Book of Eli I found interesting, as mentioned by others the Bible itself isn't important it's the knowledge, wisdom and hope inside Eli that's precious and what gets passed to next generation.

Given that the only thing about Eli that we know will be passed to next generation is the book he memorized, and got transcripted again, you mean that it's not the Bible itself that is important, it's the Bible.

 stanman wrote:
Like it or hate it the Bible is the cornerstone foundation of western civilization and shaped laws and society for thousands of years so it can't simply be replaced with made up mumble jumble.

Oh, it can easily. It's not a great text.

 stanman wrote:
Sure Manson might have had a few dozen people in his Beatles drug cult but they can't hold a candle to some of the truly massive cult sects that have spun off from the big three religions which have created followers in thousands or even millions.

Which three religions are you talking about exactly? Buddhism, Hinduism, and Sikhism?
If you look at how those religions developed, they didn't exactly reached that size instantly, and while Manson was too self-destructive, Scientology survived the death of Hubbard and could totally end up as big as any other religion.

 stanman wrote:
There's something with creating connections to past tradition and history that grants sway over people as it gives an air of legitimacy and legacy even if none properly exists.

Hence why christianity reference judaism, why islam references christianity and judaism, why jainism references all three, and so on and so forth. Totally agree on this. But the cool part is: you don't need to be faithful in those connections! You can just make them up! Which is why Carnegie would have done if he wasn't a simple tool in a christian metaphor.

 stanman wrote:
Instead it is placed alongside the others which like the Bible each form the cornerstones of civilization in other areas of the world.

Woah I guess religions are the only way to reach civilization, and that doesn't include vast swathes of Asia that are neither christian nor muslim .

 stanman wrote:
Yes it plays a large part with Eli's character but it's only one portion of the collective whole that makes up humanity's wisdom that's symbolized by the library.

Human wisdom is apparently 100% religious. Science? Nope. Philosophy? Nada. Old books used to justify atrocities? Sure!

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Can’t sue, and wouldn’t. But I can block you and report your toxic posts. Which I’ve now done both.

That's much more open-minded, thank you good sir!

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 stanman wrote:
There's something with creating connections to past tradition and history that grants sway over people as it gives an air of legitimacy and legacy even if none properly exists.

Hence why christianity reference judaism, why islam references christianity and judaism, why jainism references all three, and so on and so forth. Totally agree on this. But the cool part is: you don't need to be faithful in those connections! You can just make them up! Which is why Carnegie would have done if he wasn't a simple tool in a christian metaphor.

 stanman wrote:
Instead it is placed alongside the others which like the Bible each form the cornerstones of civilization in other areas of the world.

Woah I guess religions are the only way to reach civilization, and that doesn't include vast swathes of Asia that are neither christian nor muslim .

Given the context of that scene I would expect to see Buddhist text placed there as well, the foundational laws for civilizations all tend to have roots in religion so there is value in preserving religious text if for nothing else other than for providing a historical context. It helps to understand western law if you understand Judeo/Christian history just as it would help understand various Asian or Arabic laws if you know the religious history behind it. You don't have to practice a religion but understanding the text provides a lot of insight into the cultural history of groups of people and it provides a backdrop to their values and traditions.

Wisdom is how we reach civilization, compassion, morality and law are what set us apart from savagery, for most people that stems from some form of religion. As much as you may mock religion I don't recall seeing any great atheist societies that have stood the test of time, there's a few countries and empires that have tried to crush religion and most have collapsed as a result, pretty much every civilization on earth has been tied to one form of religion or another.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 stanman wrote:
Yes it plays a large part with Eli's character but it's only one portion of the collective whole that makes up humanity's wisdom that's symbolized by the library.

Human wisdom is apparently 100% religious. Science? Nope. Philosophy? Nada. Old books used to justify atrocities? Sure!

Kung Fury and Space Cop.

They may not be Book of Eli, but that's exactly why we should discuss them.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Kung Fury and Space Cop.

They may not be Book of Eli, but that's exactly why we should discuss them.

I'll see your space cop and raise you - "Equilibrium".

 Xenomancers wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Kung Fury and Space Cop.

They may not be Book of Eli, but that's exactly why we should discuss them.

I'll see your space cop and raise you - "Equilibrium".

FFS, no. You could see the twist a mile away, and the gun kata was just ridiculous. No.

I put Equilibrium with films like Priest and The One in a specific subset of cult classic status. For people who like low budget, high concept movies, these are classics worth seeking out. For everyone else, they're just head scratchers.

Stanman, I completely agree about keeping the Bible in a vault of knowledge to provide some historical context for future generation, but that's definitely not how the mission of Eli in the movie. He isn't doing it for historical context, he is doing it because it's his freaking holy book!

This is getting very off-topic, but



Kung Fury was funny but I don't know about Space Cops.
Anyone else enjoyed The FP?

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Kung Fury and Space Cop.

They may not be Book of Eli, but that's exactly why we should discuss them.

I'll see your space cop and raise you - "Equilibrium".

FFS, no. You could see the twist a mile away, and the gun kata was just ridiculous. No.

I thought gun kata was pretty cool.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIrbNCVCu6I

Also how could I forget - I love this movie so much.

V for Vendetta.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
I'll see your space cop and raise you - "Equilibrium".

FFS, no. You could see the twist a mile away, and the gun kata was just ridiculous. No.

I thought gun kata was pretty cool.

V for Vendetta.

Gun Kata depends on the other guy standing still like a statue, being choreographed. It's completely unnatural and ridiculous when you start thinking about what's happening.

V for Vendetta is actually good, because it's about something and was well-written in its original form. That's why it resonated, and Anon adopted the masks.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Kung Fury and Space Cop.

They may not be Book of Eli, but that's exactly why we should discuss them.

I'll see your space cop and raise you - "Equilibrium".

FFS, no. You could see the twist a mile away, and the gun kata was just ridiculous. No.

I thought gun kata was pretty cool.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIrbNCVCu6I

Also how could I forget - I love this movie so much.

V for Vendetta.

Didn't like the comic or the movie.

Really irritates me that apparently the writer of both / either don't understand anything about who Guy Fawkes and co were or why they did what they did - sad really.

For a start he was just a hired thug and not a ringleader - the majority of the actual plotters being what we would now consider to be far right conservatives.

Confused why its an issue to have a Christian theme to a movie?