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.

Just got back from seeing it. Very, very good flick even if you aren't a religious person.

A very surprising twist at the end.

I give it 5 out of 5. Acting was good by all the major players and Denzel Washington was his typical badass self plus a very good story and plot line (don't let the madd maxx theme fool you, it's got plenty of shooting and fighting but still a very serious movie).

The trailers looked good; I may have to see it.

I was nonplussed. It was entertaining in an action movie sort of way, but I didn't really find the premise interesting. I think they could have done more to make Eli into a sort of prophet, which is what I took his role to be; especially seeing as it seems to be based on the story of the apostle Paul.

I'm at a crossroads over this one. I love the look of the film, and love post-apocalyptic settings, and I have liked the Hughes brothers' other films. But it looked very heavy handed, very self important, and that's something Denzel tends to do in some of his movies.

Tell me, how many monologues does Denzel have? More than three?

Yeah, Oldman has a few as well. There are only 3 named, literate characters in the movie. That should give you an idea of how the flick is driven.

Being he is the main "hero" in the movie of course he should be somewhat front and center.

Monologue count was actually very short. I counted only 1 scene with anything that I would describe as monologue, most of his lines were the typical "he says, he/she replies, back and forth banter. Not any real "look at me and listen to me because I'm the star of the movie and I'm important".

In other words no Tom Cruise hijinks going on.

Edit...

Wrong type of monologue. There was some gloating by both but I expect it in a good guy vs villain flick. No really long dramatic speeches like in some movies where the good guy spends 5 minutes telling a criminal how worthless he is before killing him.

i just read the plot on wiki. that what i do with most movies.

dogma wrote:Yeah, Oldman has a few as well. There are only 3 named, literate characters in the movie. That should give you an idea of how the flick is driven.

Fateweaver wrote:Wrong type of monologue. There was some gloating by both but I expect it in a good guy vs villain flick. No really long dramatic speeches like in some movies where the good guy spends 5 minutes telling a criminal how worthless he is before killing him.

Yeah, guess I didn't make it very clear that I didn't mean the monologue thing literally, sorry for being a little obtuse. I'm thinking a film about finding hope in in a world falling apart can go a lot of different ways, some are very good and some are very bad. You can examine the ideas of hope and doubt from a range of different angles and produce Children of Men, or you can keep hammering a simplistic, one-note theme over and over again with speach after speach, and end up with The Postman.

Given I think Children of Men is really good and The Postman is really bad, would I like The Book of Eli?



Oh, and cheers Dogma for reminding me Gary Oldman is in this movie. He's all kinds of awesome, so that's another tick in this film's favour.

I think it did a really job of capturing the feeling that hope is out there.

As I said it has a very strong religious moral of the story feel to it (if it couldn't be guessed at in trailers) but the protagonist does a very good job of making the audience and some of the other "good guys" at the end see that even in the darkest of times there is hope so long as people believe there is hope and that one man CAN make a difference and bring hope to others.

I think you would like it Seb. I didn't see Postman ever but I too liked Children of Men. I think the Hughes Bros. did a great job in bringing the message of hope across in a serious, non-cliche non-sleeper manner and added just enough "protagonist kicks ass" scenes to keep the audience captivated. Nothing OTT or too cliche'.

Kind of has me thinking I should pick up a copy of the Bible and start reading it again.

I thought it was really terrible. The characters made very little sense, rule of cool seemed to overide plot, and the religious message was very heavily ladelled on. The ending was awful. I actually facepalmed towards the end. I didn't like the direction AT ALL, especially the way the various degenerate characters were acting.

If you go to see a post apocalyptic film this year make it The Road. It's much, much better in terms of story and acting.
Seriously.
I'd have to disagree with you Fateweaver, I found a lot of the film to be completely OTT.

i'll agree with da boss here, the Book of Eli is the less successful brother of The Road, the road has character developent, suspence and deep emotions that the Book of Eli could only dream of

Interesting comparison of this film with Zardoz over on io9.com. Makes me think I'll skip Book of Eli as I'd probably agree with Da Boss above.

Da Boss wrote:I thought it was really terrible. The characters made very little sense, rule of cool seemed to overide plot, and the religious message was very heavily ladelled on. The ending was awful. I actually facepalmed towards the end. I didn't like the direction AT ALL, especially the way the various degenerate characters were acting.

If you go to see a post apocalyptic film this year make it The Road. It's much, much better in terms of story and acting.
Seriously.
I'd have to disagree with you Fateweaver, I found a lot of the film to be completely OTT.

Sorry to necro, but I just saw the movie.

If I see one postapoc film this year, I'm glad it was Book of Eli. I read The Road, and that
thing had me depressed for days...

Yeah, best to watch films that cannot emotionally involve the audience.

dogma wrote:I was nonplussed. It was entertaining in an action movie sort of way, but I didn't really find the premise interesting. I think they could have done more to make Eli into a sort of prophet, which is what I took his role to be; especially seeing as it seems to be based on the story of the apostle Paul.

I saw it last week, and enjoyed it immensely. BY the way I don't get the apostle paul connection....at all.


GG

Manchu wrote:Yeah, best to watch films that cannot emotionally involve the audience.

Ha.

The book seriously wrecked me. No way am I going near that movie.

Book of Eli was post-apoc lite. I'm okay with that.

I get what you mean, Mal. Going back to the Vault in Fallout 3 was almost too much for me.



Also, try reading Blood Meridian.

Yeah I saw it, and I was a impressed. The acting was pretty good, and I thought it was a pretty solid film. Much better than that stupid "LEGION" movie I saw the week before...what a god awful mess that was...

Waiting for DVDs. How does it compare with The Road? Which is the better post-apocalyptic movie, in the opinion of Dakka?

Titus Pullo goes out like a bitch.