(no subject)

[camwyn]

I... I was planning on seeing The Book of Eli. The previews... it looked like the closest I would ever get to Fallout: The Movie.

And then I read Weaselking's review.

What.

WHAT.



... that's kind of all I have to say.

(Seriously, WHAT.)

Comments

[hortorum.livejournal.com]

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!!??!!

[lilpocketninja.livejournal.com]

FWIW -- I really enjoyed it, although bits were stupid and others were problematic. The female lead made the entire movie for me.

[charliesmum.livejournal.com]

I hadn't paid much attention to the movie, as it looked to me like some sort of war movie and I don't like war movies. But it is even worse than I thought.

So, the point of the movie (spoiler) is that Christians who believe in the Rapture are correct, and the only way to save the remaining people is with the Bible? Huh.

Be cooler if the twist was they were the people taken in the rapture and they're actually in hell.

[ebony14.livejournal.com]

I saw it. I think his review presupposes you believe that the "Flash" is the Rapture. I went into with a fairly rational mindset and found it to be pretty enjoyable. I found the big denouement about Denzel's character at the end to be a bit silly, but for the most part, I thought it was an okay movie.

[lilpocketninja.livejournal.com]

I didn't read it as the Rapture, but YMMV.

...I'm sorry, but I must.

[traveller-blues.livejournal.com]

'Denzel Washington approaching...!'
'What do you mean, Denzel Washington approaching? Fire all weapons!'
(dun dun dun dun dun dun dun....)
"Flash! Aaaaaah! He saved every one of us!"

*hides* :D

-Trav

[http://users.livejournal.com/_geekie_/]

Hm, I saw the movie, and I didn't take "the flash" as rapture either. Seemed to be either a nuclear blast and/or one that was capable of destroying the ozone layer. (There's evidence to support a lack of ozone layer on the planet, with its own set of spoilers.)

Not to get terribly spoilery either on another point, but it seemed that Gary Oldman's character believed that the Bible could be used to influence the minds of the weak, but the opinion of his character at his point on the matter, considering that he was quite manipulative, could be called into question on whether or not the Bible was a "magical book" that could do exactly that to these people.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_geekie_/]

(The following is very, very spoilery, but I don't see how else to make the point I'm trying to make.)

Yes, this movie has strong Christian themes. But it seemed that the message of pure faith (faith as in believing something one cannot see, rather than the Christian connotation) was strong here.

The two main characters, hero and villain, implied that this Bible, as a book, had a great deal of "power". Books have power. They can bring ideas. They can change minds. There's nothing supernatural or religious about that fact. Gary Oldman's character was a manipulative, power hungry man who even said himself that he believed that, through the words of this Bible, he could control the minds of the weak people he ruled over. Eli believed that the Bible could bring people hope - which, of course, is your Christian theme right there.

As I said above, I didn't take the "flash" to mean that the rapture had come and gone. Eli mentions in the movie that the war started over religion, and that the survivors burned the remaining copies of the Bible because they believed that it was all the Bible's fault. As I said, this doesn't seem to hold solid evidence that it was the Rapture that occurred, but rather a religious war that destroyed most of the people on the face of the planet. Turn on CNN. We have wars going on, this very moment, where people are killing one another in the name of religion. It's not fantasy.

The fact that Eli becomes a powerful fighter while in possession of the Bible is really, for the lack of a better term, up to personal interpretation. YMMV and all that. Whether it's his belief alone that gives him the confidence to fight well, or that the Bible actually holds power, is yours to decide really. But do keep in mind that this is a man who has lived in an extremely hostile environment for thirty years, and he has become a survivor at his very core.

Yes, there is religious imagery in this movie. Yes, there is allusion to events/situations in the Bible. It's up to you whether or not you find that to be a movie-killer for you. Some people would find that too heavy-handed for their tastes.

[leeshajoy.livejournal.com]

Good Lord. I hope the RiffTrax crew are planning to tear this movie a new one.

[camwyn]

I don't mind Christian imagery and Christian themes, as a general rule. It's the apparent implementation that bothers me. The "SURPRISE! We've come to take the kiddies from Earth before the horrible firey destruction and DON'T WE LOOK LIKE ANGELS!" aliens in Knowing made my teeth hurt; once bitten, twice shy, I guess. Getting a sudden case of "SURPRISE! Fire came from the sky in the past and nearly everybody's gone but the Bible is going to make things better now!" from this movie rings the same bells. I am... also rather less than enthralled with the genre billing; I had been hoping for something innovative in the post-apocalyptic genre and instead I am apparently faced with a fairly standard 'BELIEVE' thing.

Perhaps oddly, some of my issues also stem from the other side of the equation. I will admit to having an allergy to the King James translation. Partly because I was raised Roman Catholic, and partly because my Early Christian Origins and the New Testament professor forbade us from bringing it anywhere near his classroom. Said it was a lovely work of poetry and a masterpiece of the English language, but horrifically inaccurate as a translation. Beyond that, my brain screeches to a halt at any "People destroyed religion. All of it" themes. Anne McCaffrey lost much of my love when she blandly stated that nobody felt any need to continue religion any more on Pern in any form other than swearwords like 'jays!'; people don't do that. The human religious drive is sufficiently potent and powerful that it has existed in every single culture on the face of the planet, and even in societies that deliberately attempted to eradicate it for widely accepted reasons, it continued to survive. The idea that every single copy of the single most popular and widespread book in human history, except for one, could get destroyed even in a widespread global conflict... that snapping noise you hear right there? That's my suspension of disbelief, breaking. The idea of the total eradication of the Bible out of disgruntlement reeks of "Even though Christians are the majority religion in this country and overwhelmingly powerful to the degree that it's pretty much completely unthinkable for someone who isn't at least nominally Christian to achieve Presidential office, we're still being persecuted".

I don't know. Maybe I jumped the gun. Maybe I'm still sore from hearing about another "there was a terrible light in the sky and then things died and we're not going to go into more detail than that" movie- I'm looking at you, Cormac McCarthy. I'll keep an eye out for other reviews and see how it goes.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_geekie_/]

Perhaps oddly, some of my issues also stem from the other side of the equation. I will admit to having an allergy to the King James translation. Partly because I was raised Roman Catholic, and partly because my Early Christian Origins and the New Testament professor forbade us from bringing it anywhere near his classroom. Said it was a lovely work of poetry and a masterpiece of the English language, but horrifically inaccurate as a translation.

Sadly, this is the case in a lot of Biblical translations, though some are more true to the original language than others. Wish I could have been in your class to see comparisons in the translations. Sounds neat. :D

Continue to read reviews on the movie and then decide whether you're up for going to it or not. I didn't mean to say that the movie was flawless. I noticed that the review you posted did bring up one very spoilery WTF moment that I had - and I noticed the problem immediately, there, in the theater. And there are other worldbuilding issues with the movie. But no movie is perfect.

(And I get your point re: Knowing. It had somewhat a surprise!angels ending and didn't sit well with me, even as someone who identifies as Christian.)

[maxineofarc.livejournal.com]

Well, DAMN, that sounds awful.

[ebony14.livejournal.com]

I'm with you on the King James, but I did think that it made some sense, since it is one of the more popular versions of the Bible, both in the US and the world, so finding a copy of it made sense. As for the fact that it's the only Bible existent, that was a little harder to believe, but I was willing to take that as the common opinion. It felt like a comment that everyone "knew" to be true, but no one had been able to investigate, because books were more of use as toilet paper and tinder than actual reading material. (All things being equal, in an apocalypse situation, I wouldn't be toting around a Bible. I'd be toting around a Boy Scout Handbook.)

As I said, I didn't have too much of a problem with the spiritual messsage. It's there, but it didn't jump in my face and scream about it, like "Left Behind" apparently does. You can pretty much ignore it, except for the plot twist at the end, and I was willing to let that slide (by the time it's revealed, the movie's basically over).

If it concerns you, I'd say wait for it to reach DVD or cable. The film doesn't have any scenes that would suffer from not being on the big screen. That way, you can turn it off without feeling you've spent too much on it.

[batyatoon]

I read the review and now I am sad. :(

[bodldops.livejournal.com]

*CACKLES AT THE PIC*

[silveraspen]

... oh holy cats, and I was so looking forward to this film. Oh well.

[wednesday]

Augh, the comments on that comparing BoE to Left Behind, though. Either major continuity of LB (they fork dramatically). I can't even. Aaaa.

I had to show you this. (SPOILERS KIDS)

[blackswanevent.livejournal.com]

On his travels he runs into many enemies, but he ably dispatches them with his fighting skills.

As opposed to NOT despatching them well? (this sentence rings wrong to me for some reason)

Carnegie is a literate man and he has gangs looking for a book, though the gangs and his own henchmen do not understand why he wants the book

Just like they didn't understand why he wanted that magazine with the picture of the bunny-thing with the bow tie...

Carnegie attempts to stop Eli, having all his henchmen fire at him, but Eli appears to be invulnerable to bullets...

SUUUUUUPPPPEEEERRRRRR DEEENNNNZEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL...

Ok. I'm done.

I just...when the Wikipedia Article makes me-poor little not-so-knowledgable ME-stare blankly at it going, "something's wrong" there's something up wtih the movie.