The Book of ELI

[TotalVictory]

Perhaps this question/topic is better suited for the "chat about anything" section; on the other hand, it also seems a perfect fit here, so let me ask ~~~> has anyone seen this movie???

I saw it earlier in the week and found it treated what are obvious Christian themes with great respect. Given Hollywoods proclivity to treat all themes Christian with some disdain and mockery, I was a bit surprised.

The basic outline of the story has Denzel Washington as this enigmatic mysterious wanderer/traveler who, we learn, is on a mission; to take the last remaining copy of a VERY important book (yes; it turns out to be the Bible) "west" where, it is inferred, is the only place on earth (that earth having been ravaged by an apocalypse so astonishing that all bibles -- save THIS one -- have been destroyed) that it's saving contents/knowledge can be preserved. Huge surprise twist at the end on the movie that makes one reconsider the entire movie given this new information; however, the overall story line isn't really altered by this new information.

Anyway, in light of how we all here imagine and ponder the exact nature and sequences and meanings of end time events, I found this movie very good food for thought. Is this post destruction world to be seen as hell itself? Which leads me to all sorts of speculations about HOW exactly God will use hell as a place of learning, and of restorative justice. ONE copy of the bible finds it's way into hell and ... oh my ... IT becomes the tool of salvation???

Lots of other fascinating themes (including some to feed my ever present in the myth of redemptive violence) but I'm wondering if anyone else saw the movie and what the reactions are...

TotalVictory
Bobx3

[TGB]

Hi Bob,

I saw it a couple weeks ago. Denzil is always great to watch, so no disappointments there. But I had mixed feelings about the themes and assumptions of the movie. And the more I reflect on the movie the more I dislike it.

I had a hard time categorizing this film. It's not exactly Scifi, but it requires a near Scifi suspension of realism. I mean, it really seems incredible to take seriously the situation imagined in the film (every Bible in the world save one [Braille] copy perishes?). Maybe I'm being unfair. But it seemed so far-fetched that I found it impossible step inside of, which viewers need to be able to do for a film like this to make its point...EXCEPT if you're doing straight-up Scifi, which gets it's point across differently). I don't know. Plus the whole violence thing (God empowers Denzil to cut a bloody path on the way to delivering this last copy of the Bible) wasn't my cut of tea. But you can't blame non-Christians for believing Christians capable of and willing to participate in such violence.

As time goes by I understand less and less what the point of the film was.

Tom

[JasonPratt]

If I recall correctly, it was originally based on a graphic novel; which might-or-might-not have made more sense of the story.

It's also possible the story is supposed to be a parable by genre, in which case we'd be going the wrong way to take the details too literally. Whether it's a parable many, or any, Christians would agree with?--heck, I dunno. I know what happens in the film, but I haven't watched it yet. That might make a difference, but based on various reports I'm doubtful. (From everything I've heard and read, it seems more likely that things are done primarily for sake of The Rule of Cool. But see also What Do You Mean It's Not Awesome?)

[TGB]

Rule of Cool? VERY cool. Nice site!

T

[StudentoftheWord]

Hello Bob and Tom,

I saw the movie and it would be classified as apocalyptic diamond hard sci-fi. It wasn't just the Bible that was destroyed, but every religious text, as the premise is based on a war that ended in nuclear annihilation of the world, and whether true or not, all religions were blamed for it instead of the governments involved.

The only basis I find not liking the movie would be based on the wild west nature of a post-apocalyptic world, in which I believe is fear mongering as futurist, not in the violence that a blind Eli had to go through to get the Bible to a former prison. The Latter served as a lot of symbolism, as blind Eli represented faith, and a former prison noting the souls who are delivered by the saving knowledge of the Gospel actually find refuge in a place that was designed to protect society from the hardened criminals inside, but now the best place to protect the Gospel from the lost world outside.

For a movie, it was well done. I figured that Eli was blind when he read with is eyes closed, used a radio squelch (the sound would occur just before he would show up on the scene) as echo location for his surroundings and that only those perpetrated violence were killed off by Eli, but those who stayed silent and did not attack him had nothing to fear. So it wasn't a surprise.

If, that is what the future had in store, the movie was very powerful as Eli was driven by the Holy Spirit to find a book he could never find but could read, withstand every attack on him, and survive long enough to quote out the Scriptures.

[StudentoftheWord]

tvtropes is a good site as a Script writer myself, I love referring to tropes from time to time for ideas.

[JasonPratt]

Also, it's a great place to hunt up new things I haven't seen or read yet and get a sort of composite review of them.

[TotalVictory]

Observations appreciated.

TGB: suspensions of belief are an assumed part of all movie watching so I just try to suspend what the maker of the movie seems to want me to suspend so he can tell his story. It's all understood and is not always easy or doable. Of course, as you suggest, some suspensions are harder than are others.

ELI is supposed to be something of a prophetic figure, maybe even a bit messianic I suppose. Which makes his engagement with violence he witnesses, and chooses not to interfere with, rather awkward for me. (In the movie, he witnesses the brutal treatment of some poor travelers -- did anyone else paste upon this scene the bible story of the good Samaritan? -- and, as if to restrain and refocus himself toward his MAIN TASK, says I must stay on the path... or something like that.) It seems inconceivable that the Christ would stand by and do nothing while innocents are brutalized in His presence.

So maybe ELI fails -- or at least flounders badly -- as a messiah figure. Perhaps just a faithful, and flawed servant or prophet.

But does not the movie, and especially the ending, scream of new beginnings (horrific and apparently hopeless as the surroundings and context are) -- all of which are given new life by the infusion of this book; yes, the one WE revere as the inspired word of GOD! So simply envision the story as happening somewhere in the middle ages where the bible has been given new life -- and promise)

Still, does no one wonder if this movie represents a version of hell?? ie that post second coming context wherein those who were judged to be inadequate are relegated to the refinements and rehabilitations of hell?? Yes, it's all rather a hodge-podge of ideas here in this movie, but might it (this movie) represent hell in some ways??

Still curious about this...

TotalVictory
Bobx3

[Aaron37]

Everyone.

No. Just another Hollywood religious movie. I don't think we can wrap our finite minds around the true horror of Hell.

[james.goetz]

Everyone.

No. Just another Hollywood religious movie. I don't think we can wrap our finite minds around the true horror of Hell.

Does this mean that you don't understand the true horror of hell?

[roofus]

Everyone.

No. Just another Hollywood religious movie. I don't think we can wrap our finite minds around the true horror of Hell.

What does the utterance "everyone" mean here?

[JasonPratt]

Ran,

It's a general address, meaning he isn't replying to anyone in particular. (A37 often begins his posts like that.)

It should have a comma after it, instead of a period, as a mode of initial address. (See example at top of this comment. )

[roofus]

Ran,

It's a general address, meaning he isn't replying to anyone in particular. (A37 often begins his posts like that.)

It should have a comma after it, instead of a period, as a mode of initial address. (See example at top of this comment. )

[kkj]

Hey EU peeps! This is my first post. I've been reading your forum for a year or so. I'm texting this in from my phone, so I'll be brief, but I'm looking forward to engaging in some convo around UR at some point. It's taken me a while to sift through the postings and find the good stuff... Uh, not that everyone doesn't have thoughtful things to say!

So, I thought Book of Eli was a really decent flick. Like TGB, I wasn't super thrilled with the violence part, but all in all there were a lot of redeemable (hehe) themes.