Comment

Comment by Marc Draco on April 28, 2011 at 4:20pm

Egan, you are showing your youth by your arrogance, I'm afraid. Don't assume that you're the only person here with an interest in movies. I'm more than twice your age so you can assume that I've seen a lot of movies (I average one a night, if I can find one) and have done for many years.

 

What you failed to notice is that in at least one "memorable" scene, Washington is shot at by multiple bad guys, yet never actually hit. I hated the movie because it's a BAD movie. I admire Washington, he's a great actor - loved him in Man on Fire, Unstoppable etc. but BoE is tosh from beginning to end; incoherent pap. Perhaps when you've gained greater experience, you'll see that.

 

One of the things scriptwriters and directors do when a disabled character has a special ability is draw direct attention to it; this because, unlike a book, we aren't privy to what the character's abilities are or are not.

CF. The tongue in cheek approach of Blind Fury (1989) the terrifying broken glass scene in Blind Terror (1971) - which is a true British classic of the genre. Then we also have Red Dragon (2002) with Emily Watson playing a blind love interest of the serial killer...

Comment by Loren Miller on April 28, 2011 at 4:07pm

Lots of Germans put a lot of importance on Mein Kampf, but that didn't MAKE it either right or essential to life, egan.  Same notation on the bible.  The ONLY reason why I have gotten to know it is to refute it when dealing with people who have swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. 

 

Oh, and I'm not particularly christianophobic - if anything, they'd better damned well be afraid of ME.

Comment by Marc Draco on April 28, 2011 at 3:24pm

Yes Egan, I have seen it. Wasted a couple of hours of my life on it, I'm sad to say. It's been a while, but it left a bad taste in my mouth.

 

I'll point out again - Washington's character was guided and protected by a mysterious power... if that isn't an allegory for the supernatural, then I'm a creationist. Not to mention the time he had taken on his quest - how many years? I forget - but it seemed like a ludicrous amount of time to be wandering around in a wasteland.

 

If they didn't want to make it supernatural, they could have chosen another book - not the KJV, hell, Origin of Species would have been just as relevant. Perhaps we should research who financed it? That would throw a bit of light on this. Philip Pullman's movie adaptations have been tossed largely because some Xian orgs. have protested and similarly the god-awful Narnia nonsense gets big bucks from some right-wing loons. [Not to mention that the Golden Compass was a travesty to the book.]

 

I don't want to add spoilers so others can judge, but we both know what made Eli so "special" and there's no way that could be anything natural: and there certainly was no suggestion that he was a cyborg.

 

 

Comment by Marc Draco on April 28, 2011 at 2:51pm

Quite Loren... Egan, the problem is with the premise. If it's blind faith, then fine - but wait - WHY the KJV? Why no some "non-religious book?" remember that this "book" was going to save the world. That was a major premise of the film!

 

Not only that, but look (if you'll pardon the pun) at Denzel's powers... hardly worldly are they? He's bullet proof AND can kill a guy stone dead with a single shot - without so much as stopping to aim. The guy is clearly under some supernatural direction and/or protection...

 

Which film were you watching?

Comment by Loren Miller on April 28, 2011 at 2:20pm

Utter and total agreement, Mark and TNT.  Sure, I've read Fahrenheit 451 and considered the possibility of "becoming a book," but who here seriously believes that someone could memorize the entire bible?  Oh, and memorize it ACCURATELY, while we're at it?  Poor career move for Denzel, if you ask me.

Comment by Marc Draco on April 28, 2011 at 2:06pm

Book of Eli was a pro-Bible, pro-Xian movie - pure and simple, Egan. I don't see how anyone could miss that. I was also a very poor script that takes suspension of disbelief and slaps you senseless with it. If you watch it again, but through a critical eye, you will probably see that better than Mr Washington's character.

Comment by TNT666 on April 28, 2011 at 1:27pm

How to misunderstand a movie about the revival/preservation of Christianity???? Tastes are personal. I was not impressed. It's niche market is Christian US crowds.

Comment by TNT666 on April 16, 2011 at 5:50am

Mua ha ha ha, I just went to see Paul, boy, they slapped Christianity around some, it was bloody funny! Lots of strategically chosen homages to classic Sci Fi films. Good date film! :)

Comment by TNT666 on March 14, 2011 at 1:36am

In comparison, Inside Job is a poorly executed sorry excuse for a documentary. It scores all its points from an emotional stance and very few from facts and investigation, it's basically a lazy documentary. Endless snippets of interviews where the criminals who run the country are rendered speechless, and why did this dumb documentary maker think criminals would confess to him when they failed to confess to the higher institutions of justice in our society????????? Just seems ridiculous to present a bunch of speechless criminals... The one interesting factoid I gleaned from the film is the high level of corruption at universities that teach economics (Harvard, Columbia) where profs and senior administrators and presidents are basically mouth-pieces for and propagandists for Wall Street. Yes, I was a little surprised by that. What is economics? is it a science, no, it is nothing. The foundations upon which economists ply their snake oil is as shaky as the foundations of religion. sigh.

Comment by Marc Draco on March 11, 2011 at 5:46am

And we call America a democracy... (not that Britain is much better).

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• …
• 14
• Next ›
• Page