Sounds awesome. I'm looking for a movie to go see with my fiance and this seems like a good choice.

I am looking forward to seeing this too!

[...] Read the Full Article @Big Hollywood [...]

As an Athiest I am going to go and see this one. You don't need to be a bible thumper to enjoy a good movie that shows how power percieved is power achieved. Regardless of the object, if it holds sway over people someone else will always want to use it for thier own purposes. It takes a paragon to resist the urge to bend to the wills of others and not be a simple follower for a higher cause.

Another action movie that doesn't use a shaky-cam? Is this the start of a new trend in Hollywood movies? Please, let it be so.

[...] See the full article from “Big Hollywood (blog)” [...]

Let me guess, Washington is a good guy, the evil people are all White. Got it.

Not sure he's a conservative (one thing's for sure, he doesn't appear to be a knee-jerk liberal) – rumors started circulating he was conservative following a feud with Rod Lurie related to "The Contender". Oldman gave an interview denying the claim:

"This feud, this thing that has bubbled up, has become this sandstorm. I don't even know if it's interesting. It is odd that the word "conservative" has become the sort of politically-correct bad word to call someone. We've even had people call here and say "I didn't know Gary was a conservative," like they were saying I was a Communist. It's been really strange. I have never, politically or publically, claimed affiliation with any party. So this is just a story that got out there, maybe based on a few comments I made in the Premiere piece. And these things just have a way of spinning out of control. "

http://thehollywoodinterview.blogspot.com/2008/02...

this strikes me as accurate observations. surely it cuts to some of the core tensions within the Democratic party's "big tent". e.g. Liberals can't really count on the black vote when gay rights is the issue!

No, they don't, and I don't mind actually going to see a movie that I'm looking forward to, even if it's only once or twice a year. Better than not at all, as in some years past….

I would have been happier if the movie was longer. The ending kinda tapers off. If it was an HBO series it could have much more detail.

I gave you a thumbs-up just for that last line.

One could only hope for more, eh? BTW, the translation isn't the "End Times", it's actually the "End of the Time"(in a cyclical way, not the end of time) …. Hanzo

I'm a heathen but I'm going to see it anyway.

I made the mistake of trying to read the latest King book and he really falls back on some awful cliches regarding Christianity. The token "bible thumper" is, of course, a petty tyrant with a secret penchant for bi-racial porn. Add to that a very Oliver Stone-esque main character (disenchanted former military man) and at least one Mao quote (I didn't get far enough to see if there were more) and the book reads like a liberal wet dream. I'm disgusted I even tried to read such garbage.

I'm not saying anything inconsistent with my overall set of positions. I will say that I've encountered quite a tendency for litmus test appraisal of people around here! ("You are either with us or against us!" etc, etc.)

anyway, yes, the supposition of this movie may not be *that* Armageddon… but its interesting to wonder if it is.

When I heard that Hollywood had made a film that praised the Bible, I looked out my window to see if Hell had frozen over. Man, these are interesting times.

Thanks, John. I am so relieved to have your blessing on this film. (And I am even more relieved to have a Christian film that's a good film. 'Amazing Grace' broke my heart because it was so badly made. Thank God, the industry is starting to change!)

King is from my state and he made the incredible comment that if you don't attend to your studies, you might, in your ignorance, end up in the military. We no longer like King!!!!!

I wrote a post on my blog about King's stereotyping in his new book and posted the quote you mention from King. I also added that my father-in-law, who has served since Vietnam and is a two-star General, happens to have an undergraduate degree in science and an MBA. King is an idiot who has no idea what he is talking about.

Interesting idea. I would wonder about the role or purpose or meaning of a Christian carrying a bible and preaching *after* the whole Christian "story" has evidently reached its prophesied conclusion. Presumably, the character didn't go through the rapture, ascend to heaven, etc. – he's "left behind." He sort of missed the absolutely last boat. So…Does his Bible even mean anything anymore? When he prays, does God hear him? Is there any sort of relationship with God left for human beings at all? And do you suppose the movie is going to ask those or any other questions about his situation? Or is it just an actioner?

I'm not a believer, but I am able to be interested in how a believer deals with adversity.

You do love that phrase, don't you? And as I said in another thread, were Denzel to actually appear naked on said unicorn, I'd be in line for the midnight show! I think Denzel's a great actor. A few missteps along the way, but consistently good throughout his long career.

Yeah, the odds of every single copy of the world's most popular book disappearing seem slight…but hey–the movie's got Titus Pullo!!

I saw it at midnight and I disagree completely. The evil tyrant is the one doing the "community organizing."

Did you see this promo? http://vimeo.com/8543691

Got it.

Sounds inredibly like sen.john heinz-kerry, dosen't it? We don't like heinz-kerry either, what a uxorious twit….

Whew, thank God, I thought I was becoming delusional or someone had stolen your avatar. Your typical pap just cleared that up, thanks(I guess)…..

I dunno… is Denzel to dark skinned and as I recall he has a negro dialect?____JUST KIDDING… so going!!! and taking my white daughter too! thank god for Denzel!

Which book was this?

I think I've stopped giving King chances since "Cell". Guy just quit trying.

you are very welcome.

"The book is the King James Bible, it’s the last one,…"

Just wondering but, what significance should or shouldn't be attached to the type of Bible?

if this movie is intended for Christians… is it for some more than others (Protestants as opposed to Catholics?)

My ego? Hmm not sure what you mean Hanzo, I was commenting on Johns remark about not only Bible Thumpers enjoying this movie. It was my perspective on items of power that are used by people for good and bad that draws me to this movie.

A higher cause can be anything from wanting to fight a common enemy to championing an idea or religion. Being an Athiest of course I don't believe in a higher being but I still understand and apprecite the force this has on the world for both good and evil. If you took offense Hanzo that was not my attempt.

At least you have maintained your sense of humor! …. Hanzo

Considering what I've learned about Revelations – when viewed in its historical context – I would have to say, just from the reviews I've read, one could say the rapture has already occurred.

Does his Bible even mean anything anymore?

I haven't seen the movie yet, so just going by the reviews and trailer, it appears the Bible is talking to him.

And by the Bible talking, I mean the "voice" that tells him it's important.

ahem. No I haven't. I probably would suffer likewise if I ever bothered.

From what I understand (haven't seen it), it doesn't appear to be either. It seems more like it's a simple action adventure flick, with the Bible as just a means to an end – I hesitate to say a prop – but in my opinion, that's the best way for movies to interact with religion.

Don't base the story on religion (unless absolutely necessary as in The Passion), tell a story, and if religion happens to show up, so be it.

Well Aleric, I don't mean to offend you either, but, when you wrote "it takes a paragon(model of perfection) to resist the urge,,," it just sounded condescending to people of faith. As if you were saying people of faith aren't perfect(paragons) like you(hence the ego remark) because of their faith. Of course if this is your opinion you have every right to say so, no offense taken and none intended, Aleric …. Hanzo

I think you answered the your own question.

it’s the last one

Even if you're not Christen or even religious in any way, the Bible is the most important, impressive, read, translated, published, owned, and read book in the history of Western civilization.

Up until a couple of hundred years ago, if anyone even ever saw a book in their entire lives, it was most likely the Bible. The evolution itself of the Bible – from the first written version of the Pentateuch in circa 450 BC, to the current plethora of versions and translations today, it is the most read, published, sold, what ever, book in the world.

That reason alone makes it worthy of a story.

perhaps. but the Armageddon aspect seems like a bit of an elephant in the room.

Wow. Ya'll are pathetic. Only looking forward to a movie because you agree with it's views is an atrocious reason to want to go to a film. You're not film lovers. You're lovers of anything that agrees with your idealogy.

People like yourselves bring this country down and scare the crap out of me. Please stop.

Sorry, you mean in the movie – got you. yes that makes sense.

(thought you meant that Revelations already happened in real life. I was like, whoa!)

That was a big word, I had to look it up on Wikipedia.

I don't read Revelations literally. It's believed to be written some time around 110 BC., and is attributed to some named St. John, who may or may not have been the Apostle John. No way of knowing. It's said that he went into some kind of multi-day delusion, and this is what he dreamed.

Much more likely its an essay on trying to buck up Christians just as Roman persecution was starting to kick into high gear. Much of the imagery is taken almost completely from Babylonian mythology, right down to the multi-headed serpent – Tiamat.

Back in those days, written documents were a pretty rare possession in the hands of common people. And one did not want to be caught in possession of document that not only predicted, but outright called for the destruction of the Roman Empire. Rome made no doubts on their view of sedition.

So rather than write a book stating you foresaw the destruction of the Empire, John wrote it a book, that's heavily sprinkled with images that would be recognizable to Jews and Christians, but would look like gobbledygook to gentiles. The anti-Christ (as in before Christ, not opposite of Christ) was most likely Nero (who started persecution) or Domitian (who really cranked it up).

The book basically tells Christian readers to not lose faith, they will make it through this period of turmoil, and Christ will come again to right all of life's wrongs and punish the sinful.

Probably because it was the first official English translation from Greek and Latin (the Vulgate).

There's always a good portion of controversy with every new translation. My guess is this is a way to take all those arguments off the table, because the King James version is sort of viewed as the ultimate English version.

But that's just my guess.

It's an apocalyptic wasteland with a dearth of resources and amenities, yet the women still manage to have some makeup, manicured eyebrows and no hair on their legs.

The movie would not have quite the impact if the last copy of the Bible was say, a children's version, or one of the Gnostic gospel versions, or one of those versions translated into very modern language or hip-hop.

The Theory of Evolution has had a huge impact for good and evil in the world, and I believe in Evolution with the same conviction that I believe in God.

Just food for thought.

Well, if by "magically trick" you mean disgusing your real motivations, plans and personal histories and running as a moderate, then right out of the gate governing as a Marxist loon like the past 2 democrat presidents, I completely agree.

You are correct, my mistake, AD, not BC, thanks for catching. And you're probably right on the spelling of Ante, spelling has never been my strong point. In Revelations, the Anti-Christ must show up before Christ, so I explain it people using the analogy of anti-pasta, the dish before the pasta.

Every week in Mass, I do say "The Word of the Lord," which is kind of what got me into this place. I asked myself, do I really believe that? So I decided the best way to find out was to see who said so.

The Catholic Church's official position (I asked a Priest) is the Bible is what it is, they take no position on how what got into it. Which is a pretty smart move, else you get into arguments over who translated what, and where did they get the sources.

So I figured there had to be finger prints on who put what where in the Bible, and what a crazy world the history and the historical context of the evolution of the Bible turned out to be. If I was looking for easy answers, that was definitely the wrong place to look.

The earliest, historically documented existence of the Torah was around 450 BC, following the return from the second exile in Babylonia where they spent 40 years, roughly two generations. It's entirely probable that those 40 years in a foreign culture may have impacted those two generations.

And that theory is backed up by a lot of references in Revelations (and also sprinkled through out the Old Testament) of references that look an awful lot like Babylonian mythology.

"the ultimate English version"

nuff said! Thanks

Yes, but also the Victorian style prose. All those Thee's and Thou's and the Lord Smiting the enemy. Good old fashioned self righteousness.

The newer translations, while technically more accurate, really lack that old time fire and brim stone. They've still got essentially the same meaning, but not the same 'better drop to my knees now and start praying for redemption' kick.

(And this is no way meant as a disparagement in any way against the King James Version)

((Want to be careful after the Robert E. Lee incident in the last Avatar thread))

I think this movie sounds in-offensive on all of those levels.

indeed, from my own secular vantage, here we have a movie where organized religion is outlawed after it is blamed for the recent Armageddon. No where is it stated that it was this or that organized religion that led to the Armageddon- no distinction is significant here. Sounds pretty good so far!

Then the conflict is about a guy who has a personal religious quest (his "freedom of religion" which we can all root for!) against a guy who wants to use the last copy of the Bible as a tool to exploit the masses! (e.g. he wants to bring back organized religion!)

Sounds pretty awesome to me!

Re Mr. King … there are very very few books that I regret having read … 35 years later, I regret having read King's books when I was an adolescent. I still regret it. Needless to say … I don't do movies made from his books. He is a truly messed-up person.

This has been my observation also. There were more abortion clinic murderers on LA Law than there ever were IRL … including Tiller's Killer.

While Christians answer to Jesus for salvation, Jews answer to God. Never forget Jesus Christ was a gift from God to the gentiles through the Jews.

I'm guessing you saw the movie "The Mist". Your liberal-imagined stereotypical angry verse spouting bible-thumper was the one who turned everyone against the hero and his coterie, which drives them out into the unknown from their hiding spot. Of course the small-minded white folks all go along with this… Not a fun stereotype.

"We'll have the health care negotiations on C-Span!"
"Gonna have it all televised on C-Span!"
"C-Span!"

Some us WEREN'T fooled. The other ones are really REALLY angry.

What's it about? Katrina refugees "rising above" the evil Bush regime oppressing them after causing a terrible hurricane?

The Road Warrior on steroids with a Christian theme? WOW! I am totally stoked to see this flick!!! I haven’t been to a movie theater in years because of rude adult and kid movie patrons talking to each other and using their cell phones during a movie. But, I will go to the first matinee where the least of those jerks roam. Avatar can wait till the dollar Red Box at Walgreen’s. I am pondering if the Koran survived the Apocalypse.

Don't worry, I'm just kind of anal that way. And smart move on the Catholic Church's part; probably helped to avoid the continual splintering that characterized the post-Reformation Protestants. I say that, incidentally, as a Protestant. Having read a little periodically on Revelation and its relation to the rest of the Bible, I know there was some controversy within the Church during the compilation of Holy Writ on including that book, not only over its authenticity but also from the concern that if taken literally, it could encourage some revolutionary, even nihilistic tendencies among believers. Furthermore, throughout the medieval period the Catholic Church's official stance on Revelation was to discount the idea that the apocalypse was imminent, maintaining instead, from Augustine on, that the current age was the millenium and the Last Judgment would follow. This may account for some of the traditional hostility between Catholics and fundamentalists (such as the Left Behind series' dismissal if not demonization of the post-Rapture Church).

If you look at Rotten Tomatoes, the critics went for Mad Max (1979) with a positive 95%. That score even includes more recent reviews. I always enjoy this silly apocalyptic survival movie, but I don’t recall any real “message” it was trying to convey.

As of today Rotten Tomatoes has about a 50-50 split. If you look through the reviews it looks to me like the reviewers are bothered by the Biblical theme. If Eli was named Jihad and carried the Koran I bet the movie would get the 90+ positive score.

Just saw this. Moving. You won't stop thinking about it. See it.

The…uh…nuclear fallout keeps them hairless and burned their makeup on permanently?

Saw it this afternoon and really enjoyed it. But the crowd wasn't very big and the theater I attend is usually a good indicator of a film's box-office success. I'm afraid Eli might not be a success. And Avatar (3D) had a line already forming for the 7PM show.

[...] See the full article from “Big Hollywood (blog)” [...]

[...] See the full article from “Big Hollywood (blog)” [...]

FINALLY- A movie I'm really looking forward to seeing!!….

Interestingly, this is the third review I've read on this movie. The first here and the second in my local paper yesterday.

Considering the religious references in the first review, I was reading the review in the paper carefully to see if they hit on that point. And surprisingly, not really. They do mention the Bible, but no disparaging remarks against those who might happen to attend Church on occasion.

Thank the Lord.

Awesome! I'm seeing it tonight on in a DLP showing — can't wait.

I probably won't see it in theaters mostly due to the fact that I live in the middle of Alaska. But when it comes out on Blu-Ray I will definitely be ordering it on Amazon!

About the only thing I'll throw out here is that by the end of it you realize that there was some serious Divine Intervention going on. Let's just say at least one verse Eli quotes in the movie is actually quite literal in his case…

But yeah, it ain't preachy.

What part about post-apocalyptic did you not get? There's no "driving route" left that's easy. Plus having to scrounge up food and water along the way can take up half a day or more for survival. Oh, and let's not forget the roving bands of cannibals and marauders who could end up costing days or weeks to avoid. There's no hard marching either, as exhausting yourself with no assurance of water or food will only get you killed.

I also suspect Eli doesn't take an exact beeline route west either. There's reasons for that, but it involves some huge spoilers. As I posted elsewhere, one of the Bible verses he quotes is quite literal in his case.

What part of "Lewis and Clark did it in three years" don't -you- understand? There were no driving routes for them, either. There were roving bands of violent Indians — one was very nearly the end of Lewis on the return journey. They also had to scrounge up food and water. There we no maps. The difficulities that faced them were every bit as daunting as the ones that faced Eli.

If he'd just managed to make 4 miles progress per week and had traveled -double- the normal driving distance, he would have made it in less than 30 years. That's about 1 hour of walking per week and backtracking more than the entire width of the country. Does that leave enough time for scrounging for food and avoiding "roving bands of cannibals" for you? Yeah, he was avoiding exhausting himself all right. Not to mention, you have a lot more food to scrounge for when you take 30 frickin years to make the trip.

I'm sorry, no matter how you spin it, 30 years is a ridiculously long amount of time to go from coast to coast.

Yes, of course, giant scorpions explains everything. I suspect there were giant scorpions that were only repelled by whorehouses. If that were the case, it would take me 30 years, too.

I understand all that you are saying but, I'm sorry let me try to be more clear…
Is there something significant in this story that the last one is a King James version?

"IF, that is, the movie avoids not-too-subtle hints that I am evil"
WELL, are you?

I've seen plenty of ads and many billboards up in the last few weeks. Plus, in one of the rare true situations in their defense, mainstream media is justifiably busy with two much more major stories this week: the Haiti earthquake, which renders pretty much everything else trivial, and the NBC/Tonight Show debacle, which is arguably the biggest entertainment story in a year, based on the hype of Leno's exit and the gobs of money involved. Not sure the film would be criticized more or less if the directors were white…most reviews touch on the religion angle, but with widely varying respect/derision.

Good science fiction doesn't knock you out of the story with jarring internal inconsistencies. Good science fiction makes you believe the world you're reading about or watching could actually exist because it makes sense within its own premises.

Very much so. We all believe in different things, doesn't make us wrong, as long as we allow others to believe what they wish is all that matters. Good wrapped in a different package each time is still Good.

I would not call it hyper gory at all. A few people lose their heads, but it is very fast. The movie has a lot of walking and talking with a few quick and dirty fights.

I've seen–not I.

He did that in Duma Key as well. One of the daughters of the main character happens to be dating a Christian, who, of course, turns out to be an a$$hole. And I think there were some anti-Republican comments as well.

It's a shame because I usually enjoy his work (mostly the old stuff, where funnily enough he didn't do that).

But that takes me right out of the story.

Maybe as good as the end of Brideshead Revisited when Charles Rider realizes it's the Eucharist that sustains the World.

Good is good.
Bad is bad.

Good, good.
Bad…bad.

Good….er, bad.
Bad….good?

Sorry – I went all "Thumb Wars" on you. Couldn't help myself.

Hmmm, he does tend to wear brown coats.

hey Aleric, the only will you have to bend to is to giving up your own demons and the only one you follow is the Father, Son, Holy Spirit. please check out the Bible bro. it might be something you would find uplifting.

The review made the movie look interesting. My definition of Christian is a little different – actually a lot different – than his, especially at the end is very telling;

"….the all-kinds-of-awesome casting decision to put Tom Waits in a post-apocalyptic Western, or the film’s most Christian moment – most generous moment – when a nod of respect is granted to our friends…….. who have found God through other faiths."

There is no salvation in any other, so I'm a little confused by what "finding God" means:

Acts 4:12
Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

John 14:6
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

And this is from my King James Bible. "Finding God" is not interchangeable with eternal salvation.

Well, at least you finally admit it!!!!

[...] See the full article from “Big Hollywood (blog)” [...]

That's what I mean – faith in God is one of the strongest tools people have in surviving and overcoming adversity. As such, faith in God is an interesting subject to me. I tend to look at it psychologically rather than spiritually, but I don't deny its power and its centrality to some peoples' lives.

I keep referring to the movie "Black Robe." The main character is a Jesuit priest on a harrowing journey through the Canadian wilderness. His faith lets him overcome hardship, torture, abandonment by his comrades, and even the apparent ultimate futility of his journey. I found him an interesting and admirable character.

You're probably right. Like I said, I'm not a believer so I've never really studied up on The Apocalypse. Don't know the details. Having lived through the Cold War, I always figured we'd blow ourselves up before God got around to us.

I agree. However, the idea of the Apocalypse – or at least *an* apocalypse – seems fascinating to a lot of people. Even "unbelievers" get into it sometimes.

Yeah, not gory at all. The goriest fight is likely the first one, and it's all done in silhouette so while there are a few blood splatters it's not really all that bad.

Also, something that's not mentioned a lot is that the reason only one Bible is still around it that people went proactively out of their way to destroy it because it (and Christianity it seems) were blamed for causing the Apocalypse. Further metal tends to be a bit more durable than paper and there's a lot of ammo around. It's also mentioned indirectly that ammo is running out, as multiple people use the line "I don't think that's loaded" when Eli pulls a gun out, often followed by the line "they're never loaded." In short, ammo is in short supply, and there's a lot of nods to that (Eli hunting with a bow and arrows for instance).

Wow, that's a blast from the past – I saw Zardoz.
Back in the 70's. Great find Yonder…

Not quite. Are you familiar with the Geneva Bible?

http://www.reformed.org/documents/geneva/Geneva.h...

My son is too busy flying missions keeping this country safe for all of us. Even the liberals.

Oh yes, the lefties are already up in arms over this one… which makes me want to see it even more

I've been over here for about 6 years now. The 2004 presidential election was the real kicker. Kerry for president has to go down in history as one of the worst ideas of all time, and I was screamed at for not supporting it.

One thing I can say about the right, at least they're a lot more polite, reasonable, and for the most part, if they don't agree with you, they don't go viral. That is refreshing.

I think we should take comfort in someone finding God regardless how they got there.

Personally, I don't think Hollywood's trying:

I think they luck out, and when we point it out to them, "Hey, that's us!" they get all saccharine-sweet on us, and tell us, "We meant to do that" (all the while, scratching their heads at their misfortune of making on honest Christian film).

I maintain Oldman is quite possibly the greatest actor of all time. The man is incredible.

They certainly did!! Hilarious and so predictable!

Absolutely agree.

I just saw the movie and thought it was excellent. The pacing at times slowed a bit, but it's everything Nolte says it is.

As to the ending re coming to God in different ways, I saw it in a similar way but also that good religion, faith, believing in something bigger than yourself, giving yourself to God, were important to people, both as individuals, and to mankind as a society/civilization. It showed respect for religion in general, which is better than most Hollywood movies shows.

It wasn't all Wrath of God, Born Again Christian, literal Bible believing type of Christianity, so those of you who do subscribe to that interpretation might not "feel the love", but you can't deny the respect that God and Faith and even the Bible itself is given in this movie.

I highly recommend it. It got a round of applause at the theater we went to. I live in Southern CA, but in a more conservative suburb, so that's probably why.

Yeah, I guess I'll have to see the movie to interpret exactly.
Interesting.

@CgntvDssdnt

What's wrong with organized religion?

I bring this up because people (justly) applaud when governments, businesses, armies, etc are well organized and thus highly effective. However, religion that is organized according to a clear doctrine is considered somehow "scary" or "wrong."

Can someone help me out with this contradiction?

This movie was a pretty good story of the life of Elijah (Eli) and Elisha (Salara). They could have made the ending match up more to the actual Biblical story, but everything else fit really well.

[...] John Notle said over at Big Hollywood, “Eli” in the end is a genre movie. But what a genre movie — possibly the best of [...]

I doubt King is an idiot. He knows what he's talking about. He's a writer who wants to continue being published and publishers (except for a token few) are just as propagandistic (is that a word) as Hollywood or mainstream media. Who knows what he really thinks? Just as who knew what the average Russian thought when the Stalinistas were in office. I have never read a Stephen King novel and never intend to – in my opinion, he's a hack writer — but AS a hack writer, he has to kowtow to the editors and publishers all of whom are Lefties. That's where the Left kicked the Right's butt. The Right played by the rules. The Left infiltrated first the bureaucracy, then media, then education, then the arts. BH is the first attempt by Non Leftists to enter the arts.

Saw the film last night. Not for the squeamish re violence. Powerful acting by Denzel and Oldman. (Anyone who saw the old St. Elsewhere t.v. show spotted Denzel immediately. He stood out among all the cast). Unlike Obama, Denzel IS post racial. He's just a man, no color to him. His shoulders (at least on screen) have no chops. He doesn't play strutting black guy out to tell whitey off (as so many do) — he's just a character who happens to be black, not a black character. I suspect Ho' wood uses white guys as villains just as they refuse to present radical Islamists as terrorists — they're too cowardly to take the heat from the Jacksons and the CAIRS that come out of the woodwork like roaches in a greasy spoon. Easier to just put a white guy in the role. Like the white guys in hoodies in the Brinks (not somebody else) commercials. It's so ridiculous, it gets a laugh every time. (Sad for the race baiters, whites are harder to insult that blacks or Muslims – we tend to laugh at the unsultor not the insultee). Easy to put John Goodman in a white, hooded sheet ("O Brother…") when you know if the KKK still exists, it's toothless. Easy to insult Pat Robertson who's nearing 90 and the worst he'll do or has ever done is pray at or for you. Not so easy to p— off a Black Panther with a billy stick in his hand or a Jihadist who might saw off your head.

John, did you notice the couple with the house out in the dessert were named "George and Martha" (the name of the couple used to defeat the Hillary Care bill?)

Good movie. I recommend those who like a lot of fighting and violence see it. I recommend those who like great acting see it. I recommend those who like apocalyptic films see it. It was especially thought provoking as we watch a post apocalyptic Haiti deteriorating.

Need some help/advice here.

1. BH has suddenly entered the wrong email address for me. IF anyone in intense debate is replying to me, it isn't getting through. Anybody know how I can change it.

2. I cannot seem to find out how to log on. The BH computer recognizes me when I visit, but as a guest.

3. As a guest, I cannot edit nor vote.

4. AND they have the wrong email.

Anybody know what I should do?

Kids who think the post-apocalyptic genre is started with video games are funny. A game released in 1997 is a standard for "traditional. Hah. I was reading post-apocalyptic fiction when you were still thinking toilet training was a good idea.

How about about The Stand or The Postman (the book, not the execrable movie), both of those involve cross-contintental journies in a post-apocalyptic America. I used a wilderness example because that is the closest analog to a real-world example of crossing the continent with primitive tools and transportation that we have. You'll have to explain, specifically, how it gives a wrong estimate. Want another example? Bento de Gois, inspired by the writings of Marco Polo, traveled 4000 miles across Central Asia in three years around 1605.

A 10-15x increase in travel time is senseless.

Writers of post-apocalyptic fiction are, by and large, not great experts in wildnerness survival and cross-country trekking. It happens all the time when authors try to sound knowledgable about subjects they aren't familiar with. It passes fine for the uncritical reader or watcher, but when someone who knows something about the subject encounters it, it jars.

As for "traditional post-apocalyptic tropes" — there was a time when that used to be called "cliche'd." There are so many different possible states for the world after so many ways of ending it, a writer who uses "traditional post-apocalyptic tropes" is being lazy.

Husband and I saw it last night. The 30 year thing was weighing on us too until we got to the end and understood the necessity of all that time. It reminds of all the times that God tests his followers by sending them into the wilderness. I also like the way almost all of Denzel's dialogue was about faith or quoted scripture and yet I never felt like I was being proselytized to. I guess Eli's mission and purpose was made so clear that the idea that he might be preaching to the crowd never came up for me.

Now, if they make a sequel, that feel might have to change.

And God allowed Jews to be carried off into Assyrian and Babylonian captivity.

Just because a person is of a certain ethnicity or cultural identity does not mean they personally and individually have a relationship with Yahweh, the God of the Bible. (That goes equally for those who assert they were "born Christian.")

In Luke 24:27, the newly resurrected Christ Jesus is speaking with two of his disciples. "Beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them >in all the Scriptures< the things concerning himself." Since at this point none of the New Testament had been written, we deduce that Christ Jesus was in fact expositing the Old Testament, the Hebrew Scriptures.

If Christ Jesus is in fact God (see John 1, Colossians 1, and Hebrews 1, all of which assert this fact), and if Christ Jesus was speaking accurately as recorded in Luke 24, then anyone who interprets the Old Testament in such a way as to exclude Christ Jesus is engaged in pagan heathenism and blasphemy.

Eli hears from God after the apocalyptic event has occurred, so one could argue that the film adheres to Biblical prophecy – if it occurs during the Tribulation Period, all the believers will have already been raptured, but Eli has not been a believer until now.

I just like hearing that Gary Oldman is a conservative when he was already one of my favorite actors; ditto w/ Denzel Washington being a Christian.

Evolution and Creationism CAN live in the same space. I do not understand why so many Christians find it implausible that God could have created creatures which would then adapt to their environments. Isn't that what Man has done with the invention of Cars (Need to get there faster), Trains (Need to get there even faster), Planes (Need to get there the fasters) or Space Shuttle (Go where no man has gone before)? I mean if you look at it that way you can understand how animals would be able to evolve as well to suit their environments. As far as evolution from apes to man, that is implausible as why would some evolve to man and other remain as apes in the identical living conditions, it defies logic.

I saw this movie last night, and I found it both incredibly cool and emotionally moving. This is a great, great movie, and it is deeply respectful to Christianity as a whole. For those who are pedantically quoting scripture and saying the events in the movie don't fit into your perceived biblical timeline of end times, I honestly believe you are completely missing the point. This movie had a message and is very Christian-centric, it was not purporting to be scripture but is only science fiction. However, it is very very good science fiction.

I can't think of another major hollywood movie in living memory which featured divine intervention and a Christian protagonist who is actually (gasp!) kind and respectful towards others, not cruel but also not weak, and such a fantastically good portrayal of the power of Faith.

I loved it, and I have been thinking about it ever since I left the theater. It's a powerful and moving film. "Walk by Faith," as Eli says.

I also find it particularly telling how many liberals absolutely *hate* this film. Over at rottentomatoes the forums are filled with atheists complaining bitterly about how 'preachy' this movie is. Ironically there is no preaching in the movie at all, as Eli is a prophet who is specifically not called to preach, his calling is to keep the scripture safe and deliver it intact to where it needs to be at the exact time it is needed. There is not one line in the entire movie from the main character where he preaches to anyone. Instead he serves as a mute testimony of the power of living your Faith.

I also think it's telling that the same people who are up in arms over Eli's pro-Christian faith stance seem to have no problem with other movies that push faith in other religions (such as tree-hugging, for example).

Anyway, I now this thread is a little old now but I wanted to add my comment that I thought it was a kick ass movie with a beautiful and poignant message on the power of faith (no preaching in it though).

Just wanted to say that it was a great review that you gave and I agree with you 100%. Most Americans, most Christians, don't like anything too preachy, even from their own side. Even Jesus wasn't that preachy. Jesus had a way of speaking, making you want to listen, and letting you decide for yourself if you wished to follow his teachings. At least that's what I got out of much of what I've read of the Gospels.

I just wasn't raised with the whole "damnation" thing.

ever hear of "too much of a good thing"? <– that statement represents a "contradiction".

This movie supposes that there is a devastating global war and religion is blamed. Obviously someone in this future scenario has a negative attitude toward religion.

Further, the baddie here played by Gary Oldman wants to "get his hands on the precious book, so he can distort its teachings and have total control over the minds and spirits of the people who live in his empire of revived, Old West-style towns." His character is NOT one of these horrible secularists that wants to stamp out all religion.

One very cliched accusation – everyone from Any Rand, Karl Marx, even President Eisenhower – has noted the potential for religion to be used negatively in the way that Oldman's character intends.

I know just the spot to lay the target on the ground for that Lawn Dart to land.

ummmmmmmm. …..let me get this straight – if i am not a CHRISTIAN, i shouldn't see this? the last 20 minutes is about FAITH?? huh? i didn't know that CHRISTIANS cornered the market on faith….

damn.

I don't think I've seen this mentioned in the 3 pages of comments I just read, so here goes:
If you liked this movie, especially because of both the fascinating problems and hope that a "faith finds a way to survive" aspect, read Walter Miller's "A CANTICLE FOR LEIBOWITZ". You will recognize aspects of the premise if you've seen "Eli", but it goes in a much different direction. One of the most disturbing post-apocalyptic things you'll ever read and one of the strangest sources of (weird, very weird) hope you will encounter outside of the Book of Revelation. Like the end of "Brideshead Revisited", but on a cosmic scale, the ending scenes will haunt you and rip your guts out if you have the biblical and literary prepartion to understand it.

BTW – the whole "rapture" and "tribulation" thread that you see in so many of these comments is bad theology based on bad readings of the Bible. Didn't even exist until about 100 years ago. Misses the point entirely and has been immensely destructive.

"…or the film’s most Christian moment – most generous moment – when a nod of respect is granted to our friends who have found God through other faiths."

Hm, I will have to see what you mean by this when I go see it. Respecting all people and their beliefs is fine*. But if a film claims to be coming from a Christian viewpoint, then it cannot contradict the most basic of Jesus' teachings, which is that He alone is the ONLY way, the ONLY truth, the ONLY life, and that no one comes to God the Father except through Him. There is no notion of "finding God through other faiths" taught in the Bible. Quite the opposite. Don't blame me, Jesus is the one who said it. Look up John 14:6 and 1 John 5:9-12.

*Unless we're talking about Islam, which directly commands conversion, subjugation or death for unbelievers like me. I will respect Muslims who choose to oppose this portion of their ideology. But have zero respect for Islam itself because it teaches zero respect for me.

I saw the film last weekend with my wife. I loved the film. I found it interesting that whether you're a Christian or not you can still come away from the film with some interesting things to think about. If you're like me and don't subscribe to religion, the film is still very enjoyable and thought-provoking. What I took from it was not so much the "power of God" aspect, but the "power of religion and faith". Eli has spent 30 years on a journey because of his faith. Whether God is guiding and protecting him is open to discussion, but the point is HE believes it and that gives him the strength to carry on. The main antagonist has no such faith. He is simply looking for a way to expand his power and control, and he knows very well that religion can accomplish that. He sees religion, and Eli's bible, as tools to control what's left of society, knowing that if they become believers they will follow him blindly.
There's something for everyone here: Christians have a strongly pro-Christian message. Non-Christians have an interesting film about the power and potential misuse of religion.
All in all a solid film, made much more watchable by Denzel's amazing, understated performance.

Well said! Remarkably well said.

That Jesus was always causing a ruckus!

"It takes a paragon (to resist the urge to bend to the wills of others) and (not be a simple follower) for a higher cause."
Is that how it's meant to be read? Way it's phrased, it comes off as…
"It takes a paragon (to resist the urge to bend to the wills of others) and )not be a simple follower for a higher cause)."
…which definitely could offend, and may be how it was read to prompt inquisition (no, not the Spanish variety!).

You must be logged in to post a comment.