The Book of Eli

I was also waiting for this move and ultimately i have watched this movie. And i can say one thing that i want to see this movie again.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Honestly, I thought that my idea of him being blind was wrong towards then end there with Oldman starting looking at the pages: they looked blank, initially. So, I thought that was how it was going to end...foiling my guess, and making me look like a fool to my friends.

😆

Yes, that ending would have been fine, as well. And when he cues into things with his hearing, and bumps into things, it would have just seemed like it was a "more real" take on filming...with mistakes.

But, I still like the current ending better because it makes him more badass...thought the "blank pages" would be better "pwange" against Oldaman's character. I take that back: it was better for him to get pwned by the blind slave mama. The "sting" would not have been as good. In order for him to get the complete "owned" even his slave/wife had to refuse him and insult him. It was a way to make up for how he mistreated her in the past, as well.

Having the pages be blank would have been slightly less over the top, as well. A big problem with the ending is that it lazily implies that any thing that occurred in the movie prior that doesn't make sense or that could be seen as a hole is simply explained with 'god' giving him the power to do it. "Hey, if he's

Spoiler:
blind

Originally posted by dadudemon
I feel differently. Usually, altering the course of a film by a simple word, phrase, or small plot device, is quite lame and poor writing.

What it should do is elegantly change the interpretation of previous events while confirming little tidbits hidden throughout that would be revealed upon a second viewing (for most..some people like Bardock and myself have a nasty habit of guessing crap and pissing people off)

Well I don't think a good twist is simply a word or a phrase or a small plot device, obviously. If that's what the twist is then it's lazy.

Originally posted by dadudemon
You see, I think every ending, including twists are always questionable. That's because I like to write stuff, myself. I always think about how a film could be improved...regardlesss of how good it was. I do that to both improve my own writing ability (lord knows it needs improvement) and also to see what could have been done better.

That's fine. Point is though it should be essential to the film. It shouldn't feel like an afterthought. In this movie I felt as if the writer got maybe half way through the movie and then thought up the twist, then went back and added little 'oh he bumped into things' moments. It didn't feel organic, it didn't feel essential. Like I said, it felt like a novelty and nothing more.

Originally posted by dadudemon
And that's exactly what they did with this film.

Obviously, I don't agree.

Originally posted by BackFire
Having the pages be blank would have been slightly less over the top, as well. A big problem with the ending is that it lazily implies that any thing that occurred in the movie prior that doesn't make sense or that could be seen as a hole is simply explained with 'god' giving him the power to do it. "Hey, if he's

Spoiler:
blind

then how did he shoot that bird while it was flying without even taking a second to aim?" "god powers." "Hey, how was he able to walk right up to someone who was being perfectly silent and know exactly where they were?" "God powers". "Hey, how did he shoot that one guy through the chest with his crossbow thingy? "god powers". It's simply a copout.

In each of those circumstances, it was his hearing that allowed him to do that. I would say the most unbelievable of those moments was the shooting of the bird...however, that could be done.

There are actually humans that live right now that are blind and have slight echolocation at their disposal. Dead serious. Not to the extent of Eli's character, but enough to make you think they the person is not blind.

Originally posted by BackFire
That's fine. Point is though it should be essential to the film. It shouldn't feel like an afterthought. In this movie I felt as if the writer got maybe half way through the movie and then thought up the twist, then went back and added little 'oh he bumped into things' moments. It didn't feel organic, it didn't feel essential. Like I said, it felt like a novelty and nothing more.

Obviously, I don't agree.

It wasn't just bumping into things. It was pretty much everything he did was by sound in some way. He heard things before others, as well.

Everything about his character was about sound. It seems that the whole premise of the film was based on him not being able to see, meaning, it was far from an afterthought, but the entire point of his character's "chosen one". It made his calling as a modern-day prophet much more believable and divine. This movie is obviously intended to appeal to the 70% or so of Americans that are Christians in some form or another.

If I were Muslim...I'd be a tad offended...lol

On another note, did you see any semblence to slavery and "white man" when Denzel [spoiler]got shot. He tried his hardest not to go down, bow to Oldman's character. It just seemed like a "proud blackman" moment and reminded me too much of some other scenes of a black man trying to not lose his proud in front of an a**holish white guy. I liked the scene, personally...and I wish he wouldn't have actually had to get down on a knee. The "proud blackman" continued when he rowed the boat until he couldn't do it anymore. I thought that was just one too many scenes with tha as we already established his pride as an "inexorable servant." It's stuff like that to prevents me from ever giving any film a 10 out of 10. NO movie has ever earned and no movie ever can.[/spoierl]

Originally posted by dadudemon
In each of those circumstances, it was his hearing that allowed him to do that. I would say the most unbelievable of those moments was the shooting of the bird...however, that could be done.

There are actually humans that live right now that are blind and have slight echolocation at their disposal. Dead serious. Not to the extent of Eli's character, but enough to make you think they the person is not blind.

Yes, the shooting of the bird was ridiculous, obviously. And no, it could not have been done by a blind person unless it was with blind luck (hehe). Except for one with god powers.

Originally posted by dadudemon

It wasn't just bumping into things. It was pretty much everything he did was by sound in some way. He heard things before others, as well.

Everything about his character was about sound. It seems that the whole premise of the film was based on him not being able to see, meaning, it was far from an afterthought, but the entire point of his character's "chosen one". It made his calling as a modern-day prophet much more believable and divine. This movie is obviously intended to appeal to the 70% or so of Americans that are Christians in some form or another.

If I were Muslim...I'd be a tad offended...lol

It more or less was just him bumping into things that were hints, and maybe a few times of him turning his head oddly. Nothing complex enough to convince me that these hints weren't just an extension of the endings grand irrelevance as anything other than cheesy schlocky afterthought. The premise of the film wasn't about him not being able to see. If he could see, the film still would have worked just the same, the same themes would have been explored (though the themes in this film are shallow to begin with so that's not all that important). It may have made his calling more divine, but I feel that's canceled out by the fact that it also made nearly everything he did more ridiculous.

Originally posted by dadudemon
On another note, did you see any semblence to slavery and "white man" when Denzel [spoiler]got shot. He tried his hardest not to go down, bow to Oldman's character. It just seemed like a "proud blackman" moment and reminded me too much of some other scenes of a black man trying to not lose his proud in front of an a**holish white guy. I liked the scene, personally...and I wish he wouldn't have actually had to get down on a knee. The "proud blackman" continued when he rowed the boat until he couldn't do it anymore. I thought that was just one too many scenes with tha as we already established his pride as an "inexorable servant." It's stuff like that to prevents me from ever giving any film a 10 out of 10. NO movie has ever earned and no movie ever can.[/spoierl]

I think that's probably just because he has the same face as he did in that scene in Glory when he's being whipped, and tries to defy his white superiors with that 'proud' face.

I might see this movie,look's like a good plot AND action.

Originally posted by BackFire
Yes, the shooting of the bird was ridiculous, obviously. And no, it could not have been done by a blind person unless it was with blind luck (hehe). Except for one with god powers.

lol

Originally posted by BackFire
It more or less was just him bumping into things that were hints, and maybe a few times of him turning his head oddly. Nothing complex enough to convince me that these hints weren't just an extension of the endings grand irrelevance as anything other than cheesy schlocky afterthought. The premise of the film wasn't about him not being able to see. If he could see, the film still would have worked just the same, the same themes would have been explored (though the themes in this film are shallow to begin with so that's not all that important). It may have made his calling more divine, but I feel that's canceled out by the fact that it also made nearly everything he did more ridiculous.

No, there were more than those. Remember him cuing in on the rooftop snipers as he walked into town? He was memorizing their location. It was a foreshadowing of events that were to occur later. There were also several moments where he adjusted where he was shooting after shots were fired at him (cause he was, again, cuing into their location.) That happened in both shootout scenes, multiple times. There was also the clumsy way in which he retrieved items from his bag.

What you see as a haphazard rewrite of a script, I see as one of the most intelligent and attentive to details writing that tried to hide his blindness, but at the same time, make it seem unapparent to those around him in the world he lived in. This is why I liked it so much: intelligent writing, an enjoyable premise, great characters, and an excellent plot.

Also, that last part is where you and I diverge: where you see it making things ridiculous, I see it making things even better.

Originally posted by BackFire
I think that's probably just because he has the same face as he did in that scene in Glory when he's being whipped, and tries to defy his white superiors with that 'proud' face.

Shit, dude, I think you're right. I guess that's what the call "subconscious recognition"? Such a complex thought from a very simple subconscious correlation: the mind is just fascinating sometimes.

Plus he does that face in many of his films at some point.

Saw this las night, I really liked it. I was very impressed with the sound design. The shoot out at the old house was really cool how the camera movements followed the points of impact where the bullets landed and the explosions occured. As I think back, it went very well with the surprise ending in that we find out

Spoiler:
he's blind.

I did think the ending was a bit cheesy,

Spoiler:
not so much that he was blind, but more so that he remembered the entire Bible by heart??? That was very far fetched, however it didn't ruin this movie for me, I still think it's the best movie I've seen in theaters in a while.

I have a better ending for this film, and it would have eliminated the whole

Spoiler:
twist where we learn he's blind, and it would have been far more believable than him remembering the entire Bible by heart. Here's my kickass ending: The book Gary Oldman ends up with turns out to be one of those make shift hiding places for a gun, where the shape of the gun is cut out in the pages so one can fit it in the book and close the book so it looks like a book. Then, the big surprise ending could have been that he downloaded The Bible, book on tape style, to his IPod!!! They practically set the movie up to end that way with all his talk about 'the voice in his head telling him...' That voice in his head would have been his earphones!!! Damn I'm good. Also, the charging of the IPod scene would have been more profound once we learned my hit surprise alternate ending.

Originally posted by Tired-Hiker
Saw this las night, I really liked it. I was very impressed with the sound design. The shoot out at the old house was really cool how the camera movements followed the points of impact where the bullets landed and the explosions occured. As I think back, it went very well with the surprise ending in that we find out

Spoiler:
he's blind.

I did think the ending was a bit cheesy,

Spoiler:
not so much that he was blind, but more so that he remembered the entire Bible by heart??? That was very far fetched, however it didn't ruin this movie for me, I still think it's the best movie I've seen in theaters in a while.

Cool.

And, I'm glad we finally agree so well on a movie again.

Originally posted by Tired-Hiker
Saw this las night, I really liked it. I was very impressed with the sound design. The shoot out at the old house was really cool how the camera movements followed the points of impact where the bullets landed and the explosions occured. As I think back, it went very well with the surprise ending in that we find out

Spoiler:
he's blind.

I did think the ending was a bit cheesy,

Spoiler:
not so much that he was blind, but more so that he remembered the entire Bible by heart??? That was very far fetched, however it didn't ruin this movie for me, I still think it's the best movie I've seen in theaters in a while.

I have a better ending for this film, and it would have eliminated the whole

Spoiler:
twist where we learn he's blind, and it would have been far more believable than him remembering the entire Bible by heart. Here's my kickass ending: The book Gary Oldman ends up with turns out to be one of those make shift hiding places for a gun, where the shape of the gun is cut out in the pages so one can fit it in the book and close the book so it looks like a book. Then, the big surprise ending could have been that he downloaded The Bible, book on tape style, to his IPod!!! They practically set the movie up to end that way with all his talk about 'the voice in his head telling him...' That voice in his head would have been his earphones!!! Damn I'm good. Also, the charging of the IPod scene would have been more profound once we learned my hit surprise alternate ending.

Originally posted by Mairuzu
He spent 30 years alone with it basically. Would it really be that hard?

Well ****...

😂

Originally posted by Tired-Hiker
Yeah, it would dude. Trust me. I know. I know everything there is to know about everything.

lulz

Well, a little more seriously, I knew an old man from church that had our Mormon Doctrine and Covenants mostly memorized. I say mostly because he didn't have all sections memorized and some were incomplete. However, he did have close to all of it done. He said it took him years to reach that point.

The bible is like...10 times as long as that, but a person with a good memory should be able to memorize the whole bible with 30 years.

I could see someone memorizing what happens in the Bible in general, but not as detailed at Eli seemed to have. I still think the whole memorizing thing was way too far fetched and they should have gone with my Bible downloaded in the IPod idea.

Originally posted by Tired-Hiker
I could see someone memorizing what happens in the Bible in general, but not as detailed at Eli seemed to have. I still think the whole memorizing thing was way too far fetched and they should have gone with my Bible downloaded in the IPod idea.

Though it is a bit much for the average person to be able to do, it is not impossible. However, someone as mentally talented as Eli should have no problem memorizing the entire king James version. A good memory is hardly required for 30 years of practice. A photographic memory is not even close to necessary.

Let's put it this way: if Sarah Palin can memorize a couple of pages in a couple of days for a speech, an obvious fictional genius in the form of Eli can certainly memorize over 2000 pages in 30 years.

So, the moral was that the book inspires good things.

These good things involve a man killing to protect the book, a man killing to find the book...when if the book didn't exist, none of that would have even happened...with Eli even going so far as saying that the book was said to have caused the war?

Did someone start writing this movie as a testament to faith and then realise: "Wait, religious faith AND/OR religious misuse actually causes way too much bullshit. Quick, write an ending!"?

Because that's certainly what it felt like.

I really liked the movie apart from the ending.

At least we now know who they should cast in the reboot for

Spoiler:
Daredevil

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
So, the moral was that the book inspires good things.

No. The moral is that a book can be horribly evil and the real message of Jesus' teachings is to help the shit out of each other.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
These good things involve a man killing to protect the book, a man killing to find the book...when if the book didn't exist, none of that would have even happened...with Eli even going so far as saying that the book was said to have caused the war?

No. Eli said that after the war, people blamed the book and they had a "hate the bible" fest.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Did someone start writing this movie as a testament to faith and then realise: "Wait, religious faith AND/OR religious misuse actually causes way too much bullshit. Quick, write an ending!"?

No, cause the ending change occurs a little after the 2/3 part. Eli even says that the book isn't the point, in the cooling tower.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Because that's certainly what it felt like.

I really liked the movie apart from the ending.

At least we now know who they should cast in the reboot for

Spoiler:
Daredevil

.

-AC

lulz

Originally posted by dadudemon
No. The moral is that a book can be horribly evil and the real message of Jesus' teachings is to help the shit out of each other.

So...basically what I said.

The moral was that the book can inspire good things, because that is where we know of Jesus from.

Originally posted by dadudemon
No. Eli said that after the war, people blamed the book and they had a "hate the bible" fest.

No, he said that the book was CLAIMED to have been the cause of the war, and I'm not saying he said it WAS. He said that it was claimed to have been the reason and that the books were burned as a result.

He never put such a spin on it as to say: "People went on a bible hating spree.".

The fact is, it's never explained how or why the book is believed to have caused such a devestating war. If it did, IF, then getting the **** rid of them would be justifiable cause. The one book that Eli had caused a shitload of people to die that wouldn't have died had it not existed. Eli could have gone around and done good things for people regardless.

It's not a movie that makes the best case for the bible, to be honest. It's the most ridiculous message to have: "The bible has some good messages.". Thanks...I didn't know that in 2010. "The bible can be bad if misused by ANYONE (Because killing people for it is as bad as killing people to get it, Eli was blind in more ways than one).". True, because I didn't realise that either in 2010.

Originally posted by dadudemon
No, cause the ending change occurs a little after the 2/3 part. Eli even says that the book isn't the point, in the cooling tower

My mistake, you didn't get that I was making a joke.

I enjoyed it up until the ending where it just didn't have a f*cking clue what point it was trying to make, and so it tried making the most obvious and most cop-out point available.

What bothers me additionally is the fact that Eli said EVERYONE burned the bibles, right? So obviously it was popular opinion that they were to blame (Whether they were or not is unstated). Why, then, does Terence Stamp's character think that religious texts are something that they need to be carrying into a new world?

It obviously didn't do a ton of good when they had them before.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

So...basically what I said.

The moral was that the book can inspire good things, because that is where we know of Jesus from.

No, he said that the book was CLAIMED to have been the cause of the war, and I'm not saying he said it WAS. He said that it was claimed to have been the reason and that the books were burned as a result.

He never put such a spin on it as to say: "People went on a bible hating spree.".

The fact is, it's never explained how or why the book is believed to have caused such a devestating war. If it did, IF, then getting the **** rid of them would be justifiable cause. The one book that Eli had caused a shitload of people to die that wouldn't have died had it not existed. Eli could have gone around and done good things for people regardless.

It's not a movie that makes the best case for the bible, to be honest. It's the most ridiculous message to have: "The bible has some good messages.". Thanks...I didn't know that in 2010. "The bible can be bad if misused by ANYONE (Because killing people for it is as bad as killing people to get it, Eli was blind in more ways than one).". True, because I didn't realise that either in 2010.

My mistake, you didn't get that I was making a joke.

I enjoyed it up until the ending where it just didn't have a f*cking clue what point it was trying to make, and so it tried making the most obvious and most cop-out point available.

What bothers me additionally is the fact that Eli said EVERYONE burned the bibles, right? So obviously it was popular opinion that they were to blame (Whether they were or not is unstated). Why, then, does Terence Stamp's character think that religious texts are something that they need to be carrying into a new world?

It obviously didn't do a ton of good when they had them before.

-AC [/B]

Woah. That's a lot of post.

I ain't readin' all that. I did read the last part where you said that I didn't get you were making a joke. I'm not sure why you would think that despite my amusment with the joke in my reply.