  I really wanted to like this film. I really did. The imagery looked cool, and the prospect of Denzel Washington being a complicated bad-ass was intriguing. But unfortunately, I'm left with nothing less than utter disappointment. The logline says, "A post-apocalyptic tale, in which a lone man fights his way across America in order to protect a sacred book that holds the secrets to saving humankind." Sounds intriguing, right? I mean, you kind-of know the jist of what that book is going to be, but when you finally find out, you can't help but roll your eyes. ***SPOILER ALERT*** They hide the content of the book for awhile and never come out and say what it really is until later: the last copy of the King James Bible (all of the others were destroyed long ago). I say I "rolled my eyes" not to be disrespectful, but the whole story is framed around the idea that the Bible is going to save mankind -- literally. People are willing to die and kill for it only because of it's beautiful words and it's potential power to reshape mankind into the quality people we once were (? -- more on this later). Eli (Denzel) thinks he's doing God's will, and Carnegie (Gary Oldman) thinks the book will bring him power -- maybe not supernatural power, but the power to rule over people via religion. I think these are both fascinating and potentially deep concepts that could have been (and should have been) thoroughly explored in this film, but the filmmakers (The Hughes Brothers) completely miss the opportunity with boring action cinematography, cliched scenes, and wasted on-screen talent. When I say cliched scenes, I mean, every single scene is lifted right off the page from every other action film you've ever scene. Back to back, we see the bad guy (Oldman) twisting the knife in everyones' back to get what he wants: "he'll rule this town and nobody's gonna get in his way." Then there's the quiet wanderer (Washington) who's on a pure and holy mission. He's got to deliver his sacred book for the sake of humanity, and he just might slice and dice a few thugs along the way to get it. Well... more than a few. There are far too many scenes of "future rednecks" getting in his way: redneck, "Wellll, looky what we got here? Got ourselves a wanderer who done wondered into the wrong part-o town." or, "Welll, this here girls' kinda purty. I think I'll rape her 'cause that's all my filthy, illiterate ass knows how to do -- yee-haw!" Does he want to kill them? No of course not, but it's the protagonist's duty to dispatch these vermin with passionless effort (and passionless fight choreography) so we can get our movie-going blood-lust satiated. And then there's Mila Kunis who was the worst casting choice for a post-apocalyptic film. She looks and sounds like she just walked out of Beverly Hills and not 30 years into the rough and tumble world of "after the blast" as they say. To add insult to injury, when she goes on the road with Denzel (she begs him to take her with him of course -- for no good reason other than that's what the protagonist is supposed to do with the leading lady -- despite the fact that she's leaving her mother behind with the bad guy -- her mother whom she couldn't dare to leave or see hurt -- whatever) dressed in the latest in fashion de apocalypse: cool tight jeans, chic top with fluffy trim, and the cutest boots ever -- omg! Add a few accessories like a comfy scarf, aviator glasses, and a bag to die for(!), and she's ready to tackle anything on the hard road with Denzel -- as long as there's a day-spa and some shopping along the way. 20+ years of living in the hard-boiled, unwashed, scavenger future world, and her makeup is perfect, her eyebrows are neatly waxed, and she even has a darling little braid just in case costume and makeup didn't have enough to do that day (yes, I spent a lot of time looking at Mila Kunis. Deal with it!). You can just see Denzel looking at her and thinking, "I won an Oscar so I could be in a movie with this?" And poor Gary Oldman. It's bad enough he's been so type-cast as the bad guy all these years. He delivers some horribly cliched lines and you can just see it all over his face, "Good God, what has my career come to? Is there anything in the Book of Eli to save it?" The final twist is somewhat interesting, but impossible to believe. My eyes were already tired from rolling so much, and this just made them fall out of their sockets. With so much heavy-handed, watered down, generalized, mass-marketed spirituality, I felt I had actually lost faith in humanity rather than gained it. I wept, but not for the message of the film, but for Washington and Oldman who are obviously suffering in this patronizing excuse for a spiritual film. Back to the mixed (and completely ill-thought) theme of the film: the Bible will save humanity. All current religious ideologies and opinions aside, I look only at the filmmakers' message: Eli (and the filmmakers) presume that the Bible has made the past world a good place to begin with. BUT, they make the comment that the Bible *may* have been the cause of the war in the first place. Hmm. So, if the characters know this, and maybe it's true, maybe it's not, what makes them think the Bible will save them this time around? Despite 2000 years of the Bible's successful life, it ultimately ended in apocalypse. But now, it's somehow going to be different this time around(?) How is a book that has the unshakable power to transform humanity going to do it right this time around if it couldn't do it the first time? In fact, the movie actually makes the opposite point that the filmmakers are trying to make. The film is trying to say that if only we lived by the underlying message of the Bible (the Golden Rule -- do unto others as you would have them do unto you), then humanity would live in peace and prosperity. But the fact that Eli (Denzel) is a fanatical killing machine on a holy war of his own, and the fact that Carnegie (Oldman) lusts after the book's power to control people only confirms what Bible detractors have always said: The Bible has not been misused, but its very nature is in fact divisive and prone to corruption. It fanaticizes its believers, and it creates lust for power via its religion. The two opposing characters fall into the worst of both spectrums. The Golden Rule theme is lost because of the failure of the characters and the filmmakers to see past the self-righteousness and shallow proselytizing the film employs. But I digress. That's a long, protracted discussion for another time. In the end, The Book of Eli could have been better -- if it were a completely different film. |
posted by Josh C at
6:15 PM
0 Comments
