Short Review: You know how you'll trick your dog into getting into the car and he will pant and smile because of the anticipation of a fun ride and perhaps something exciting at the end of the trip? Then you pull into the vet and his eyes droop and his excitement wanes? Go see this movie and see what it feels like.



Denzel Washington plays Eli, a lone drifter who travels the violent open highways of a post-apocalyptic America. He carries the only Bible remaining in the whole world. From the looks of the cast, he is also the only remaining black man.

Carnegie (Gary Oldman) is a local despot controlling a small, isolated down. He has been sending his greasy-toothed biker minions on missions to collect books wherever they can be found. Carnegie is a budding fascist dictator and understands that if he can find a copy of the Bible, he has the Word of God at his fingertips. This will afford him the ability to control the populace within the sound of his voice.

Eli strolls into town. His sole Bible is found out and things get a tad violent.

This is a solid premise and a strong conflict. There is no reason why this film shouldn't be a fascinating, moving work of cinema. Remarkably, even with a sturdy plot, compelling story and a talented cast (mostly), this film ends up missing the mark.

There is an old adage for police that you don't pull out your gun unless you're going to use it. The same can be said for faith in film. If you broach the sensitive subject of religion in a film you had better be willing to a have a conclusion one way or the other. Any story that pulls in religious imagery or text and then balks at remaining firm through to the end will ring hollow - just like this film does.

Eli violently protects his Bible. He cuts men down with a blade and gun. In his defense, he always offers a mild attempt at peaceful resolution, but ultimately he kills more people than Matthew Broderick behind the wheel after a couple of double shots of SoCo. It is made abundantly clear that he reads his Bible every day. Apparently, he has an issue with the comprehension part of reading.


At the end of the film Eli arrives at Alcatraz where he recites the Bible verse for verse to a librarian. The printed Bible is then shoved away into a library in between the Koran and the Torah. Even though Eli is clearly shown to be protected by miraculous intervention, his efforts are rewarded by being morally equated to other religions. The end is a statement that implies that all religions are the same.

The Hughes Brothers, the men who made the film, go out of their way to show that God is personally invested in Eli's journey. They then abort this relationship in favor of satisfying politically correct dogma that all paths to God are equal. This undermines their whole story, the whole reason for the film. It undermines any reason the audience may have to sit through the production in the first place. If the Bible is just another book that informs just another religion then it doesn't make sense that Carnegie would assume having it would change anything in his small town. If the Bible is so unspectacular, then Eli is a psycho for killing people he meets along the way on his fool's errand.

I'm not saying this had to be a preachy flick. It did however need to resolve the issues it brought up in the first place. It fails to do this therefore it fails overall.


The other serious problem with the film is Mila Kunis of That 80's Show fame. She is woefully miscast. The first problem is that her character was born after the destruction of civilization. This means she has never known soap, shampoo, conditioner or makeup. Somehow she wears makeup, has thick, healthy hair and wonderfully white teeth. She is beautiful, but not naturally so, it is all make-up.

Mila is not a great actress. This is made abundantly clear in her scenes with Washington, Oldman and Jennifer Beals. Mila wilts in comparison. She is a dark-haired Barbie in a world of thespians.


Washington grumbles his lines. Oldman offers his usual delicious overacting. The real standout in the production is Jennifer Beals. It will not be surprising if she earns larger roles from her supporting role here. First of all, unlike Mila, Beals provides a striking natural beauty. She looks like the kind of woman who looks as good without make-up as she does all dolled up. Beyond the superficial, Beals also provides the real emotional hook in the production. Washington is a stodgy, unlikeable guy. It falls to Beals to provide the emotional connection for the audience and in this role she shines. If there is anything to take from this film, it comes from her performance.

Overall, this is a good pick for a DVD release. This is not a waste of time but it is also not time well spent. This is truly a lukewarm production.

It is a deep shame that we don't live in an culture open enough to speak about faith in an honest and open way. Perhaps this film could have resolved in a logical fashion. Instead it was forced to capitulate and stutter to an unsatisfying end that helps no one.



Related Reviews:
Denzel Washington movies
American Gangster (2007)
The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 (2009)


Other Critic's Reviews:
The Film Reel
Film Edge

Labels: Denzel Washington, film, Gary Oldman, Jennifer Beals, Michael Gambon, Mila Kunis, movie review, Ray Stevenson, Tom Waits

What: The world has ended. In the aftermath, a man travels through a countryside full of robbers, killers and cannibals with the hope of protecting a book.


Who: The latest from the Hughes Brothers (From Hell, Dead Presidents) has the commercial and cinematic advantage of featuring Denzel Washington and Gary Oldman in the leads.

Bottom Line: Just go see it now. Don't let anyone ruin the movie's twists and surprises for you. Don't talk to anyone who's seen it, and don't read reviews (though I promise to keep this one spoiler free). Just go see it. My fellow geeks, this one is one of those movies.


Review: So far in 2010 I've seen two movies in the theater: The Book Of Eli and The Road (My review of that film is here.). Both of them are movies set in a post apocalyptic American wasteland. Both of them are stories of men with precious cargo on arduous journeys. Both of them pit their heroes against killers, cannibals, thieves and crazies. And both of them revolve around some of the same themes.

But these two films could not possibly be more different. These two films are polar opposites. These two films, for all their remarkable similarities, seem to have originated in different universes. I saw The Road with high hopes, expecting to love it, and I left the theater dismayed. I saw The Book Of Eli figuring that, at best, it would be OK ... and I left the theater with that post-movie buzz you only get when you've seen something you know you and your friends will talk about for years to come.

There is so much I want to tell you about this movie, but I don't want to tell you anything about it. I don't want to ruin this movie's twists and turns. Imagine that it's 1999 and you've just seen The Sixth Sense on opening weekend. Think about how badly you'd want to tell your friends about the film, but how much you'd want them to see it knowing nothing about it so they'll get the full experience. This is that kind of thing.

Now, don't go see it expecting Ikiru or Schindler's List. Let me be clear, this is a pop movie. It's pure comic book story telling, with broad characters and a completely implausible plot. This film is sentimental and corny and some of the dialogue is pretty bad. But this thing is custom made for a certain kind of movie goer; people like me and my friends. People who are more than happy to suspend disbelief in the name of a fun, loud movie with surprising emotional impact and a few unexpected twists and turns. This is a "fanboy" movie and it'll be a Godsend for fanboy audiences.



There will be time to discuss this movie's themes and messages and all the little plot details and it's oozing nerdy goodness over the next several months. Meanwhile, with the goal of not ruining it for you, I'll give you only the bare basics:

Denzel Washington is incapable of turning in a bad performance. He's up there in the modern pantheon, with De Niro and Penn and Eastwood, and he can take a good movie up several notches toward greatness. A big part of this movie's success is because of Denzel's nearly peerless command on screen.

Gary Oldman is good here, too, as one of those lip-licking psycho villains he does so well, but has rarely done at all over the past ten years. I'd forgotten how much fun it is to see Oldman as a prancing, scene-stealing bad guy.

As the damsel in distress, Mila Kunis is a custom fit. She has the kind of saucer sized eyes that don't require her to do any actual acting, and as a comic book female lead she's more than adequate for the job at hand.


This movie isn't set in the kind of hyper-realistic post apocalypse that made The Road such a long trudge. This dystopia is more cinematic and conventional; more comparable to Mad Max or The Planet Of The Apes. After having spent two hours last week, slowly going insane with Viggo Mortensen in that other film's jet black nuclear wasteland, The Book Of Eli and it's Fallout-like user-friendly Armageddon was a welcome return to an entertaining apocalypse.

This movie is getting mixed reviews, and that's because of the movie's message. This is a film that comes down cleanly, in a very broad sense, on one side of one of those great cultural divides that separates some folks from others. I've read some of this movie's bad reviews, and it's apparent that many of those who dislike the film are really railing against this movie's greater themes. Certain kinds of people cultivate a certain kind of secular uber-coolness, and in order to maintain the prerequisite air of elite detachment, they'll almost feel required to slam this movie. Just see it for yourself and make your own call. This one is worth the ten dollar gamble on a movie ticket. Movie fans like me, who relish a good geek-out that's framed on traditional good-vs-evil archetypes, will find much to love in The Book Of Eli.


Oh, and let me be clear about one thing: This movie isn't actually based on a comic book. But it is a comic book movie, and geeks know what I mean by that, and that it's a good thing. There's a reason so much of the marketing is aimed at me and my fellow fanboys. This is our kind of thing. This movie and movies like it, more so than any actual Marvel or DC licensed product, represents the best possible effect that comic books could have had on modern film.



Related Reviews:
Denzel Washington movies
The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 (2009)
American Gangster (2007)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Dark Matters
The Critical Critics

Labels: adaptation, Denzel Washington, film, Gary Oldman, Jennifer Beals, Michael Gambon, Mila Kunis, movie review, Ray Stevenson, Tom Waits

This looks interesting. The trailer is rather conventional. It makes Washington seem like he recites his lines in a low, raspy grumble the whole time. Maybe that's why Gary Oldman apparently is constantly laughing?

It's the end of the world as we know it and Eli (Washington) has the only copy of the Bible in the whole world. Bad guy Carnegie (Oldman) wants the Bible because he knows he can pervert the Good Book to do bad things. Eli doesn't feel like giving up the Word of God to this yahoo. This leads to lots of fire and bullets and people jumping around.





Screenwriter: Gary Whitta
Directors: Allen Hughes (From Hell) and Albert Hughes (Dead Presidents)
Actors: Denzel Washington (American Gangster), Gary Oldman (Romeo is Bleeding), Mila Kunis (Extract), Ray Stevenson (King Arthur), Jennifer Beals (The Grudge 2), Michael Gambon (The Good Shepherd) and Tom Waits (Bram Stoker's Dracula)

Labels: Denzel Washington, film, Gary Oldman, Jennifer Beals, Michael Gambon, Mila Kunis, movie trailer, Ray Stevenson, Tom Waits

Short Review: Ryder is a bad guy with a soul. Walter is a hero who need redemption. We’re an audience in need of some entertainment.



Like Assault on Precinct 37 or The Italian Job, this a remake that was done for no apparent reason. The original is hardly a classic and this reworking doesn't shine as well. Are we wallowing so deep in post-modern muck that we need to recreate mediocrity?

John Travolta and Denzel Washington spend time in this rehash of the 70’s flick about the hijacking of a New York subway. Ryder (Travolta) and his crew of highly expendable thugs jump Pelham 123, a subway car. Walter (Washington) is a dispatcher with a troubled past.

When the cops show, Ryder insists on only negotiating with Walter. This sets up a long series of hostage phone conversations which are just like every other series of hostage phone conversations we’ve seen in film for forty years.

Director Tony Scott employs his usual sharp edged stylization in an attempt to mask his hollow script. Neither Travolta nor Washington have much to do since their character don’t have notable arcs. They yap and yap as they wait for the next plot point to arrive.

In order to make the final confrontation happen the plot has to discard any logic and/or acknowledgment of police procedure. All of the narrative acrobatics leads to a resolution that is dissatisfying and when considered, pretty darn distasteful.




Related Reviews:
Denzel Washington movies
Man on Fire (2004)
American Gangster (2007)


Other Critic’s Reviews:
Commentary Track
Movie Freak

Labels: Denzel Washington, film, John Travolta, movie review, remake

Screenwriters: John Godey
Director: Tony Scott (Domino)
Actors: Denzel Washington (Deja Vu), Johan Travolta (Swordfish), Luis Guzmán (Boogie Nights), John Tuturro (The Big Lebowski), James Gandolfini (8mm) and Gbenga Akinnagbe (The Wire)

Labels: Denzel Washington, film, James Gandolfini, John Travolta, John Turturro, Luis Guzman, movie trailer