Fri 15 Jan 2010
The Book of Eli
By Ian Forbes
[3] Comments

I’m Gary F’n Oldman, you’ll eat what I tell you to eat!
Theatrical Release Date: 01/15/2009
Directors: Albert & Allen Hughes
Cast: Denzel Washington, Gary Oldman, Mila Kunis, Jennifer Beals, Ray Stevenson, Tom Waits, Frances de la Tour, Michael Gambon
The Hughes Brothers came onto the directing scene with the powerful “Menace II Society” and seemed to be cruising along fine with “Dead Presidents” and “American Pimp”. Then came “From Hell”, a Jack The Ripper tale that boasted an impressive cast but couldn’t cut warm butter. Since that time, they seemed to drop off the entertainment map, with two TV credits to their names (though the American reboot of the British “Touching Evil” series is seriously under appreciated).
Now, nearly nine years after “From Hell” seemed to mark the end of their feature film career, The Hughes Brothers come back with “The Book of Eli”. A post-apocalyptic tale of a man (Denzel Washington) in possession of a book that a local despot (Gary Oldman) will do anything to acquire, the film shows off a clear sense of style and vision (We’ll get to whose style and vision later).
Now, I am fully cognizant that January is usually a mixture of Oscar contenders getting wider release and general dreck major studios have little faith in. Sure, there’s the odd kids or horror film thrown in, but that’s just good counter programming – and when a film like “Norbit” can dominate the January box office, you sort of see how vast a wasteland the month can be.
However, “The Book of Eli” is a bit of a mystery to me. Now, I’m not saying this would win any awards but I was not expecting to come out of it as pleasantly surprised. It delivers a little bit of action, some good acting and raises the type of ‘what makes up humanity’ questions films of this genre should. There’s even a Malcolm McDowell sighting and a re-teaming of “Harry Potter” actors Gary Oldman, Michael Gambon and Frances de la Tour – if that’s your thing.
Back to the story’s core, Denzel delivers another good performance, though aside from his fighting exploits there isn’t much here we haven’t seen from him before. However, Gary Oldman really steals the show here, playing a villain again after spending so much time as Harry Potter’s Godfather and Batman’s favorite cop. Every time Oldman is on-screen, the energy level picks up and his brilliance shines through. His quiet genius seethes from every pore and it’s this cerebral viciousness that makes for such a fantastic bad guy.
Now, this brings me to one of my bigger issues with “The Book of Eli”. While I liked the film, trying to decide whether I did because of the film itself or the connections I made with other cinematic examples was difficult to reconcile. Oldman’s performance has more than a few shades of his dirty cop from “The Professional”, there’s a rowboat scene that seems lifted straight from “Children of Men“, so much of the film echoes other post apocalyptic fare like “Mad Max” or “The Road” (though there’s no way the Hughes Brothers could have avoided that one) and the last scene of the film reminded me of “Blade Trinity” (no, I’m not kidding). As such, I took a second bite at this apple and re-watched the film.
And although I still made those same connections, I will say that they didn’t shake my appreciation for the film. While the rowboat scene is the most egregious, perhaps it was an homage and I’ll think of it as such. The rest are pretty much unavoidable because of the genre. Water’s going to be the most important commodity in a time where the world goes to pot. Thugs will rise up and take what they want from those too weak to fight back and smart, charismatic wannabe tyrants will find a way to exploit those thugs to be their brawn. Films like these are just built to bring about a messiah character who galvanizes the meek to rise up against their oppressors and right the wrongs.
Another element I wanted to revisit was the volume level of the score. When the film began, I wondered if the projectionist had cranked up the sound too high but as the film unfolds, it’s clear that the Hughes Brothers decided to go for an atmospheric quality to the film, both in its sound design and in some of the dreamlike camera shots, tooling with the frame rate on CGI cloud movement (since I doubt any shot of the sky wasn’t digitally altered) and the like.
This was very reminiscent of some of the key aesthetic choices of the “Touching Evil” TV series and really worked … though I can’t say for certain how much of my enjoyment is thinking back to the series versus the film at hand. The visual look of the film was a standout, essentially a whole other character unto itself. Also, the lighting and cinematography, most notably in the opening scene, give an otherworldly sheen to the production that serves the story quite well. It’s in many of the scenes without dialogue that the true beauty comes through.
“The Book of Eli”, although another post apocalyptic tale in a growingly crowded genre landscape, is artistic as well as entertaining and as such earns a 3.5 out of 5. This type of story has been done many times before but Washington and Oldman, in combination with The Hughes Brothers’ spin on things, make this one of the few January releases from a major studio worth the price of admission in recent years.


Rantrave.com -
A place to rant and rave about everything that matters.
May 3rd, 2010 at 1:49 pm
you suck
May 3rd, 2010 at 2:53 pm
Point taken.
May 1st, 2012 at 3:50 am
I think you pretty much spot on with the etrine review with a few “minor” things I think differently in respect to the ending. And I do agree about Mila Kunis, she was too pretty, perfect and clean for something of this magnitude. It was as if she couldn’t wrap herself around the role and idea of what was going on around her. And as Roth said, she wasn’t believable when TV or anything else was mentioned. She can’t read, but she spoke very well for someone who had never learned how to. Not many people that I have met, who are illiterate, can speak that well. As for the ending, when I figured out Eli’s “condition” the lights went on and a lot of things made sense to me. I honestly thought it was a more solid ending than either of you thought. Only because at THAT one point in the film, I figured out, why it took so long, why things he did “now” made sense, and why he was so “focused” on his goal. The cumulation of everything he was accomplishing justified the ending to me. Not because of some “religious” aspect, but because of his spirituality in finishing this mission of his life. This was probably something to do with the writers and they way they saw Eli. And this, to me justified “why” he did all of this. It even justifies why Mila’s character did what she did in the end. I mean, come on The Book of Eli I should have figured that one out immediately. It’s like a book in the bible. And Mila’s character was “continuing” Eli’s mission by starting her own in respect for Eli. Whom, I would assume she now greatly respected. Now they never say “why” or “how” he knew where he needed to go. I think they left that to your imagination, which to me is good story telling. I’ve always thought a really good story left some parts for you to think about and work out on your own. Helps you become “part” of the story. The “religious” aspect, I do agree that it’s very generic and not preachy at all. Just enough to give you the reasoning behind why he did what he did. Kind of like in “The Day After Tomorrow” when they were in the library and the one character (who is an atheist) says he wants to save he Gutenberg Bible, not because of religious reasons. But because it was the dawn of the age of reasoning, etc. They do a great job of pointing out Oldman’s character wants to use Religion as a tool/weapon to control everyone. And even the “mention” of the reasoning why the burned all the bibles, makes complete sense because there are those who would use it as a means to control masses of people. Hence Oldman’s character wanting it to rule his piece of the world. So the reasoning why I thought it was a much stronger ending than you all did, is because of that point in the film when “everything suddenly makes sense” (avoiding spoilers here). I don’t know if it has to do with my religious upbringing or how I was raised. Not that I am religious now, by no means am I anymore. But it became VERY clear to me the reasons and the whys. I love how they did it in such a way that I was completely in the dark until the end (no pun intended). I normally figure these things out and did not. I do think that there are some who will dislike it because they won’t like that “religious” overtone that’s there. And they definitely won’t understand the “why” either. Just my two cents (well, okay more like $5) but you get it. Keep up the great work!