The Book of Eli (2010)

Rated R

I have heard such great things about this film. Many came from friends and family that have seen it but I had heard from movie reviews that it wasn’t very good. Now, don’t get me wrong I don’t usually listen to critics but occasionally I do. In the post-apocalyptic world, one Bible remains. Can this really happen? Will it happen? Maybe. I do have one issue, it’s a small issue but it’s still an issue. How did they drive their vehicle to the west? Was there gas stations along the way and I just missed it? This film reminds me of the first generation of Christians when the Word travel by mouth. This is a remarkable film, well worth it. You may try to destroy God but He will live on.

This entry was posted in 2010, Action, Adventure, Drama, films, Movie reviews, movies, Rated R, Thrillers and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to The Book of Eli (2010)

  1. Sri Rama Lama Ding Dong says:

    Okay, you probably won’t let this reply live and I’ve got a couple of issues. I hadn’t thought of the gas station thing; I did catch a bunch of other stuff of similar idiocy. The first generation Christians thing is; the first generations of Christians didn’t call themselves Christians. They were Jews following the teachings of Jesus. Of course, word-of-mouth seems to have been the method of transmission of the message as the earliest ‘books’ date from late in the first century and mostly from the second. These were later edited, expanded, mythologized, rearranged and, truth be told, we don’t know who wrote any of them.

    It would have been great had the makers of this movie explored some of your notions as that’s meaty stuff whether or not you buy into Christianity or not. This movie was really remarkable to me for all the opportunities it missed to cogently follow a theme.

    As far as God living on, I have to ask you this: Since God exists outside of our concept of time how could God start, stop or go on, when IS seems to the God’s state?


    • laurarachel4 says:

      I agree that the first generation Christians didn’t call themselves Christians; I was using that as a reference point term. I also agree with you that the filmmakers should have explored into the more significant details of Christianity. I think they wanted the film to be about saving a book and not to go into depths with why they should save the book. My thoughts on God living on are this: That the survival of the Bible makes it possible for His word to live on. I did not mean to imply that God wasn’t Omnipresent. I disagree with you on the thought that we don’t know who wrote most of the books. We know who wrote most of them, the letters from Paul and Timothy are examples of ones that we know for sure. There are some books, of course, that we don’t know for sure. Whether they were edited, expanded, and rearranged that is hard to tell, I don’t consider any of the books to be mythologized. I believe that no matter who wrote, edited, expanded or rearranged the books they are still the word of God.


      • Sri Rama Lama Ding Dong says:

        I’m curious. How do you account for the differences in the books of the New Testament and the content of the books found at Nag Hammadi (Gnostic Gospels) and of the Dead Sea Scrolls?

        The books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John differ significantly in the Gnostic and Scrolls from those in the Bible versions most commonly in use. And relative to the versions of the Bible, they are a continuation of what transpired at the Council of Nicea in the third century CE. At that council, the first of three such gatherings, high ranking officials in the Church of Rome (Catholic) and others of influence not of official priesthood had a much more expansive collection of books considered to be original scripture, and in use by Christians at that time.

        During the course of this council it was decided what to keep, what to throw out, what to order burned across all of Christendom, and how certain remaining books should be translated in particular places.

        It does matter who added, altered, translated and so on. How can we know they were even enlightened enough to comprehend the substance of the content with which they worked? We do not know who they were, what they changed (with a few exceptions) and more importantly what they tossed out for lack of understanding or because the content would have lessened the ability of the church to control–and most importantly, what were their motives? Surely the socio-political climate of their time influenced their thinking, interpretation, concepts and foundational beliefs and most certainly would have had a direct impact on their decisions about what to keep and throw out.

        The Catholic Bible does contain more books than the KJV and others in use by non-Catholics, yet essentially we are all still using what’s left after the early Catholics got through with it. How then, and I ask not sarcastically but to aid in clearing my own confusion, do we consider what’s left to be the true word of God?


  2. laurarachel4 says:

    I don’t discredit those other writings or the Council of Nicea. I have a question for you-Do you just have an issue with the Bible or Christianity in general? My belief in God and Christ do not solely focus on what’s in the Bible. Do I study the Bible? Yes. Do I believe God provided the Bible? Yes, but he also provides other ways for us to learn more about him. Prayer is another way to grow close with the Lord.


  3. Pingback: Top Five Films of 2010 | What to Watch.

  4. Pingback: Mila Kunis | What to Watch.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.