The Good Book of Bad Movies

[ZippyDSMlee]

Yikes are you still whining about book of eli bob???

 

[SaintWaldo]

Wait. Why would a story about an evil angel blow your mind? Isn't that what Satan's always been?

 

[solidstatemind]

Once again, I have found my thoughts presented preemptively by others, and probably more succinctly. OwenEdwards, Dead Rebel, and Hyena the Pirate, I salute you.

Bob, I would add one thing: although there was a certain lunatic fringe in the dissent to your review of BoE, you seem to have focused solely on them, rather than upon the reasonable and earnest contrary views. The bottom line for most of us, I think it's reasonable to say, was not that we were disappointed you panned the movie, but that you over-focused on one particular aspect and used it to beat the movie to death with it; that over-focus on the Bible/religious aspect made it seem (to me at least) that once you were exposed to that aspect, it spoiled your ability to approach the rest of the movie critically, which is your job. I really didn't get very much useful information about the rest of the movie out of your review, and since I don't share your opinion on the calamity of using the Bible and faith as a viable plot device (at least not when there isn't a religious agenda driving the inclusion of those elements, and I highly doubt you can say that the Hughes Brothers are evangelizing with this movie), your review was a complete waste of my time. THAT was the point.

ANYway. Back OT, I appreciate your point of view, and you make some very reasonable points, even if I think you're not really trying hard enough to consider how someone outside of your particular demographic would view these sorts of things.

And man, the story about The Passion explains SOOOooooo much.

 

[Cody211282]

I just look at faith/power of god in the same way I look at having the force or magic in a story, its just there and it does what it wants, if your not into it then don't go see the movie, its like having someone who hates magic saying that LOTR was bad because Gandalf was a story shortcut for a lazy writer, either accept it for what it is in the script or leave it alone

 

[Ph0t0n1c Ph34r]

Quick question, as my thoghts in use of religion have been better stated, you have made numerous refrences to Halo throughout your reviews, specifically how shitty it is. I wish to know if you have actaully played or, or are
coming at it with the same apparent baud that you do with films using religion ( Specifically Christianity). Just something I was wondering.

 

[Sylocat]

Here's the thing about Luc Besson's version, he leaves it up to interpretation. Was she chosen by God? Or was she a mad zealot who imagined the whole thing?

The same could be said for The Book of Eli albeit more subtle. Every action of "faith" he takes can either be explained away as "God used him" (which is the interpretation you're sticking to tooth and nail) or he is lucky/skilled/a hero.

Problem is, no one would ever be as lucky as he would have to be unless God were actively supporting him from the get-go. And when God is an active participant, wave bye-bye to dramatic tension.

Since when is throwing God into a story lazy? Since when is throwing anything into a story lazy? People turn into zombies because they were infected by a virus. Is that going to be considered lazy now too? Or how about the evil mastermind behind some grand scheme to rule the world? Is that considered lazy as well? I don't understand where this sense of "laziness" is coming from anymore, and frankly I'm quite tired of hearing about it.

I think "throwing" something into a story is not the same thing a PUTTING it in. "Throwing it in" implies not that it is an important element, but that it's tacked on, either as a cheap way to bring heat to a story that doesn't have any, or as a cheap way of getting around creating interesting characters. When your answer to every question about why we're supposed to root for this guy is "Because God told him to do what he's doing," that's the very definition of a Designated Hero [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DesignatedHero]. And while I admit there is a BIT more going on in The Book of Eli than just "He's the good guy because he's doing God's work and that's all there is to it you heathen," this article isn't just ABOUT that one movie. It's about how "It's about God" is used as a crutch in a zillion works of fiction out there.

 

[PhiMed]

Bob,

A central theme in your critiques and articles is that your are a person who appreciates the succint transmission of ideas. As such, you really ought to know better.

I really enjoy your writings and reviews, but your link ("interesting" feedback) merely takes us to the comment page of the Book of Eli. I refuse to read all 351 (at this time) comments on your review of this movie, and a scan of the first and last page shows nothing out of line. Provide us with examples of what you feel is so over-the-top. If we want to see if the comments you produce are representative of the feedback as a whole, those of us who are so inclined can look at the comments page for that review ourselves.

Now, On Topic:

I do agree that shoehorning Judeo-Christian stories and themes into a story can often generate an insulting result. I'm a white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant Christian from the Southeastern United States, but I frequently find the insertion of the Christian faith into stories where it isn't appropriate incredibly uncomfortable.

There is a huge difference between an artist exercising their talent with their religion as inspiration and an evangelist trying to push a message by trying to hide it in art. The first generates amazing and moving works. The second generates empty-feeling kitsch that cheapens the very message the idealogue is attempting to spread. An example of this is the vast majority (not all, flame-throwers!) of the Christian popular music industry.

What bothers me most is that I feel that many of the movies we're seeing now are produced by a third category to which Bob alluded in his video review of Legion. This is the person who is not an inspired artist, and not a misguided evangelist, but an exploiter who wishes simply to ride the devotion or scorn of the faithful to notoriety. Once you get the name of a film out there, and people see it as something inspiring/edgy, you're halfway to getting their butts in the seats of the movie theater. That is profoundly cynical, not just from a religious perspective, but also from an artistic one.

 

[T'Generalissimo]

Let me quote from that review that Bob linked in this article:
"The Book of Eli" isn't just Christian, it's off-the-rails Christian...literally. Heathens might as well hit the lobby at the end of the second act because the final act is all about the faith. You're more than welcome to stick around, but I have a feeling those of you with red strings tied 'round your wrist will be checking your watch for the last twenty-minutes.
But make no mistake, this is a genre film. A B-film (with kind of a silly final twist). No molds are broken. You've seen it all a hundred times before. But this is a Christian genre film...a very Christian genre film with a fabulous cast and stylish direction.
I'm not sure that it's a problem of lazy story-telling as such, but if you're relying on something that only a very specific portion of the audience can relate to, don't be suprised if everyone else dislikes it and percieves the movie as bad.

 

[Axolotl]

The creator of Neon Genesis Evangelion, an anime which uses TONS of Christian terms, even admits he uses the terms just because they SOUND COOL. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neon_Genesis_Evangelion_(anime)#Religion Yet people analyze the heck out of it, lol.

You have to remember that Neon Genesis Evangelion was designed to fail so the same could probably be said about the whole series.

On topic, what was it about Book of Eli that made it worse than Daybreakers?
And was that praise or criticism for Narnia to say it bases itself in Christianity?

 

[BehattedWanderer]

Religion as a shield, as a plot device, and as a motive does not make the best of storytelling. Introducing flaws in what should otherwise be conceived as a good vs evil approach by twisting rebelliousness into those that should be following the all-encompassing good and inspiring doubt in them that their ever-enduring leader might be wrong in some regards? Now that's storytelling. One's inclined to remember at this point that for all of the Messengers (that's Angels for those that don't know that that's what it means) that God had once upon a time, head among them at God's side was the leader of the rebellion, and he brought with him many of the Messengers. Should there be such things as 'evil angels'? Well, in terms of how the normal Angels are viewed--YES! There's angels on both sides, folks, and they tend to look identical.

 

[MovieBob]

On topic, what was it about Book of Eli that made it worse than Daybreakers?

Superior cinematography, more ambitious setup, people turning into giant bat-monsters and Sam Neil.

And was that praise or criticism for Narnia to say it bases itself in Christianity?

Let's call it "observation" in this particular case, though otherwise I'm quite fond of Narnia even while recognizing that Lewis is using it to work through some... "interesting" psychological hangups, or at least appears to be.

 

[microwaviblerabbit]

I have an interest in the matter, as a trying-to-be-devout Christian looking forward to a career in church ministry and theological lecturing.

I think Bob's 100% right that films use popular tropes (topos, as it were) to hook audiences. The new Transformers series has used childhood nostalgia, big explosions and tits to make up for an enormous vacuity, appalling morality and narrative abombination. Some other films use religion, or gratuitous violence, or child abuse, or whatever - an emotive or exciting issue - to lend weight to a thin plot.

Bob, in this article (though not consistently elsewhere), recognises that religious material and conviction can provide the basis for fantastic literature and film (contra Martin Amis). Lord of the Rings is the other very obvious example of an evidently Christian story, written by a devout Christian. C.S. Lewis' science fiction trilogy is similar, and Chesterton's Father Brown and Peters' Cadfael both tie the faith of the detective and the situation closely together (cf especially Brown appealing to Flambeau to change his ways). Religious feeling has motivated some of the greatest poetry of all time - Donne, early Wordsworth, Browning, Eliot, to name but a few English language poets.

It genuinely seems a healthy, sincere faith is a creative thing, not something that calcifies, and certainly religious material, from Greek mythology to Christian Scripture, seems able to inspire great works by those who don't necessarily believe. But what about films? Is it somehow uniquely inappropriate in films to wear your faith on your sleeve? Or is the Exorcist's indebtedness to Christianity ONLY to the sociological background of the Satan concept?

Well, no. The Exorcist is about, amongst many other things, a struggle for self-worth and understanding of the world in the face of doubt, and the redemptive epiphany of self-sacrifice in the face of true evil (the Truest Evil, you might say). The Stone Table scene in the new The Lion, Witch, and the Wardrobe film is heartbreaking and redemptive not because of some strictly humanist perspective, but because of the theological narrative facts involved. And so on.

(Also, to call the West a religious milieu borders on the ridiculous. Europe is very secular and America is about the least Christian country I can imagine, in so many ways. Having a religious heritage is like having a heritage in mining - it means you know some half-remembered things about it, but doesn't make you a miner!)

Cadfael's entire premise for becoming a monk was to atone for his actions in the crusades. In a way, he was trying find Christianity for himself. He is post-change but parts of his old life pop up in places...such as his son.

However it is a case where religion makes sense. Medieval England was in many ways run by the church, so setting wise it works. I agree with Bob that in many cases religion is used as a prop for actual setting or character development. There is a large difference between tropes such as in Lord of The Rings and blatant use of Christianity such as in Legion.

That being said, the Christian-Right will attack or support anything based on their view of Christianity. I find it a horribly sad state of affairs that their Christian moniker holds despite blatant contradictions and hypocrisy.

 

[Wrds]

Had you stated THIS in your review of the book of Eli instead of "The Bible?! BOooooooo!" and ranting on about it in a manner that was both unnecessary and poorly supported in the context it was provided, then I don't think you would have received the criticism you did.

There is a difference between critical analysis of something and just straight bashing it because you dislike it. Sometimes that line might become obscured or so hard to see that a person can't cross it, but it's there. To be honest a review of a movie that actually turned out to be pretty darn decent to many people when you looked PAST the religious undertones (or overtones depending on your particular perspective) should have remained in the context of the FILM, but instead you scarcely touched on any OTHER aspect of the film. This aided the impression that you didn't like the movie because it was the kind of film someone of faith might walk away from feeling slightly inspired to continue believing in a God you do not believe in.

But we can all consider such thing, teachable moments. Disagreeing on a subject does not give one carte blanche to ignore or even insult the importance of said subject to others. One can be diplomatic in these things while still maintaining your own personal beliefs and exercising free speech.

I suppose one could call it "tact".

This now that I understand what you were really trying to get across and why you disliked Book of Eli I don't feel like defending it's religiousness.

Some of its story telling could have been done better, like, and I didn't really see the whole "God's side vs. Satan's side" the same way you did.

W/e I still enjoyed it...I liked it better than Daybreakers anyways....Could have done without the last 3 minutes of it where the chick walks off with all of Eli's gear.

 

[Axolotl]

Superior cinematography, more ambitious setup, people turning into giant bat-monsters and Sam Neil.

Fair enough, I disliked Daybreakers because it's action scenes hid the actual action making them confusing to watch, and it's obsession with people exploding. I saw Book of Eli's trailers and it looked like a similar film with better action and Post Apocalypse vibe and wondered what separated them.

Let's call it "observation" in this particular case, though otherwise I'm quite fond of Narnia even while recognizing that Lewis is using it to work through some... "interesting" psychological hangups, or at least appears to be.

Well Lewis was inspired to write the Narnia books because of his conversion to Christianity. And whilst he got really hamfisted towards the end they wouldn't exist without his religious inspired passion.

Also it's worth noting that the person who converted Lewis to Christianity was none other than J. R. R. Tolkien.

 

[WhamBamSam]

If the Almighty were to put the fear of God back into some lawless desert wasteland stepped in sin, He wouldn't pussyfoot around with a damned Bible. He'd use a Qu'ran, you know, like He did the last time that happened.

The thing is, doing that with the Book of Eli would've probably done a better job of making the kind of publicity splash you're describing. The audience would have gone through the whole film thinking of the book as a Bible, only to have it unveiled at the end as a foreign religious text, and one that many of them will associate with an enemy in the present state of global politics. I'd go so far as to say that you might have fallen for it yourself Bob.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Strangely enough, I think this is the true fate of Religion. In creating some of the most apocalyptic scenarios known to mankind, it's become the ultimate apocalyptic genre; in the same way the Nazis are the ultimate bad guys.

Whatever message the original words of the Lord(s) have is being spouted by characters as fuel for their machismo.

And usually wrongly: Ezekiel 25:17 actually says "I will execute great vengeance on them with wrathful rebukes; and they shall know that I am Yahweh, when I shall lay my vengeance on them." depending on which version you use. But nowhere does it mention the AK-47.

 

[Shitflap]

I'm confused guys, I've just read the wikipedia page about "Book of Eli" & I was wondering something cos I ain't seen it.
It sound like me a little like a religious riff on Zatoichi, although I've only seen the Takeshi Kitano remake, so I'm not sure if it's an homage.
For anyone who has seen it, was this intentional, or just seemingly coincidental?

 

[Ericb]

What really gets me is not people putting heavy pro-religious styles in films to make them sell. Much more I hate them removing negative pseudo-religious messages from established stories that could have made a kick ass trilogy of films (Read His Dark Materials/Golden Compass here) Dont know about anyone else but I fucking loved those books and have stoutly refused to see the film because all of the religious references were removed so fox news wouldnt give it bad press!

I felt pretty much the same way about them.

On one hand I hated the cop-out on the studio's part for removing the controversial stuff out of movies. On the other, I get that the amount of said controversy would be nigh-astronomical, much like MovieBob exemplified in his article.

... by the way, wh owas it really that made that self-censor call anyway?

The creator of Neon Genesis Evangelion, an anime which uses TONS of Christian terms, even admits he uses the terms just because they SOUND COOL. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neon_Genesis_Evangelion_(anime)#Religion Yet people analyze the heck out of it, lol.

He probably tried to warn the poor people about all this masturbatory analysis because, quite frankly, it gets scary at times.

Now, just to stay on the topic, this Book of Eli gig possibly generated the funniest paragraph in a Roger Ebert review:

It grips your attention, and then at the end throws in several WTF! Moments, which are a bonus. They make everything in the entire movie impossible and incomprehensible -- but, hey, WTF.

 

[Tarkand]

One of the thing that really amazed me at all the heat you got for your Book of Eli review Bob was just how many people were freaking out because you had said a movie with god in it was bad.

Reviews for Book of Eli were mostly negative (45% on Rotten)... are all those review bible-bashing atheist? I doubt that.