Le Livre d'Eli

Everybody's talking about what happens after the apocalypse these days. "The Book of Eli" is sort of the boiling point of this science-fiction concept, a combination of last year's "The Road" and George Miller's "The Road Warrior." America is a post-apocalyptic wasteland and Denzel Washington is the only self-sufficient badass. So originality is not exactly "Eli's" calling card, but it clearly establishes its ruinous world and the Hughes brothers ("From Hell") take good care of its characters while supplying top-notch action. Washington stars as our stolid protagonist, Eli, journeying westward with his canteen, a large machete, a couple guns and a special leather-bound book. He lives on an Earth that was fried 30 years before by the sun because of a war that ripped a hole through the ozone layer. Sun-goggled bikers run amok pillaging, killing and raping passers-by, yet Eli is morally sound and focused on keeping his book safe no matter what so he can deliver it somewhere out west. Although written by a first-time screenwriter and former PC Gamer editor, Gary Whitta, "Eli" impressively creates its world between the sunglasses/goggles due to the sun's power, trading of goods because money's obsolete and the constant examining of hands to determine if someone is jittery from eating too much human flesh. Whitta also places Eli squarely in the story. He's a good but dangerous man who's not afraid to kill, and as he sits idly by as a couple gets attacked, it's abundantly clear that this is a world where compassion is secondary to survival and self-interest. Where the plot comes in is "Eli's" weak link. It doesn't try too hard to hide just what exactly the book is and that sort of dissolves some of the film's mystique. The plot is essentially Eli wants to protect it and take it west and he has a run in with Carnegie (Gary Oldman), an older man who runs a small town and desires it for selfish power-related reasons. Along the way, anyone who threatens to lay a hand on Eli gets sliced up or shot. In the two or three fight scenes where he takes down numerous guys at once, you can't help but wonder why after he kills the first few guys, the others don't run the hell away, especially considering people are otherwise in self-preservation mode living in a wasteland (and they know nothing of the book). The Hughes brothers make those scenes worthwhile, however. There's a style and grace to their action scenes -- they create a sort of a moving tableau in some scenes and execute a wide range of tempos in the action sequences to make them more intense. When Carnegie's men encounter Eli and the young woman (Mila Kunis) that he inspires who follows him at the home of some old folks (cameos by famous Brits Frances De La Tour and Michael Gambon), they place the camera in the middle of the action and sweep along with the gunfire (part- digitally) from one side to the other. It's very cool and is an example of one way the Hugheses keep the focus away from the plot's shaky skeleton. I only have beef with their excessive slow-motion walking-toward-the-camera shots and showing a bit too much of the cloudy green-gray sky. Some people are going to be more surprised and impressed with the film's big reveal than others, but anyone with a love of action and that post-apocalyptic context will find something to make "Eli" a worthwhile watch regardless of plot weakness. Washington is slightly under-utilized but he's an ideal fit. He brings an intensity in his demeanor that makes him an intriguing character and the film does a good job of making his character more central than anything else. ~Steven C

Few things are hotter this winter than Mila Kunis walking around a post-apocalyptic town in a pair of Aviators. That and a quiet Denzel Washington wielding a sword sets up The Book of Eli, yet another post-apocalyptic thriller set in the future (or lack thereof). The post-apocalypse film may be getting old after films like Children of Men, The Road, I Am Legend, etc., but The Book of Eli manages to keep itself away from the cliché apocalypse film.

Denzel portrays the title character of Eli, a mysterious man who walks around around a destroyed world carrying a book he believes can save humanity. He wanders into a makeshift town where a sadistic villain (Gary Oldman) desperately wants the book. Enter some hacked limbs, explosions, and cannibals, and you got yourself an interesting film.

This is a different role for Denzel. Usually, he's just the calm talker who tries to make sure the bad guys don't do anything crazy (think Inside Man and last summer's remake of The Taking of Pelham 123). However, not only does Denzel do a lot of talking, but he's cutting off people's arms and shooting up the place like he's Jason Statham. One memorable scene involves Eli killing Oldman's men-who are armed with sniper rifles AB machine guns-with a simple handgun.

It's also very refreshing to see Gary Oldman return to the role of a villain. Younger audiences now see Oldman as a good guy after portraying famous literary protagonists such as Sirius Black in the Harry Potter films and Jim Gordon in the recent Batman series. While there's nothing at all wrong with that, I was starting to miss Oldman's villain days, including classic turns as a drug addicted cop in Leon The Professional and a Russian terrorist in Air Force One. Oldman shows his versatility in Eli, where he makes his character a complete psycho.

When I first saw that Kunis was cast in this film, I was a little worried. Sure, everybody loves Mila, but could the star of comedies like That 70's Show and Forgetting Sarah Marshall make the transition in a serious film? Kunis plays her role well, but she should stick with the comedies until she's given a character with more to do.

The Book of Eli isn't perfect with its choppy action sequences or pacing issues, but its a fun film nonetheless. It's films like these that keep the post-apocalyptic genre alive and well.

Thirty years after a man-made apocalypse, Eli (Denzel Washington) hikes westward on a quest across the vast American interior--a dark and dusty scape. He encounters a number of people who survive at the expense of others. In a small town, he is captured by a local despot named Carnegie (Gary Oldman) who makes him an offer. Being a loner, Eli prefers to go his own way, but he may not have a choice.

"The Book of Eli" is a stylish film that is reminiscent of "I Am Legend" and other post-apocalyptic stories, though it carves out a niche for itself due to its strong characters and its central theme.

The film presents some religious sub-themes, which might find differing interpretations by different viewers.

I found the ending a little disappointing, but I think others may enjoy the twists in the final scenes. Mila Kunis plays a strong character--a young woman whose life undergoes a transition under the influence of Eli.

The Book of Eli was an interesting idea of a movie, one man setting off to the west trying to find the best place for this one of a kind book he walks around with. Now, that is pretty much the whole plot of the movie. 2 hours of watching this man walk west, obviously encountering a few obstacles on the way. This eventually leads to him being chased by someone that really wants the book. Now, not to be hasty...but there is no real intriguing plot to the movie. I do believe that Gary Oldman did a great job in this film and as did Denzel, though at some parts the acting seemed less believable. This movie does have some interesting action scenes where Denzel goes on a killing frenzy, which was quite entertaining. If you want to see this movie, realize you are not going to be drawn in by the plot. It is a very slow-paced start that gradually builds up, and then, in my opinion, drops at the very end. I don't mean the end in general, I mean the last 10-20 seconds of the film. It really was quite a dumb ending that just should have been taken out.

Final Rating: 6.5/10

The first thing that strikes you about this film is how horrid and beautiful it looks all at the same time. We are in a post-apocalyptic world of washed out colours, destroyed structures and dying people scrabbling to make sure they are not the next to die; and it is a world that is really well designed and really well filmed by Don Burgess. Everything looks convincing and it doesn't feel like they just shot it out in a desert location, it genuinely feels like a scorched earth. The only slight irritant about the look of the film is that it does feel very much like a great copy of the world of Fallout 3 as created by Bethseda – right down to the design of the "bandits" with their goggles and ragged clothing; this bugged me and those very familiar with this world via gaming may also feel the film is "borrowing" rather than creating.

I talk about the look and style of the film first because to me it is really one of the main reasons to watch this film and indeed for the first 20 minutes or so, it is all we are drifting on – this sense of the cool and the barren without much in the way of who's or why's. Unfortunately when the plot does start to come in, it does so with a terribly corny story and message that wouldn't be out of place in one of those overly-earnest low-budget films made by Christian companies. Indeed this is what this film is – an overly earnest religious film, it just happens to have cost millions and have massive Hollywood stars involved in it. Now, this is the point where you assume that I dislike the film because it is to do with God and the bible, but this wasn't it all at – it didn't help for sure, but this isn't the reason.

The main problem I have is that the film doesn't actually seem interested in making this message work and the plot just seems like a necessary evil to get the character walking in slow-mo around this cool landscape. There isn't much development beyond the basic dialogue about the power of this book and it is nothing but endless corn in the main; I may have respected it more if it had done something with the content, but it doesn't, indeed it seems almost embarrassed by it. The Hughes Brothers for sure aren't particularly interested in that and thus the performances and shots are all about the style, the atmosphere and the look of the film. Accordingly the cast do the same – which is fine because I wonder why they were all queuing up to be in this story. Washington is a great lead because he is all style and presence and he fits the landscape well. Kunis' character makes less sense as she goes on but she is stunning to look at and again fits the style aspect of the film. Oldman's villain is poor and as a result he is only OK.

What all this leaves then is a film that should be watched by fans of Fallout 3 and New Vegas, simply because it is a great film recreation of those worlds, from the colour of the sky down to the costumes it feels and looks like the games. Outside of this though, the casual viewer is left with very little of interest going on behind the style; the story is cloyingly religious and lacking any insight or intelligence – in terms of writing it feels like having two guys at your door trying to sell Jesus to you with platitudes and clichés. It all looks fantastic but unfortunately the script simply doesn't deserve the visuals.