AVS Forum banner

The Book of Eli (Blu-ray) Official AVSForum Review

28K views 121 replies 53 participants last post by  thehun 
#1 ·


The Review at a Glance: (max score: 5 )

Film:


Extras:


Audio/Video total rating:

( Max score: 100 )

90






Studio and Year: Warner - 2010
MPAA Rating: R
Feature running time: 118 minutes
Genre: Action/Adventure/Thriller

Disc Format: BD-50
Encoding: VC-1
Video Aspect: 2.40:1
Resolution: 1080p/24


Audio Format(s): DTS-HD 5.1 Master Audio, English/French/Spanish Dolby Digital 5.1
Subtitles: English SDH, French, Spanish
Starring: Denzel Washington, Gary Oldman, Mila Kunis, Jennifer Beal, Ray Stevenson, Michael Gambon, Francis De La Tour
Directed by: Albert & Allen Hughes
Music by: Atticus Ross
Written by: Gary Whitta
Region Code: A

Blu-ray Disc release Date: June 15, 2010







"Some will kill to have it. He will kill to protect it"



Film Synopsis:


Eli walks alone in post-apocalyptic America. He heads west along the Highway of Death on a mission he doesn't fully understand but knows he must complete. In his backpack is the last copy of a book that could become the wellspring of a revived society or in the wrong hands, the hammer of a despot. Denzel Washington is Eli, who keeps his blade sharp and his survival instincts sharper as his quest thrusts him into a savage wastelandand into explosive conflict with a resourceful warlord (Gary Oldman) set on possessing the book.



My Take:


We walk by faith, not by sight. The Book of Eli is a sort of multi-genre film that takes place thirty years after an apocalyptic event has devastated the planet. Civilization has been obliterated along with humanity. Those that remain survive by preying on others or serve at the whim of moguls who offer protection for subservience. There are few remaining that lived or remember life prior to the apocalypse. Many of the world's books were destroyed afterward and the majority of the current populace can't read. Eli (Washington) is a walker who travels alone by foot with only his backpack and what appears to be an empty sawed off shotgun. At first glance he would seem to be a middle aged loner that would be an easy mark for opportunists. This assumption has cost many their lives. Eli carries with him a book which he has read from every day for the last thirty years. To most it would be of little value but Eli seeks to take it west to those who understand and respect its contents. Carnegie (Oldman) has been searching for the book for years and sees it as a means to exercise control over the fragile people/society that he considers ripe for the taking. Their paths converge when Eli comes to the small town run by Carnegie. When his attempt to bribe Eli by offering the company of a young woman named Solara (Kunis) fails, Carnegie resorts to using force via his throng of heavily armed minions. What he doesn't realize is that Eli is no ordinary walker. He is a man driven by faith and possessing an indomitable belief that nothing will prevent him from fulfilling his mission. The fact that he is also an efficient killing machine doesn't hurt either

I had heard good things about this film but never got around to catching it during its theatrical run. This post apocalyptic story has a sort of Road Warrior/Western/Graphic novel feel with a helping of morality sprinkled on top. It works and I like the implementation as it offers a good blend of action, drama and thrills. The story and characters are developed pretty well and at nearly two hours in length I thought it was perfectly paced. The cinematography, visual style and effects sequences properly set the tone of the film while adding to its appeal. Denzel Washington is typically credible in the lead role and capably pulls off the action set pieces. It is always good to see Gary Oldman playing the heavy and Mila Kunis does more than just supply eye candy in the role of Solara. The story is a bit preachy and the ending doesn't quite live up to the first two acts but the overall result is an entertaining and discussion provoking film that is definitely worth seeing.



Parental Guide:


The rating is for brutal violence and language.





AUDIO/VIDEO - By The Numbers:
REFERENCE = 92-100 / EXCELLENT = 83-91 / GOOD = 74-82 / AVERAGE = 65-73 / BELOW AVERAGE = under 65

**My audio/video ratings are based upon a comparative made against other high definition media/blu-ray disc.**


(Each rating is worth 4 points with a max of 5 per category)


Audio: 90


  • Dynamics:

  • Low frequency extension:

  • Surround Sound presentation:

  • Clarity/Detail:

  • Dialogue Reproduction:





Video: 90


(Each rating is worth 4 points with a max of 5 per category)

  • Resolution/Clarity:

  • Black level/Shadow detail:

  • Color reproduction:

  • Fleshtones:

  • Compression:

The Book of Eli comes to Blu-ray Disc from Warner featuring 1080p VC-1 encoded video that has an average bitrate of 18 Mbps and lossless DTS-HD 5.1 Master Audio sound that has an average bitrate of 3.5 Mbps.

This film utilizes a stylized visual design that features a de-saturated color scheme (50 to 70 %) that works aesthetically well for the subject matter. The visible color range is limited to shades of dark blue, gray and black with splashes of crimson red and muted sepia tones. Warm golden accents are used to break up the film's monochromatic essence. Uneven light and shading are prevalent. Contrast is spot on which empowers whites and grays with washing away detail. Whites are snappy and crisp and grays are multi-staged and layered. The use of green screens softens some of the background elements during wide angle pans but I never found it to be excessive or distracting. Overall I found the quality of the video to be high. Every scene isn't always razor sharp but it is pristinely rendered with plenty of subtle refinement that increases the perception of fine detail and depth/dimension. A great example occurs during chapter 17 where there is a low wide angle shot of George and Martha's house (around the 1:13:30 mark) taken from behind as Eli and Solara approach. This shot looks amazing and has a near infinite sense of depth as everything within the frame appears in focus with clearly articulated textural nuance that brings out the subtle differences in shapes of stones, and the rough surface of the clapboarding on the old house. Blacks are dynamic and gradational and detail in shadowy areas is discernible but not as revealing as I would have liked. I find the film's deep grays, rich contrast and intriguing use of color enamoring. Grain is visible but never obtrusive and I saw no signs of video degrading artifacts or compression related noise.

I have been impressed with the DTS-HD MA soundtracks from Warner's big ticket action films and The Book of Eli is no different. This is a very involving surround mix that delivers an enriching home theater experience. Integration of the front and rear soundstages is seamless as discretely placed sounds follow a deliberate and realistic path as dictated by the events onscreen. This is an active sound design that incorporates a vast number of sound effects that are intricately mixed to engage the listening position. Bass is robust and can sometimes be substantive in depth but never rises inappropriately in prominence within the soundfield. The delicate blend of Atticus Ross' music, discrete/spatial ambience, crystalline dialogue and invigorating dynamics is supremely enriching as it weaves an aurally stimulating pattern across the surround platform. I found this to be a superb audio/video presentation that enhances the enjoyment of this film.




Bonus Features:

  • Maximum Movie Mode: An in-depth look at the film/production and an interactive viewer that includes PiP, Storyboards, concept art, cast/crew interviews and more. It is far from your everyday run of the mill BonusView track and is broken down into 10 Focus points segments that can also be viewed independently.


  • (HD) Focus Points: (35 minutes)

    1. The look of Eli
    2. Underpass
    3. Building Carnegie's town
    4. The motorcycle brigade
    5. Eli goes to battle
    6. Eli's mission
    7. Shootout at George and Martha's
    8. Eli's weapon choice
    9. Solara causes mayhem
    10. Apocalyptic San Francisco
  • (HD) A lost tale: Billy - Animated short

  • (HD) Behind the story:

    1. Starting over - 13 minute featurette
    2. Eli's journey - 18 minute featurette
  • (HD) 3 Deleted/Alternate scenes

  • (HD) The Book of Eli soundtrack - 5 minute featurette

  • WB BD-Live enabled

  • Bonus Disc: Digital Copy/DVD version of The Book of Eli





Final Thoughts:


The Book of Eli represents another entry in the recent wave of post apocalyptic films that I have seen. It has the look and feel of a graphic novel and features a good blend of action, drama and thrills built around a strong lead character and a morally suggestive story that in my opinion never rises to an overt level. Kudos to Warner on this Blu-ray Disc presentation as I appreciated its stylized, high quality video and superlative DTS-HD Master Audio surround sound. The inclusion of a comprehensive and fan friendly set of interactive Blu-ray Disc bonus features enhances the enjoyment of an already strong offering that comes highly recommended. Enjoy!















Ralph Potts
AVS Forum Blu-ray Reviews





Reference Review System:



JVC DLA-RS20 1080p High Definition Front Projector (Calibrated by Jeff Meier)

Stewart Filmscreen - Studiotek 130 G3 100 16x9 Screen

Anthem AVM50v THX Ultra 2 Preamp/Video Processor

Sherbourn Technologies - 7/200 Seven Channel Amplifier

Oppo BDP-83 Universal disc/Blu-ray Player (HDMI Audio/Video)

Toshiba HD-XA2 HD DVD Player (HDMI Audio/Video)

Sony Playstation 3 Blu-ray disc Player (HDMI Audio/Video)

Oppo 970HD universal disc DVD Player (480i HDMI)

Philips TSU9400 Pro Series Touch Panel Remote Control

Canton "Ergo" Series speakers

Axiom Audio QS8 Quadpolar speakers

SV Sound PB-13 Ultra (Rosenut finish)

APC AV S15BLK Power Conditioner/Surge Protector

Furman SPR-20i Stable Power Regulator

Wireworld, VizionWare, Audioquest, Best Deal Cables - Audio/Video/Speaker Cabling

Cool Components - CP-CP102 cooling package
 
See less See more
15
#27 ·
Wait...is this movie heavily religious? I saw some posts about Passion of the Christ and "religious friends", etc. Ralph even said "preachy". I can overlook a lot of that type of content if it is well integrated, but I don't want to be banged over the head with religious dogma. Can someone expand on this?
 
#28 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Datacide /forum/post/18727283


Wait...is this movie heavily religious? I saw some posts about Passion of the Christ and "religious friends", etc. Ralph even said "preachy". I can overlook a lot of that type of content if it is well integrated, but I don't want to be banged over the head with religious dogma. Can someone expand on this?

Personally, I did think it went a little bit over the top on the Christian religious subtext and sounded a bit "preachy" as well. There are good things and bad things about all religions. But, that's just me. Kinda weird too with all the brutal violence... Hmmm...


Just not to the level of Passion of the Christ. Don't get me started on that one.
 
#30 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Datacide /forum/post/18727283


Wait...is this movie heavily religious? I saw some posts about Passion of the Christ and "religious friends", etc. Ralph even said "preachy". I can overlook a lot of that type of content if it is well integrated, but I don't want to be banged over the head with religious dogma. Can someone expand on this?

Greetings,


No worries it isn't heavily religious. I won't expound on it further other than to say that its integration within the story's narrative is far from in your face and works well within its context.


Regards,
 
#32 ·
Looking forward to getting this and watching for the first time on Blu-ray.

Many aspects and characteristics of this film fit the profile of what I like in films.

I just hope Denzel in not yet another pigeon-toed cocky arrogant character.

I'd really like to see him in a role where he can let his emotions rule.


I can't believe Mr. Whitta is actually posting here as well.
That's awesome!

If I could ask one question, in advance of seeing the film, would be if he wrote the film from a purely fictional standpoint, and/or whether the religious overtones stem from his own beliefs. Just curious about that.



Great review once again Ralph! Again, looking forward to this one.
 
#33 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph Potts /forum/post/18728567


Greetings,


No worries it isn't heavily religious. I won't expound on it further other than to say that its integration within the story's narrative is far from in your face and works well within its context.


Regards,


Ahhh...ok. That sounds alright then. I mean, I don't mind religion in my movies (I love The Exorcist), but as you said, it needs to work well in context. I wouldn't want to miss an Oldman movie (Washinton is great too).


Thanks for the assurance.
 
#34 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman /forum/post/18727327


Personally, I did think it went a little bit over the top on the Christian religious subtext and sounded a bit "preachy" as well. There are good things and bad things about all religions. But, that's just me. Kinda weird too with all the brutal violence... Hmmm...


Just not to the level of Passion of the Christ. Don't get me started on that one.


So...would you recommend watching it? I think I will anyways as I am a big Oldman fan, but maybe I should should be prepared.
 
#35 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Datacide /forum/post/18730767


So...would you recommend watching it? I think I will anyways as I am a big Oldman fan, but maybe I should should be prepared.

It's worth a rental, at least.


To me, it seemed to borrow a few thematic elements from Children of Men and a bit of Blade for Denzel's fighting style and appearance on more than one occasion.


I won't go into details so as not to spoil the movie for you.


As to brutal violence, subjugation/control, and religion... they will forever be entwined, sadly, as long as humans are around. But as to this film, it felt like it was trying to serve two masters with its pious and reverent religious Christian subtext along with the use of almost nonchalant and guilt free, gory violence like any other rated-R action movie.


Don't get me wrong. The visual style of a post-apocalyptic wasteland and the use of bartering for survival and hunter-gathering of whatever food one could find no matter its source, personal hygiene habits, and the affects of radiation on the body... that was very well done and gave more of an air of believability.


The clothing on some of the town's inhabitants, though, sometimes reminded me of a modern-western coupled with Mad Max.



I just didn't get into the story or the characters as much as I would have liked even as Denzel and Gary Oldman chewed up the screen, as usual.


For the genre, I think I liked The Road a bit better.
 
#36 ·
"The Book of Eli" was a great movie. To me it is a more subtle version of the story of "Man on Fire" which was also a great movie (and also made me cry).


Feel free to skip this if you don't care about the Christian themes:

There are some Christian themes and parallels; however, I would say that a lot of Christians say that things have themes so we can justify watching them. Did the author or the director or Denzel mean to portray overt Christianity? I have no idea. Are so-called Christian themes things that are common virtues to all men such as courage, sacrifice, mission, love, and redemption? Yes. With that said, if I'm looking for Christian themes, I can find them in everything from "Passion of the Christ" to "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" and this movie is no exception.


I would be interested in seeing if there is a writer/director commentary which could flesh out these ideas; however, that would ruin the great discussions that this movie has caused.
 
#37 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by flipflopsnowman /forum/post/18731099


"The Book of Eli" was a great movie. To me it is a more subtle version of the story of "Man on Fire" which was also a great movie (and also made me cry).


Feel free to skip this if you don't care about the Christian themes:

There are some Christian themes and parallels; however, I would say that a lot of Christians say that things have themes so we can justify watching them. Did the author or the director or Denzel mean to portray overt Christianity? I have no idea. Are so-called Christian themes things that are common virtues to all men such as courage, sacrifice, mission, love, and redemption? Yes. With that said, if I'm looking for Christian themes, I can find them in everything from "Passion of the Christ" to "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" and this movie is no exception.


I would be interested in seeing if there is a writer/director commentary which could flesh out these ideas; however, that would ruin the great discussions that this movie has caused.
Who Framed Roger Rabbit, however, didn't...
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) Spoiler  
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) ...imply the Christian version of the Bible was the key to man's survival in its script...




In order to not put one particular religion in a better light than the others, they could have had Denzel carry a small collection of religious texts from various cultures he found along the way. He could have also memorized passages from The Koran, The Torah, Buddhist and Hindu teachings, etc. along with the King James Bible. They're all important, they all have a roll to play.


One only has to take a good comparative religion course to see how similar they really are... since they all fed off each other through trade, cultural and social mingling, and, yes, clashes thousands of years ago.


The major religions are mostly the same, because the animal **** sapien is the same, though we don't like to admit it. They all have stories of courage, sacrifice, mission, love, and redemption, besides their very worst natures.


The universality of goodness or badness in most religions and cultures is usually overlooked when discussions of religion come into play. And now more than ever this seems to take place, which is the exact opposite of what should be happening if we're ever going to get off this merry-go-round of intolerance and violence.


A good resource is Joseph Campbell's Hero With A Thousand Faces, or if you'd rather use your home theater rent Bill Moyer's interview with Campbell, The Power of Myth. Campbell was Lucas' mythological and anthropological resource for the original Star Wars trilogy.
 
#40 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman /forum/post/18730988


It's worth a rental, at least.


To me, it seemed to borrow a few thematic elements from Children of Men and a bit of Blade for Denzel's fighting style and appearance on more than one occasion.


I won't go into details so as not to spoil the movie for you.


As to brutal violence, subjugation/control, and religion... they will forever be entwined, sadly, as long as humans are around. But as to this film, it felt like it was trying to serve two masters with its pious and reverent religious Christian subtext along with the use of almost nonchalant and guilt free, gory violence like any other rated-R action movie.


Don't get me wrong. The visual style of a post-apocalyptic wasteland and the use of bartering for survival and hunter-gathering of whatever food one could find no matter its source, personal hygiene habits, and the affects of radiation on the body... that was very well done and gave more of an air of believability.


The clothing on some of the town's inhabitants, though, sometimes reminded me of a modern-western coupled with Mad Max.



I just didn't get into the story or the characters as much as I would have liked even as Denzel and Gary Oldman chewed up the screen, as usual.


For the genre, I think I liked The Road a bit better.


Cool...thanks! Sounds like I'll do just that...give it a rent.
 
#41 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph Potts /forum/post/18728567


Greetings,


No worries it isn't heavily religious. I won't expound on it further other than to say that its integration within the story's narrative is far from in your face and works well within its context.


Regards,

I agree with Ralph. It is a good film regardless, but if you ARE religious the film will have added interest. I think you can take from it what you want really. Good movie though!
 
#42 ·
This movie is very much on my radar, now even moreso in light of the discussion in this thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman /forum/post/18731240


One only has to take a good comparative religion course to see how similar they really are... since they all fed off each other through trade, cultural and social mingling, and, yes, clashes thousands of years ago.


The major religions are mostly the same, because the animal **** sapien is the same, though we don't like to admit it. They all have stories of courage, sacrifice, mission, love, and redemption, besides their very worst natures.


The universality of goodness or badness in most religions and cultures is usually overlooked when discussions of religion come into play. And now more than ever this seems to take place, which is the exact opposite of what should be happening if we're ever going to get off this merry-go-round of intolerance and violence.


A good resource is Joseph Campbell's Hero With A Thousand Faces, or if you'd rather use your home theater rent Bill Moyer's interview with Campbell, The Power of Myth. Campbell was Lucas' mythological and anthropological resource for the original Star Wars trilogy.

We're treading into mod-alert territory with religious debate, but here's something to chew on with regard to the above:


Note: spoiler tags are used, so no one is forced to read


Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) Spoiler  
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) AREN'T ALL RELIGIONS BASICALLY THE SAME?


In the final analysis this is the issue that must be faced: Is God so narrow-minded that He provides only one way of redemption?


Part of the reason we struggle so deeply with a question like this is due to the impact of the results of the nineteenth-century approach to the study of comparative religion. In the nineteenth-century there was a concerted effort by scholars to examine closely the distictive characteristics of the major religions of the world. The "buzz word" of the day was "essence." Many serious studies of religion were published which contained titles like The Essence of Religion or The Essence of Christianity. These books reflected an attempt to get at the basic core of religious truth that was found in all religion.


Religion was often reduced to its lowest common denominator. Frequently the distilled essence of religion was pinpointed by the phrase "the universal fatherhood of God and the universal brotherhood of man." Thus it was seen that at the heart, all religions were working for the same thing. The outward trappings of religious belief and practice differed from culture to culture but at the root their goals were the same. Thus, if all religions were essentially the same then no one of them could ever make exclusive claims to validity.


Out of this quest for the essence of religion came the now famous and popular "mountain analogy." The mountain analogy pictures God at the peak of the mountain with man down at the base. The story of religion is the account of man's effort to move from the base of the mountain to the peak of fellowship and communion with God. The mountain has many roads. Some of the roads go up the mountain by a very direct route. Other roads wind in circuitous fashion all over the mountain, but eventually reach the top. Thus, according to the proponents of this analogy, all religious roads, though they differ in route, ultimately arrive at the same place.


Out of this conviction that all roads lead to God has come a considerable number of ecumenical movements, pan-religious endeavors, and even new religions such as Baha'i which seek a total synthesis and amalgamation of all of the world religions into one new unified religion.


I once had a conversation with a Baha'i priest. He told me that all religions were equally valid. I began to interrogate him concerning the points of conflict that exist between Islam and Buddhism, between Confucianism and Judaism, and between Christianity and Taoism. The man responded by saying that he didn't know anything about Islam, Judaism, or the rest but that he did know they were all the same. I wondered aloud how anyone could assert that all religions were the same when he had no knowledge of what those religions professed or denied. How can Buddhism be true when it denies the existence of a personal God and at the same time Christianity be true when it affirms the existence of a personal God? Can there be a personal God and not be a personal God at the same time and in the same relationship?


...There are only two possible ways to maintain the equal validity of all religions. One is by ignoring the clear contradictions between them by a flight into irrationality; the other is by assigning these contradictions to the level of insignificant nonessentials. The latter approach involves us in a systematic process of reductionism. Reductionism strips each religion of elements considered vital by the adherents of the religion themselves and reduces the religion to its lowest common denominator. The distinctives of each religion are obscured and watered down to accomodate religious peace.


Why does this kind of reductionism take place? Perhaps there are many motivating factors for it. Certainly one of the most powerful factors is the desire to end religious controversies and the upheaval they often bring. Differences in religious conviction have led again and again to passionate disputes between people, family alienation, violent forms of religious persecution, and in many cases even war. Thus if we were able to achieve a universal religious essence perhaps we can end these very costly disputes. The goal is peace. The price is truth.


If religion deals with matters of ultimate concern, there is little wonder that religious debates produce so much passion. But if we are interested in truth we can never discover it by denying the real differences of truth-claims.


...It is one thing to seek an atmosphere of religious debate that is characterized by charity. It is quite another thing to say the matters under debate are not important. It is one thing to protect the right of every religious person to follow the dictates of his conscience without fear of persecution; it is another to say that opposing convictions are both true. We must note the difference between equal toleration under the law and equal validity according to truth.


-R.C. Sproul
 
#43 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad Theimpaler /forum/post/18740027


This movie is very much on my radar, now even moreso in light of the discussion in this thread.




We're treading into mod-alert territory with religious debate, but here's something to chew on with regard to the above:


Note: spoiler tags are used, so no one is forced to read


Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) Spoiler  
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) AREN'T ALL RELIGIONS BASICALLY THE SAME?


In the final analysis this is the issue that must be faced: Is God so narrow-minded that He provides only one way of redemption?


Part of the reason we struggle so deeply with a question like this is due to the impact of the results of the nineteenth-century approach to the study of comparative religion. In the nineteenth-century there was a concerted effort by scholars to examine closely the distictive characteristics of the major religions of the world. The "buzz word" of the day was "essence." Many serious studies of religion were published which contained titles like The Essence of Religion or The Essence of Christianity. These books reflected an attempt to get at the basic core of religious truth that was found in all religion.


Religion was often reduced to its lowest common denominator. Frequently the distilled essence of religion was pinpointed by the phrase "the universal fatherhood of God and the universal brotherhood of man." Thus it was seen that at the heart, all religions were working for the same thing. The outward trappings of religious belief and practice differed from culture to culture but at the root their goals were the same. Thus, if all religions were essentially the same then no one of them could ever make exclusive claims to validity.


Out of this quest for the essence of religion came the now famous and popular "mountain analogy." The mountain analogy pictures God at the peak of the mountain with man down at the base. The story of religion is the account of man's effort to move from the base of the mountain to the peak of fellowship and communion with God. The mountain has many roads. Some of the roads go up the mountain by a very direct route. Other roads wind in circuitous fashion all over the mountain, but eventually reach the top. Thus, according to the proponents of this analogy, all religious roads, though they differ in route, ultimately arrive at the same place.


Out of this conviction that all roads lead to God has come a considerable number of ecumenical movements, pan-religious endeavors, and even new religions such as Baha'i which seek a total synthesis and amalgamation of all of the world religions into one new unified religion.


I once had a conversation with a Baha'i priest. He told me that all religions were equally valid. I began to interrogate him concerning the points of conflict that exist between Islam and Buddhism, between Confucianism and Judaism, and between Christianity and Taoism. The man responded by saying that he didn't know anything about Islam, Judaism, or the rest but that he did know they were all the same. I wondered aloud how anyone could assert that all religions were the same when he had no knowledge of what those religions professed or denied. How can Buddhism be true when it denies the existence of a personal God and at the same time Christianity be true when it affirms the existence of a personal God? Can there be a personal God and not be a personal God at the same time and in the same relationship? Can Orthodox Judaism be right when it denies life after death and Christianity be equally right when it affirms life after death? Can classical Islam have a valid ethic that endorses the killing of infidels while at the same time the Christian ethic of loving your enemies be equally valid?


There are only two possible ways to maintain the equal validity of all religions. One is by ignoring the clear contradictions between them by a flight into irrationality; the other is by assigning these contradictions to the level of insignificant nonessentials. The latter approach involves us in a systematic process of reductionism. Reductionism strips each religion of elements considered vital by the adherents of the religion themselves and reduces the religion to its lowest common denominator. The distinctives of each religion are obscured and watered down to accomodate religious peace.


Why does this kind of reductionism take place? Perhaps there are many motivating factors for it. Certainly one of the most powerful factors is the desire to end religious controversies and the upheaval they often bring. Differences in religious conviction have led again and again to passionate disputes between people, family alienation, violent forms of religious persecution, and in many cases even war. Thus if we were able to achieve a universal religious essence perhaps we can end these very costly disputes. The goal is peace. The price is truth.


If religion deals with matters of ultimate concern, there is little wonder that religious debates produce so much passion. But if we are interested in truth we can never discover it by denying the real differences of truth-claims. The peace that is produced by reductionism is a false and carnal peace. We recall the false prophets of Israel who, in their desparate attempts to avoid conflict, cried "Peace, peace," when there was no peace. Jeremiah's lament remains relevant, "These men heal the wounds of the daughters of Zion, slightly" (see Jer. 8:11).


It is one thing to seek an atmosphere of religious debate that is characterized by charity. It is quite another thing to say the matters under debate are not important. It is one thing to protect the right of every religious person to follow the dictates of his conscience without fear of persecution; it is another to say that opposing convictions are both true. We must note the difference between equal toleration under the law and equal validity according to truth.


-R.C. Sproul
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) Spoiler  
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) The trouble is when you peel back the layers of history and study them... No assumptions needed...


When you look at, let's say, The Christ and The Buddha, there are very similar stories being told. Siddhartha and his path to enlightenment pre-dates the stories of Jesus, but in some of the gospels that were selected for the New Testament there are eerie similarities in those stories. More-so in some of the scrolls found years ago in the region buried in caves within earthen pottery that also unearthed the Gospel of Mary Magdalene and Thomas.


Many scholars believe the influence of the trade/spice routes as early Christianity was forming helped Buddhist teachings and parables get mixed into Christ's story as the cultures mixed.


History abhors a vacuum.


Also, take the Old Testament stories of Moses and those of Egyptian god mythology...


The ancient Mesopotamian poem "The Epic of Gilgamesh" pre-dates Noah and the Ark, but they are practically the same.


A lot of "borrowing" goes on as cultures mix and clash. One person's Gilgamesh is another's Noah, one person's Buddha is another's Jesus, etc. etc. That's why Joseph Campbell's seminal work is called "The Hero With A Thousand Faces." As he and other scholars traveled around the world studying myth and religion and various societies they found there were far more similarities than differences. Maybe because we all look up at the stars or look around our surroundings and wonder...


The only times this doesn't seem to occur is when a culture is completely isolated from the rest due to the topography and geography and resources (the latter is discussed in great detail by Jared Diamond). One great example is an almost extinct South American jungle tribe that was discovered a few decades ago that has no religion, no spirituality, no mythology, no stories of the past or of the future. None. Zip. Zilch. Nadda.


They have no words for yesterday, no words for tomorrow. They live completely in the now. You're born, you die and decay. That's life... move on. It's all about survival, and their society is based around that. There was no time to sit down and contemplate anything else. You did that, the jungle would claim you. They are not violent towards each other, and actually quite jovial and friendly to outsiders. If you have any personal failings... you're dead anyway because of the dangers surrounding you.


Another is a Mexican tribe, the Rarámuri, that run long distances as if in a dream state (perhaps via the use of peyote or other plant hallucinogen) or while playing some sort of sport (also while "juiced") in order to go 100 miles or more without much stress where other modernly trained athletes would probably drop. They only wear crude sandals or go barefoot. Why they do it, or the actual origin of this, is still being debated. They believe the world of mortality and that of the afterlife is a mirror image. Maybe they believe they are running through both at the same time.


We could go on...
 
#44 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman /forum/post/18740189

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) Spoiler  
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) The trouble is when you peel back the layers of history and study them... No assumptions needed...


When you look at, let's say, The Christ and The Buddha, there are very similar stories being told. Siddhartha and his path to enlightenment pre-dates the stories of Jesus, but in some of the gospels that were selected for the New Testament there are eerie similarities in those stories. More-so in some of the scrolls found years ago in the region buried in caves within earthen pottery.


Many scholars believe the influence of the trade/spice routes as early Christianity was forming helped Buddhist teachings and parables get mixed into Christ's story as the cultures mixed.


History abhors a vacuum.


Also, take the Old Testament stories of Moses and those of Egyptian god mythology...


The ancient Mesopotamian poem "The Epic of Gilgamesh" pre-dates Noah and the Ark, but they are practically the same.


A lot of "borrowing" goes on as cultures mix and clash. One person's Gilgamesh is another's Noah, one person's Buddha is another's Jesus, etc. etc. That's why Joseph Campbell's seminal work is called "The Hero With A Thousand Faces." As he and other scholars traveled around the world studying myth and religion and various societies they found there were far more similarities than differences. Maybe because we all look up at the stars or look around our surroundings and wonder...


The only times this doesn't seem to occur is when a culture is completely isolated from the rest due to the topography and geography and resources (the latter is discussed in great detail by Jared Diamond). One great example is an almost extinct South American jungle tribe that was discovered a few decades ago that has no religion, no spirituality, no mythology, no stories of the past or of the future. None. Zip. Zilch. Nadda.


They have no words for yesterday, no words for tomorrow. They live completely in the now. You're born, you die and decay. That's life... move on. It's all about survival, and their society is based around that. There was no time to sit down and contemplate anything else. You did that, the jungle would claim you. They are not violent towards each other, and actually quite jovial and friendly to outsiders. If you have any personal failings... you're dead anyway because of the dangers surrounding you.


Another is a Mexican tribe, the Rarámuri, that run long distances as if in a dream state (perhaps via the use of peyote or other plant hallucinogen) or while playing some sort of sport (also while "juiced") in order to go 100 miles or more without much stress where other modernly trained athletes would probably drop. They only wear crude sandals or go barefoot. Why they do it, or the actual origin of this, is still being debated. They believe the world of mortality and that of the afterlife is a mirror image. Maybe they believe they are running through both at the same time.


We could go on...

Dan, the response was appreciated. I'm saving it to my PC in case the mods elect to remove our posts. I'll wait a bit to see if that happens. Either way, my next response will probably come to you in a PM since this is all OT anyway.
 
#45 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad Theimpaler /forum/post/18740277


Dan, the response was appreciated. I'm saving it to my PC in case the mods elect to remove our posts. I'll wait a bit to see if that happens. Either way, my next response will probably come to you in a PM since this is all OT anyway.

Greetings,


Dan/Vlad, this discussion is obviously way too far off the mark. Let's end it here.


Regards,
 
#47 ·
I find it utterly hilarious when people throw their arms up whenever there is even a slight religious overtone in a movie. They say that they don't want religion beaten over their head.


But yet these are the same people that are totally fine with a movie about drugs to be beaten over their head. Or about murder, or prostitution, or deceit, or adultery, or politics, etc. And it's the same people who laugh at potty humor that shows up in almost every comedy these days.


But religion is too strong, they don't want to see or hear about it. Laughable.
 
#48 ·
There are two topics that get people going a bit too much, and that's why they are both banned from discussion on AVS.

Not like they want to gag anyone's opinion, but it's just gets too out of hand, as a lot of people are very sensitive to anything against own beliefs/opinions.

Just as well, if we were to get into an extensive discussion about murder/prostitution/ or any unethical subject matter, I'm sure that would be frowned upon as too.

There are forums on the internet where such discussions are not taboo, and that is where they should be held.


On a personal note, nothing in any movie is ever going to make me upset. If I don't like it, then I don't watch it. I try to keep an open mind about artistic value of someone else's work.

If any given person should be so closed minded that they can not handle the subject matter, then maybe they should stick to primetime public television and Disney movies.
 
#49 ·
Thanks for the excellent review. We missed this in the Theater making it all the more urgent that I pickup what appears to be an excellent quality blu-ray right away.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman /forum/post/18730988


As to brutal violence, subjugation/control, and religion... they will forever be entwined, sadly, as long as humans are around. But as to this film, it felt like it was trying to serve two masters with its pious and reverent religious Christian subtext along with the use of almost nonchalant and guilt free, gory violence like any other rated-R action movie.

I appreciate the theological discussion in this thread as well. It sheds some additional light on what must clearly be a central aspect of the movie's story line, thus some discussion of it, in context of the movie seems quite in order.


As a theologian myself I will only comment that I find it refreshing to see that a topic that has almost become the new "taboo" in this modern secular society can still be addressed freely in the backdrop of a big Hollywood production.


Aren't subjects like violence, battle and conflict a reality in any world whether religious or secular? Why should a movie with a Christian subtext or even an overt one shy away from reality? In fact I'm pretty sure that many parts of the stories in the biblical scriptures could garner a literary "R" rating for some of it's frank and realistic subject matter.


Odd how that things that were once frowned upon in our entertainment are now freely accepted and even embraced while conversely topics that were once openly discussed and embraced by most are now "too sensitive" to field or even discuss in our treasured entertainment. Things that make me go hmm...


PS: Some might not have noticed that a little movie called "AVATAR" had some strong religious themes in it as well, just not of the Christian variety.
 
#50 ·
Going to go pick this one up ! Even though I told my self I wasnt buying any blurays this weekend lol
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top