The Book of Eli

[whitehall]

Clever title and typical great performance by Denzel Washington. Gary Oldman plays the best bad guy in the post apocalyptic world. Denzel helped produce the movie and without divulging the big spoiler it's about a wanderer in a world about 30 years after a nuclear war and a King James Bible. Great movie filmed in a sort of but not colorless grey lighting that works.

 

[Asclepias]

One of my favorite movies

 

[shockedcanadian]

Clever title and typical great performance by Denzel Washington. Gary Oldman plays the best bad guy in the post apocalyptic world. Denzel helped produce the movie and without divulging the big spoiler it's about a wanderer in a world about 30 years after a nuclear war and a King James Bible. Great movie filmed in a sort of but not colorless grey lighting that works.

I really enjoyed this movie. I had a new found respect for Washington after this one, he really played the part well.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Clever title and typical great performance by Denzel Washington. Gary Oldman plays the best bad guy in the post apocalyptic world. Denzel helped produce the movie and without divulging the big spoiler it's about a wanderer in a world about 30 years after a nuclear war and a King James Bible. Great movie filmed in a sort of but not colorless grey lighting that works.

OLD movie. Not great, but not terrible.

 

[shockedcanadian]

Clever title and typical great performance by Denzel Washington. Gary Oldman plays the best bad guy in the post apocalyptic world. Denzel helped produce the movie and without divulging the big spoiler it's about a wanderer in a world about 30 years after a nuclear war and a King James Bible. Great movie filmed in a sort of but not colorless grey lighting that works.

OLD movie. Not great, but not terrible.

Not that old, lol. When I think of an old movie, I think of 1980s or earlier.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Clever title and typical great performance by Denzel Washington. Gary Oldman plays the best bad guy in the post apocalyptic world. Denzel helped produce the movie and without divulging the big spoiler it's about a wanderer in a world about 30 years after a nuclear war and a King James Bible. Great movie filmed in a sort of but not colorless grey lighting that works.

OLD movie. Not great, but not terrible.

Not that old, lol. When I think of an old movie, I think of 1980s or earlier.

2010. Old for a first watch.

 

[whitehall]

Clever title and typical great performance by Denzel Washington. Gary Oldman plays the best bad guy in the post apocalyptic world. Denzel helped produce the movie and without divulging the big spoiler it's about a wanderer in a world about 30 years after a nuclear war and a King James Bible. Great movie filmed in a sort of but not colorless grey lighting that works.

OLD movie. Not great, but not terrible.

Not that old, lol. When I think of an old movie, I think of 1980s or earlier.

2010. Old for a first watch.

Time flies but kids who were born that year would still be too young to understand the movie.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Very good movie!!!
Makes me wish I was like Biden so I could watch it again and it'd seem new all over.

 

[hjmick]

Good movie, my problem with it is, the whole Bible in format Washington's character is carrying could get to 39 volumes (books) which would make a stack 6'6 feet high. At best he is carrying one book of the Bible. Also, in that format, just one of the gospels is a book that is about 1 or 1 1/2 inches wider, 2 inches taller and 1 inch thicker than the book he carries.

 

[whitehall]

Maybe the braille system was more concise than the English translation. You gotta have faith.

 

[Gracie]

Love anything Denzel is in. Watched a few movies today that he starred in and or directed and or produced.

 

[whitehall]

The music score was creepy and absolutely worked.

 

[Anathema]

Excellent movie. Very re-watchable as well.

I do have to admit I didn’t figiout what the book was until the end, the first time I ever saw it; and I thought it was a great twist.

 

[Flopper]

I certainly would not consider this movie among Denzel Washington's best performances (Glory, The Hurricane, Training Day, or Fences). Maybe that's because post apocalypses movies are not my thing.

The ending of movie was clever but what proceeded it was not. The cinematography was excellent. The movie begins with high contrast B&W with a touch of sepia giving way to a bit of color near the ending, supporting the director's theme of moving from a very dreary depressing saga to one with just a ray of hope.

Denzel Washington is in my opinion the greatest actor of the 20th century, movies, stage, and TV, comedy, drama, biographies, action thrillers, love stories, Shakespeare to soap operas etc. He's done it all, acting, writing, directing, and producing. With two academy award, 9 nominations, and slew of other awards, he is a favorite of both audiences and critics.

Washington is far more than just a great actor. He's a good person. He was the product of a broken home, constantly getting in trouble bouts with drugs and alcohol and ending up in a military school but he straighten his life out. He is a devout Christian, an active member of his church, and a lay preacher. He has been married to same women for over 40 years with 4 children. He has a net worth of over 250 million which would have been a lot more if hadn't given so much away. He actively supports 23 charities with both his money and his time.

“I pray that you put your slippers way under your bed at night, so that when you wake in the morning you have to start on your knees to find them. And while you’re down there, say thank you,”
Denzel Washington in a sermon to members of the Church of God in Christ.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I agree with Flopper in that, for sure, this was not one of his best performances, however I love this movie.
I have seen it, I think 3 times. And will probably watch it at least another 3 times before my time to go.
Few movies can I watch several times and enjoy it equally as the first time I saw it. And this is one of them.
A movie doesn't have to be an epic/spectacular film to be a thoroughly enjoyable work of art.

 

[Flopper]

I agree with Flopper in that, for sure, this was not one of his best performances, however I love this movie.
I have seen it, I think 3 times. And will probably watch it at least another 3 times before my time to go.
Few movies can I watch several times and enjoy it equally as the first time I saw it. And this is one of them.
A movie doesn't have to be an epic/spectacular film to be a thoroughly enjoyable work of art.

As the saying goes, different strokes for different folks. My favorite Denzel Washington movies are not his best performances but I found them very entertaining, Out of Time, Pelham 1 2 3, Deja Vu, John Q, Remember the Titans, The Pelican Brief, and Crimson Tide. No academy awards but fun to watch.

Denzel Washington seems to have uncanny ability to pick movies that audience will pay to see. I believe this comes from a team approach. Most of Washington's movies are a collaboration between him, a half dozen directors and producers he has worked with for many years. They work together to get the story and they work together to build a cast and crew. They usually have a financial stake in the movie.

Often movies begin with financial backers or studios obtaining a story, raising funds, hiring a producer who works the backers to hire to hire a director(s) who search for the actors for the leading rolls, leaving selection of cast and crew to assistants. The result is often a group of people who have never worked together and have little interest in the movie other than collecting their paycheck. The history of Hollywood is filled with movies who have great director, great stars, great cast, and a great story that results in a crappy movie. What makes great movies is more of what goes on behind the camera than in front it.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I agree with Flopper in that, for sure, this was not one of his best performances, however I love this movie.
I have seen it, I think 3 times. And will probably watch it at least another 3 times before my time to go.
Few movies can I watch several times and enjoy it equally as the first time I saw it. And this is one of them.
A movie doesn't have to be an epic/spectacular film to be a thoroughly enjoyable work of art.

As the saying goes, different strokes for different folks. My favorite Denzel Washington movies are not his best performances but I found them very entertaining, Out of Time, Pelham 1 2 3, Deja Vu, John Q, Remember the Titans, The Pelican Brief, and Crimson Tide. No academy awards but fun to watch.

Denzel Washington seems to have uncanny ability to pick movies that audience will pay to see. I believe this comes from a team approach. Most of Washington's movies are a collaboration between him, a half dozen directors and producers he has worked with for many years. They work together to get the story and they work together to build a cast and crew. They usually have a financial stake in the movie.

Often movies begin with financial backers or studios obtaining a story, raising funds, hiring a producer who works the backers to hire to hire a director(s) who search for the actors for the leading rolls, leaving selection of cast and crew to assistants. The result is often a group of people who have never worked together and have little interest in the movie other than collecting their paycheck. The history of Hollywood is filled with movies who have great director, great stars, great cast, and a great story that results in a crappy movie. What makes great movies is more of what goes on behind the camera than in front it.

Nice Post.
He is definitely in my top 5 favorite actors. IMO... the only one that beats him is Tom Hanks. And I am not "bandwagoning" with that, Hanks has more range than any actor of any time period.
Mentioning Glory, which of course Denzel stole the show, his character was 3rd position in the movie at best.. but his performance was better than anyone. Speaking of which... I have always thought the choice of Matthew Broderick was the perfect choice for this movie. His acting had not yet matured to play such a strong character, but he was playing a character who was also not ready for prime time and it worked perfectly.
When the movie came out I remember thinking "Broderick...really??, couldn't find anyone else??".... but whoever picked him knew what they were doing

 

[Flopper]

I agree with Flopper in that, for sure, this was not one of his best performances, however I love this movie.
I have seen it, I think 3 times. And will probably watch it at least another 3 times before my time to go.
Few movies can I watch several times and enjoy it equally as the first time I saw it. And this is one of them.
A movie doesn't have to be an epic/spectacular film to be a thoroughly enjoyable work of art.

As the saying goes, different strokes for different folks. My favorite Denzel Washington movies are not his best performances but I found them very entertaining, Out of Time, Pelham 1 2 3, Deja Vu, John Q, Remember the Titans, The Pelican Brief, and Crimson Tide. No academy awards but fun to watch.

Denzel Washington seems to have uncanny ability to pick movies that audience will pay to see. I believe this comes from a team approach. Most of Washington's movies are a collaboration between him, a half dozen directors and producers he has worked with for many years. They work together to get the story and they work together to build a cast and crew. They usually have a financial stake in the movie.

Often movies begin with financial backers or studios obtaining a story, raising funds, hiring a producer who works the backers to hire to hire a director(s) who search for the actors for the leading rolls, leaving selection of cast and crew to assistants. The result is often a group of people who have never worked together and have little interest in the movie other than collecting their paycheck. The history of Hollywood is filled with movies who have great director, great stars, great cast, and a great story that results in a crappy movie. What makes great movies is more of what goes on behind the camera than in front it.

Nice Post.
He is definitely in my top 5 favorite actors. IMO... the only one that beats him is Tom Hanks. And I am not "bandwagoning" with that, Hanks has more range than any actor of any time period.
Mentioning Glory, which of course Denzel stole the show, his character was 3rd position in the movie at best.. but his performance was better than anyone. Speaking of which... I have always thought the choice of Matthew Broderick was the perfect choice for this movie. His acting had not yet matured to play such a strong character, but he was playing a character who was also not ready for prime time and it worked perfectly.
When the movie came out I remember thinking "Broderick...really??, couldn't find anyone else??".... but whoever picked him knew what they were doing

I think the whole movie was done well. It was based on the the actions of the 54th Massachusetts Infantry Regiment, the second African-American regiment in the Civil War. The movie stuck to historical facts but that was probably easy since the regiment saw extensive action throughout the war. Most of those that joined the regiment were killed or wounded.

 

[whitehall]

I guess people with Parkenson's disease might be mistaken for cannibals in that post apocalypse era. Denzel's "Man on Fire" was great "revenge is a dish best served cold".