Book of Eli : Fallout Series Discussion

» Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:25 pm

I wonder how many people would be averse to the Book of Eli if the main character had been a Bhuddist monk following the golden path of zen bhuddism instead of Christianity? Or if it had been some fantasy fictional deity instead?

I still wouldn't have liked it if he was blind and could outshoot a military sniper. The melee stuff I thought was just fine because theoretically he could have heard and felt all that crap but I doubt it. There's no excuse for his marksmanship...seriously I've been shooting since I was big enough to hold a gun and shots like that with a pistol are near impossible.

» Fri Apr 08, 2011 4:36 am

^ Fair enough. I'm British, so I've never seen a real gun in my life, let alone fire one.

» Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:30 pm

lol its a movie though! haha its not suppose to be what you think would REALLY happen in REAL life. im sure theres plenty of movies you like that have situations that flat out just wouldnt happen.

This is true, but the way TBoE went about presenting theirs was bad. I don't mind so much that he was trying to safeguard a bible, as I agree it would be a powerful tool in a fractured world, but a blind man? No.

99% of the unbelievable things in movies I like can be justified by their setting. IE: Major Hazard surviving an explosion from an air strike though he was only 2 feet away in GI Joe. Given the setting, with all their advanced tech, its not unreasonable to think that he has some powerful body armor, though that doesn't account for his face.

Anyhoo, back to Eli. To me, the movie was a crate of juicy Fuji Apples, and the main character being a blind man on a divine mission from god was a rotten orange mixed in.

PS: Guns are freakin awesome!

» Fri Apr 08, 2011 1:53 am

I watched The Road the right before getting New Vegas, it was good to get me in the post apocalyptic mindset lol

» Thu Apr 07, 2011 8:06 pm

I think Eli most definitely took some set designs from Fallout 3. Everything about the setting screamed Fallout 3.

But the movie svcked. I HATED the ending.

» Fri Apr 08, 2011 8:55 am

I thought the film of The Road was good, but the book by Cormac McCarthy is excellent.

» Thu Apr 07, 2011 8:03 pm

It's a crap movie (/opinion) and the only thing they have in common are: it's post-apocalyptic and there's sand.
Just cause it take place after the bombs, or whatever happened in that film, doesn't mean it's instantly fallout.

The visual style however, was very reminiscent.

However I think that's because both are borrowing from common stock rather than BoE copying FO.

Besides, BoE didn't have a crappy color filter over everything, though it did keep the slightly-desaturated bleached scenery.

If you took BoE and filmed it with lime jello smeared all over the lens it would have been FO3-like.

For FO:NV honey would work.

» Fri Apr 08, 2011 4:54 am

The people who are so bold as to say they, not only do not believe, but they KNOW that there is no god, a.k.a atheists, (Before you take issue with this, look into the context of the word atheism as applied today and the simple definition of the term.) believe that to make a religious character a lead character is "blasphemy" and offensive it seems. Never mind the billions of movies that portray non religious and even anti religious characters, and their sometimes clear and direct insults to any religious faith, and its followers.

Plain and simple, the people are arrogant, ignorant, and rude by all meanings of the terms.

Before anyone gets their pants in a bundle, consider, firstly, are you an atheist?

Do you simply not believe? That is not atheism, that is a simple, understandable, and completely fair lack of faith, belief or devotion.

Now, to say not only that you do not believe, but that you know that there is no god of any kind, and to even SHUN those that do believe (the latter being optional) means you are an atheist.

To be clear, I have no issues what so ever with people who simply do not believe. My problem is with the direct polar opposites of atheism, and domination of religion. I believe, that is enough for me, but to force the belief as bible thumpers and big wigged preachers do, even though, their understanding of it is vague at best, is wrong. Plain and simple. To say that you are right and all who believe are simply wrong, is ignorance, arrogance and rude, and these attitudes are the same on both sides of said spectrum. But these oppositions show up much more heavily in TRUE atheism.

The problem is that atheism is popular right now, just like being bi-sixual, gay or "an outcast" which to be clear, I HAVE NO OPPOSITION TOWARDS. My issue lies strictly with the groups that proclaim themselves a member of THESE groups, in order to gain attention, affection or gain. But in all respects, I have yet to meet one person who is truely atheist, or at least, would admit themselves to be, because when you get right down to it, it's a position of arrogance.

So, to make a long story short, because "atheists" don't like seeing anything that a christian or any other denomination would enjoy, and cannot accept any difference, they simply believe that only they have the right.

Before any *ahem* "atheists", decide to start a throw down because of this, think carefully about your OPINION and whether or not you simply do not believe, or oppose belief entirely.

The book of Eli was, in my opinion, a great movie. I found it to HIGHLY resemble Fo3, but thats just me.

Please do not think me outlandish or rude, as frankly, I don't believe anyone I've met TRULY backs atheism, 100%. I am simply making it clear what atheism really is, and how it pertains to fallout and The Book of Eli.

Well put and also a reason to be agnostic and not atheistic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism

Agnosticism is the view that the truth value of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, but also other religious and metaphysical claims—is unknown or unknowable.[1] Agnosticism can be defined in various ways, and is sometimes used to indicate doubt or a skeptical approach to questions. In some senses, agnosticism is a stance about the similarities or differences between belief and knowledge, rather than about any specific claim or belief.

Myself I do not believe in a God, but that doesn't mean I think he can not exists. It just means I do not have enough evidence to prove or disprove so I choose not to believe. I like many other non-believers have no problem with religious people expression their believes as long as they don't try to push them on people who have no reason to believe or no want to believe. That said I understand the loathing for the Atheists that is just as steadfast in their belief that their is no God, as the Popes belief that their is a God and he knows his will.

I think the book of Eli was very well done. Firstly the backgrounds and sets provided the best look at the scenery of a post apocalypse I have ever seen. Blowing away Mad Max imo. Also not only did it show that the Bible could be used for Good it also showed how it could be used in a very evil way. I think it is funny that so many Atheists think that they will finally escape people believing in a God, any God in the post Apocalypse. The one thing I found unbelievable about the Book of Elie was that only one book in brail survived. Even if their was a concentrated effort to destroy all King James Bible's there are many other versions in many languages, and it's the most printed book in the world. Surely Thousands or even Hundreds of Thousands would have survived. Not to mention digital copies. Given you have to find a working computer and a generator, but that shouldn't be to much of a problem.

» Fri Apr 08, 2011 7:51 am

I bet Eli had 10 luck :sleep:

» Fri Apr 08, 2011 2:18 am

I bet Eli had 10 luck :sleep:

I'm thinking a high perception on this one.

» Thu Apr 07, 2011 6:00 pm

No perception.

He's blind foo.

» Thu Apr 07, 2011 8:59 pm

I'm thinking a high perception on this one.

Blind with Per 9 luck 10 and the Four eye's trait. :gun:

» Fri Apr 08, 2011 12:19 am

How is Mad Max similar to Fallout?

The Raider outfits? :rofl:

» Fri Apr 08, 2011 1:25 am

When I play Fallout, this is one of the movies I think of. It's neither here nor there but I liked the movie (and I hate religion... but the movie is not exactly about religion if you actually pay attention to what's going on).

» Fri Apr 08, 2011 6:00 am

The people who are so bold as to say they, not only do not believe, but they KNOW that there is no god, a.k.a atheists, (Before you take issue with this, look into the context of the word atheism as applied today and the simple definition of the term.) believe that to make a religious character a lead character is "blasphemy" and offensive it seems. Never mind the billions of movies that portray non religious and even anti religious characters, and their sometimes clear and direct insults to any religious faith, and its followers.

Plain and simple, the people are arrogant, ignorant, and rude by all meanings of the terms.

Know what you mean. Kind of like ignorant, arrogant people that "KNOW" that everyone that practices a different religion from theirs is going to hell.

» Thu Apr 07, 2011 6:47 pm

No perception.

He's blind foo.

Perception is not only sight.

» Fri Apr 08, 2011 6:51 am

I loved the movie. I thought it was very well done. The story was compelling and revealing, the camera angles were AMAZING, the acting was great and the dialog was...Well it was good enough.

Being atheist and not of the jerk variety, I know that people fully believe in a god and are willing to put themselves at risk if they know they are 'protected'. I think the movie showed that it's ok to believe in whatever you believe in with all of your being, while also showing human greed and corruption that abuses faith. On one side we have 'good' religion and the other side we have 'bad' religion. I think it walked the 'line' in this sense and showed what could be done to serve humanity as a hole...Like giving them fresh clean water, to any and all.

At the end of both 'The Book of Eli' and 'Fallout 3', I think the message that's shown is hope for humanity during it's greatest time of need.

» Fri Apr 08, 2011 6:16 am

Perception is not only sight.

Yes I know this, But, I usually think of my eyesight when I see Perception.

But maybe thats just me.

» Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:44 pm

Know what you mean. Kind of like ignorant, arrogant people that "KNOW" that everyone that practices a different religion from theirs is going to hell.

Religious arguments? Check
Name calling? Check
Flame bait? Check

If we keep this up this thread is going to get locked and somebody is going to get punished.

Just sayin'

» Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:20 pm

Being atheist and not of the jerk variety, I know that people fully believe in a god and are willing to put themselves at risk if they know they are 'protected'. I think the movie showed that it's ok to believe in whatever you believe in with all of your being, while also showing human greed and corruption that abuses faith. On one side we have 'good' religion and the other side we have 'bad' religion. I think it walked the 'line' in this sense and showed what could be done to serve humanity as a hole...Like giving them fresh clean water, to any and all.

I also liked the idea that its alright to have faith, its good that people can find inspiration and comfort in their faith. They took it a step too far IMO when rather than having someone who was willing to go to great lengths for his faith actually claims to have spoken to god and been given directives. I think it would've been more powerful if he'd just found the bible and wanted to preserve it on his own without having to be told to do so. Thats one point where I think they messed up.

» Thu Apr 07, 2011 6:07 pm

Religious arguments? Check
Name calling? Check
Flame bait? Check

If we keep this up this thread is going to get locked and somebody is going to get punished.

Just sayin'

Would have been a great example if the post you quoted had statements actually DIRECTED at a forum member instead of a general comment about society. But alas, no insults or name calling were pointed at anyone here. Kind of ruins a perfectly good rant. What a shame. :evil:

» Fri Apr 08, 2011 12:10 am

Would have been a great example if the post you quoted had statements actually DIRECTED at a forum member instead of a general comment about society. But alas, no insults or name calling were pointed at anyone here. Kind of ruins a perfectly good rant. What a shame. :evil:

Yeah the thread has remained surprisingly calm and fairly friendly despite discussion of a religious film. I think it might be a record for these forums.

» Fri Apr 08, 2011 5:31 am

Would have been a great example if the post you quoted had statements actually DIRECTED at a forum member instead of a general comment about society. But alas, no insults or name calling were pointed at anyone here. Kind of ruins a perfectly good rant. What a shame. :evil:

I'm just telling you that that stuff isn't allowed here and the moderators enforce it very harshly. Politics and religion are banned, as well as name calling of any kind. As for flame baiting, well, look at your response to his. You freaked out a bit. Just a tiny bit, but still. Enough to be snarky. Now imagine some easily offended user comes through here and sees that. They could go ballistic and then there's even more of a problem. I'm not saying it's just you doing it. I didn't even say you were doing all of it. I was just making a general comment. I don't know. Maybe I shouldn't have even bothered.

But yeah; no major freak-outs yet. That's definitely a record.

» Fri Apr 08, 2011 7:36 am

No perception.

He's blind foo.

Blind Deathclaws have perception 9

» Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:27 pm

Please do not think me outlandish or rude, as frankly, I don't believe anyone I've met TRULY backs atheism, 100%. I am simply making it clear what atheism really is, and how it pertains to fallout and The Book of Eli.

I think you might be reading into it too much. An objective person is able to separate their personal religious views from their evaluation of a work of fiction. It's not necessary to agree with something on a moral or religious level to evaluate it fairly as a film or piece of literature. In fact, coloring your opinion of a work of fiction based on whether or not it falls in line with your religious, moral, or political views is a marked sign of a lack of emotional maturity.

I just thought it was a clumsy, cliche, heavy-handed, inconsistent, and poorly-written script, which is too bad because the camera work, art direction, and overall production values were very good. Why does it need to have anything to do with religion? It's just a classic case of a strong effort by the technical direction and actors being soured by a bad script. My opinion, of course.