In film, as well as literature and theater, we become involved and interested in a story because we've come to be interested in the main character who has an emotional involvement in the story. The main character is our guide. They are who we identify with. We care because they care.
So I have a question for the Hughes Brothers, directors of the Book of Eli, and Gary Whitta, the writer: when the main character is uninterested and uninvolved in the conflict and story, how and why are we, the audience, supposed to be interested and involved?
Eli, played by Denzel Washington, walks around the entire movie with the basic attitude of 'whatever, just don't touch my book.' He's not interested in anything other than taking the book west. He only cares when someone tries to take the book. And, honestly, it's hard to feel attached to a book. Especially when even we the audience are kept at a distance from the character and the book.
Gary Oldman as the villain, Carnegie, is the best part of the movie. And his run and control of the town would be the most interesting part of the movie, if it was actually a part of the movie. Instead, Eli doesn't care and just moves on. Carnegie wants the book though. So he goes after Eli.
Carnegie wants the book (the Bible) because he knows it has the power to control people. Eli is righteous, but he has no interest in trying to make things right...which feels odd. How can a man who feels he is being guided and protected by God not try to right wrongs? Selective righteousness I guess.
I wanted more of the world in which the movie takes place. We get a little taste of it, but it'd add so much more to the movie if we could really see the world, see how the people live, and to find out a little more about what exactly happened and how they got to this point. Again, we get a little, but then, of course, Eli doesn't care, just moves on, and so do we.
So, basically, all we get, and all we have to hold our interest, is fight scenes and shoot outs. Which is fine for the few minutes they last.
And, here's some spoilers so if you care, skip ahead. We spend two hours watching Eli not let anyone get near his book. Protecting it with his life. He will kill to protect it. And he definitely doesn't want Carnegie to get it. Two hours of this. Only for him to then give up the book without a second thought. Because he has it memorized and it's in Braille so no one can read it anyway. So what did I just spend two hours on? The movie could've been 30 minutes long had he just been willing to show Carnegie the book is Braille and can't be read by him, refuse to read it for him, kill Carnegie when he tries to force Eli, and be on his merry way. It's an unnecessary complication. There has to be a better way to create and tell this story.
Anyway, there's some cool action here. I guess that's the real point of it. Though it's funny that throughout the movie people wonder whether the gun Eli has has bullets in it, almost as though bullets are some rare commodity, and then there's this huge shoot out with tons of ammunition spent. Why wouldn't his gun have bullets? Go for the action, don't expect to be blown away by story or character.
2 ½ out of 5
