REVIEW: ‘The Book of Eli’ (2010)

Denzel Washington slices and shoots his way through a bleak, post-apocalyptic landscape populated by cannibalistic raiders like an elder, Zen Mad Max in THE BOOK OF ELI. It’s a gritty and rambling dystopian actioner with a slight plot twist from the directing team of brothers Albert and Allen Hughes. Compared with past post-apocalyptic movies, of which there are many, it comfortably fits within its own realm where Old West shootouts, chambara and modern, defensive martial arts conventions merge within an atmospheric, near religious fable of one man’s quest to safeguard the world’s last remaining Bible from those who would use it to control the dwindling masses struggling to survive and rebuild their world.

The film takes place 30 years after a cataclysmic world war left humanity in ruins and the Earth’s protective atmosphere depleted, forcing survivors not already blinded by the sun’s harmful rays to wear protective eye gear outdoors. In America, the remaining population has become divided between roving cannibals who prey on the weak and people clustered into small, protective communities struggling to subsist under the rule of corrupt leaders like Carnegie (Gary Oldman) who plans to expand his control of a small town to other settlements. What he needs to accomplish this is a way to sway the hearts and minds of people beyond their basic need for survival and the answer is to find the Holy Bible, a powerful text that has caused wars and yet provided hope and comfort to those in need.

Enter Eli (Washington), a survivor of the war who has spent years developing uniquely effective survival and self defense skills as he travels west across the United States with a Bible he hopes to deliver into worthy hands. His path leads him to Carnegie’s town and a confrontation over ownership of the Bible.

Amid this struggle, Eli hooks up with Carnegie’s daughter who is played by actress Mila Kunis. She previously starred alongside Mark Wahlberg in the video game-to-film actioner MAX PAYNE but is best known as the voice of Meg Griffin in the popular animated TV series FAMILY GUY.

Eli is the prototypical samurai/cowboy hero with nerves of steel who wields a machete, shotgun, pistol, and bow, all with equal proficiency. He’s able to cleanly slice off heads like a Japanese swordsman and shoots straight like an Old West gunslinger. His mission to transport a Bible across country takes on a suggested supernatural slant similar to, yet more subtle than Clint Eastwood’s HIGH PLAINS DRIFTER. The suggestion is that because Eli is trying to save the last Bible, he might be receiving aid through divine intervention. A related revelation towards the end of the film also reveals a strong association with a certain Japanese chambara hero who shall remain nameless so as not to spoil the surprise (see comments section for spoiler).

For action choreographer Jeff Imada, the man behind the rugged fight work in the Jason Bourne films, the action in this movie marks a new benchmark for intense and efficient defensive martial arts fighting on screen. I use the term defensive martial arts to denote the reality-based fighting that Imada and his mentor Dan Inosanto specialize in. Once a student of Bruce Lee, Inosanto has become a well-respected martial arts master who has applied Lee’s Jeet Kune Do principles to the Filipino arts of Kali and Escrima. He was hired to train Washington for six months prior to the filming of ELI.

At age 55, it would seem a little late for Denzel Washington to start playing a martial arts-trained action hero but he must have been a quick study because he looks mighty lethal onscreen. It helps tremendously that the kind of fighting he is required to do is based on efficiency rather than style. Imada’s brand of screen fighting is the polar opposite of physically-demanding, performance oriented contemporary wushu, as used by Jet Li and syncopated Chinese opera kung fu as used by Jackie Chan. The difference can be boiled down to the amount of telegraphing of movement that takes place. In wushu and kung fu movements are often greatly exaggerated in extended sparring matches whereas Imada’s screen fighting is closer to what a real street fighter needs to do which is remain compact and make each strike count. In this case where no law exists, it’s kill or be killed and that’s exactly what Eli lives by. I could definitely see a cautious, well-trained man in good physical condition in his 50s being able to hold his own against the kind of undisciplined thugs who appear in this film. That said, the Hughes brothers do take liberties by having Eli frequently face off against multiple opponents.

One thing I would have liked to see more of in this film is a Miyamoto Musashi approach to the fighting where Eli uses tactics and the environment more to his advantage. As someone who has survived in this wasteland into his 50s, Eli would need more than just fast reflexes to overcome his adversaries. At one point Eli decides not to get involved in saving a girl from raiders so as not to compromise his mission. This is the sort of survival instinct we should have seen more of. Yet once he heads into town for his expectant showdown with Carnegie and his men, that survival instinct turns into foolhardiness for the sake of accommodating several one-versus-many fights.

Another aspect that the Hughes fail to fully capitalize on is the quirky characters that make post-apocalyptic action movies interesting. From MAD MAX and THE ULTIMATE WARRIOR to SIX-STRING SAMURAI and WATERWORLD, the more megalomaniacal potentates, crazed cannibals and deadly psychopaths the merrier. ELI is remarkably restrained in this area despite having Gary Oldman as a would-be ruler. We know he can lay it on thick from his turn as Zorg in THE FIFTH ELEMENT but here he comes across rather bland as a man a little too consumed with finding a Bible based on an unproven assumption that it will help him to control people in such desperate straits.

Oldman’s right-hand man is played by PUNISHER: WAR ZONE star Ray Stevenson in an even more restrained role. Early on, it seemed like he might end up being a fighting match for Eli but nothing comes of it. As Eli’s sidekick, Kunis is also bland and seemingly underdeveloped. Eli becomes something of a mentor to her but it’s not shown in any meaningful way. Even singer Tom Waits who is known for his charismatic and quirky performances is wasted in his supporting role as a generic pawnshop owner. All this leaves, apart from Jennifer Beals who plays Kunis’ blind mother, are the various cannibals Eli encounters and none of them are memorable apart from a single encounter.

The problem with ELI is that the Hughes brothers seem to have gotten lost in their own story. While the film starts out promising by following genre convention leading up to the first big confrontation between Eli and Carnegie midway through, the focus is lost thereafter. Eli wanders off to continue his quest while leaving Solara (Kunis) behind yet he miraculously appears out of no where to rescue her after she encounters raiders. Meanwhile, it seems to take Carnegie and his men several days to catch up with Eli on foot when they have cars. To me, this looked like a stalling tactic to fill time with scenes of Eli and Solara sitting around camp fires. Then after a second and final confrontation, the conflict ends but the film keeps on going as we follow Eli to his final destination. The problem here is obvious. Without any conflict or tension left, the only carrot left to dangle in front of us is how Eli is going to be able to deliver his Bible after he loses it to Carnegie. This is what leads to the one surprise plot revelation at the end. It’s not enough though. The film’s end is ultimately anticlimactic and rushed in an effort to explain how everything is resolved. Even though it would have spoiled their plot twist, it would have been better dramatically if the Hughes brothers had left most of this out and spent more time on expanding the conflict between Eli and Carnegie. That’s what the film should be about. The Bible and the journey are just MacGuffins to fuel conflict, though the Hughes brothers would want you to think otherwise.

The Christian theme that the media is so focused on deals with Eli’s calling by God to deliver the Bible to a place he has never seen and to do so on faith alone. What I find a little disturbing is how Eli is led to conflict, rather than away from it and opts to kill rather than to give up the Bible which turns out later to be non-essential to his mission. Given the film’s apparent message that faith and hope have as much value to humanity as sustenance and safety, I feel the message gets a little lost in excessively violent conflict which does not appear necessary within the plot beyond the filmmakers’ desire for carnage. However, there is a suggestion later on that Eli regrets his actions.

In spite of underdeveloped characters, an anticlimactic ending and suggestions of an underlying religious message that may leave some viewers (namely myself) a bit confused, THE BOOK OF ELI still has plenty to offer. It has excellent atmosphere created by the fine cinematography of Don Burgess, Gae Buckley’s weathered production design and haunting ambient scoring from Atticus Ross. Denzel Washington proves to be very capable of taking on the mantle of elder action hero alongside Liam Neeson. Jeff Imada’s fight work is the best I have seen from him yet and it isn’t ruined by jerky camera work or excessive editing. The Hughes brothers struggle with keeping the story intact and characters engaging but they do know how to shoot action with flair. It is unfortunate that nine years since their last feature film, FROM HELL, this is the best that the Hughes brothers could do. They are definitely talented filmmakers with some great ideas and this is one of them. It just doesn’t reach its full potential.

Editor’s Note: I have removed a portion of my original review that touched on Christian elements in THE BOOK OF ELI and replaced it with something I hope readers find less contentious. This action came after weighing some of the comments below and reconsidering what I had written. In short, my original words were not balanced, objective, well thought out, or truly representative of what I wished to convey. I’ve also reconsidered the score and brought it up a notch to reflect this change.