Total Posts:27|Showing Posts:1-27
Jump to topic:

Book Of ELi

wonderwoman
Posts: 744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2010 12:20:44 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Ok, It honestly felt like a Christianity/Bible Propaganda. Not only for ONLY people who use THE KING JAMES VERSION so the catholic bible out, sorry, only protestants.

Anyone else get that vib that the whole mopvie was propaganda?
wonderwoman
Posts: 744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2010 12:34:19 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/18/2010 12:23:27 AM, Puck wrote:
How so?

He heard a voice to go and get this "book". He followed the voice. He is blind. He has faith that what this book says is real. He attempts to explain how faith is following blindly essentially in words and in actuality. He "memorizes" the bible. He is protected by an invisible force. The book is a bible.

However, it might have been to teach tolerance.

Seeing, as the war was caused by religion(stated in the film)

The old man at the end said something about teaching people respect for the "old wars" (before the war) and inferred religious tolerance. HE places the bible next to the Torah and the Quran at the end of the movie.

Perhaps tolerance was the issue or propaganda. Either war it was a distastful movie. Terribly dissapointing.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2010 12:35:51 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Parts of this movie were confusing. I'm sure I probably missed something as I couldn't figure out why all the other bibles were burned. I don't really see how it was pro-christian propaganda though other than the fact that the story revolved around supposibly the last remaining copy of the bible.
wonderwoman
Posts: 744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2010 10:43:28 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I did some more thinking and it could have actually been bashing religion as well.

It shows how ALL faith is blind. In the case of ELi literally. His faith had no basis and he made an illogical statement to describe faith during the film. The girl he is with constantly questions him about his faith and he can only respond with I know what I heard or I know it's real.

I may be thinking to much into it but overall there was an underlying propganda story in this movie
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2010 10:48:38 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I don't mind if it's propaganda or not really, does not mean it is or is not a good film. Mind you I am not that keen on watching this now.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2010 11:58:05 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
It is not so much propaganda as it is an interpretation of the journey of the prophet Eli from the book of Revalations I believe. I could be wrong about the portion of the bible but the story is in there. I think that they should make more movies about the cooler parts of the bible. Such as the wars and end of days stuff.
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown
wonderwoman
Posts: 744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2010 10:08:37 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/18/2010 11:58:05 AM, Korashk wrote:
It is not so much propaganda as it is an interpretation of the journey of the prophet Eli from the book of Revalations I believe. I could be wrong about the portion of the bible but the story is in there. I think that they should make more movies about the cooler parts of the bible. Such as the wars and end of days stuff.

They have its called The Omega Code lmao
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2010 12:15:37 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/18/2010 10:08:37 PM, wonderwoman wrote:

They have its called The Omega Code lmao

As with all such things there is, A List.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Even that is less than complete, seemingly only counting overt end of days stuff, which tend to be far less interesting than the subversive references found in a lot more. :)
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2010 1:02:57 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/19/2010 12:59:48 AM, Puck wrote:
Racist.

Me? Never. I just thought the ABM stereotype being the Prophet quite funny.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2010 2:44:51 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I just came back from watching the flick.

Although the beginning was slower than expected, I heavily enjoyed the fighting scenes, ending, philosophy, and spirituality in the movie.

Wonderwoman - you must not understand faith. Faith is believing without necessarily seeing. Washington's self-blindness symbolized his faith in his own travels and tied with his faith in God. It really was not that hard to understand.

I felt there were many philosophical connections and thoughts that movie incorporated with the ending. I'd like to discuss, with wonderwoman, why she is so against the Christian aspect in the movie. I'd also like to know why she has vote bombed me in various debates.
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2010 9:51:36 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
****SPOILER ALERT****

****SPOILER ALERT****


I enjoyed the movie overall, however, I couldn't help but nickpick at certain things... like how was the man walking "west" for 30 years and it only took him a couple days to go from completely savage territory to civilized land? Why didn't the people with cars ever think to drive around for a bit to find the "new" San Fransisco? (I think it was San Fransisco...) And... why couldn't Eli trade for a car in the first place? (I guess he's too blind to drive but not too blind to fight off everyone he comes across even when they have guns). And if he was blind, how did he know which direction to row the boat in? And how did he memorize the entire book word-for-word but he paraphrased throughout the movie? He could have easily been making that sh*t up. And how is it that the "war" was 30 years ago and yet nobody remembers Christianity? Surely someone would have told their children about it.

Don't watch movies with me. I ruin them with my constant rationalizing.
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2010 9:55:28 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/23/2010 9:51:36 PM, TulleKrazy wrote:
****SPOILER ALERT****


****SPOILER ALERT****



I enjoyed the movie overall, however, I couldn't help but nickpick at certain things... like how was the man walking "west" for 30 years and it only took him a couple days to go from completely savage territory to civilized land? Why didn't the people with cars ever think to drive around for a bit to find the "new" San Fransisco? (I think it was San Fransisco...) And... why couldn't Eli trade for a car in the first place? (I guess he's too blind to drive but not too blind to fight off everyone he comes across even when they have guns). And if he was blind, how did he know which direction to row the boat in? And how did he memorize the entire book word-for-word but he paraphrased throughout the movie? He could have easily been making that sh*t up. And how is it that the "war" was 30 years ago and yet nobody remembers Christianity? Surely someone would have told their children about it.

Don't watch movies with me. I ruin them with my constant rationalizing.

I was thinking about these things, too. We can spoil together ;)
Maikuru
Posts: 9,112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2010 10:08:09 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I was actually very interested in seeing the movie until they started revealing that the book was the Bible. This isn't because I have anything against Christianity, but rather because the main appeal for me was finding out what exactly he was carrying. I was secretly hoping it would be something insignificant or personal that had been built up through rumors and myth.
"You assume I wouldn't want to burn this whole place to the ground."
- lamerde

https://i.imgflip.com...
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2010 10:22:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/23/2010 9:51:36 PM, TulleKrazy wrote:
****SPOILER ALERT****


****SPOILER ALERT****



I enjoyed the movie overall, however, I couldn't help but nickpick at certain things... like how was the man walking "west" for 30 years and it only took him a couple days to go from completely savage territory to civilized land?
Simple. He had the ability to fly at the speed of 10,000 m/s. He only walked and talked to make more scenes for the film.

Why didn't the people with cars ever think to drive around for a bit to find the "new" San Fransisco? (I think it was San Fransisco...)
They didn't want to waste valuable gasoline ...

And... why couldn't Eli trade for a car in the first place?
He didn't have enough things of value to trade ...

(I guess he's too blind to drive but not too blind to fight off everyone he comes across even when they have guns).
Well, when he was walking, he could use his senses to detect motion and the bearings of the ground itself. In a car, it's too difficult.

And if he was blind, how did he know which direction to row the boat in?
Faith. He lived on it for over thirty years.

And how did he memorize the entire book word-for-word but he paraphrased throughout the movie?
He made the Bible simpler to understand.

He could have easily been making that sh*t up. And how is it that the "war" was 30 years ago and yet nobody remembers Christianity?
Because most people were killed. Maybe all the Christians were killed and left only atheists/

Surely someone would have told their children about it.
Some people did know.

Don't watch movies with me. I ruin them with my constant rationalizing.

I got you.
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2010 10:22:18 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/23/2010 9:55:28 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
At 1/23/2010 9:51:36 PM, TulleKrazy wrote:
****SPOILER ALERT****


****SPOILER ALERT****



I enjoyed the movie overall, however, I couldn't help but nickpick at certain things... like how was the man walking "west" for 30 years and it only took him a couple days to go from completely savage territory to civilized land? Why didn't the people with cars ever think to drive around for a bit to find the "new" San Fransisco? (I think it was San Fransisco...) And... why couldn't Eli trade for a car in the first place? (I guess he's too blind to drive but not too blind to fight off everyone he comes across even when they have guns). And if he was blind, how did he know which direction to row the boat in? And how did he memorize the entire book word-for-word but he paraphrased throughout the movie? He could have easily been making that sh*t up. And how is it that the "war" was 30 years ago and yet nobody remembers Christianity? Surely someone would have told their children about it.

Don't watch movies with me. I ruin them with my constant rationalizing.

I was thinking about these things, too. We can spoil together ;)

YAY movie ruiners unite!
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2010 3:32:12 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Personally I hate it when people nitpick at every little detail in a movie. They're made for entertainment so who cares if there's stuff that's scientifically inaccurate, loopholes, etc.
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2010 9:14:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/25/2010 3:32:12 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Personally I hate it when people nitpick at every little detail in a movie. They're made for entertainment so who cares if there's stuff that's scientifically inaccurate, loopholes, etc.

If you're not right, you're wrong. Why advocate incorrectness?
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2010 9:23:30 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/25/2010 9:14:54 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
At 1/25/2010 3:32:12 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Personally I hate it when people nitpick at every little detail in a movie. They're made for entertainment so who cares if there's stuff that's scientifically inaccurate, loopholes, etc.

If you're not right, you're wrong. Why advocate incorrectness?

Because it's a movie. Who cares if there's incorrect details in it. If you want to learn something you're better off reading a book or something.
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2010 10:23:12 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/25/2010 9:23:30 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 1/25/2010 9:14:54 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
At 1/25/2010 3:32:12 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Personally I hate it when people nitpick at every little detail in a movie. They're made for entertainment so who cares if there's stuff that's scientifically inaccurate, loopholes, etc.

If you're not right, you're wrong. Why advocate incorrectness?

Because it's a movie. Who cares if there's incorrect details in it. If you want to learn something you're better off reading a book or something.

But when a movie doesn't make sense it's just not fun for me :( Like if you don't want to hear that in the first Matrix the bullets disappeared and reappeared in several scenes, or that in Twilight vampires can't be choked because they're not supposed to have to breathe, or that in The Perfect Getaway the twist at the end didn't follow, don't watch movies with me. And for that reason I actually watch movies alone 98% of the time.
wonderwoman
Posts: 744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2010 12:20:00 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/23/2010 2:44:51 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
I just came back from watching the flick.

Although the beginning was slower than expected, I heavily enjoyed the fighting scenes, ending, philosophy, and spirituality in the movie.

Wonderwoman - you must not understand faith. Faith is believing without necessarily seeing. Washington's self-blindness symbolized his faith in his own travels and tied with his faith in God. It really was not that hard to understand.

I felt there were many philosophical connections and thoughts that movie incorporated with the ending. I'd like to discuss, with wonderwoman, why she is so against the Christian aspect in the movie. I'd also like to know why she has vote bombed me in various debates.

I understand faith. I have not votebombed.

They took the whole faith is blind concept to far and it ruined the movie. Besides faith is well a waste of your time plain and simple. I personal have faith in the pink unicorn. I have faith that it is pink and since I cannot see it I use logic to tell me it is invisible. That's the basis for any religion try to disprove how ridicilious that sounds.
nickthengineer
Posts: 251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2010 5:54:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I totally wasn't expecting a Christian message from this movie but I was pleasantly surprised. Nice change of pace from typical hollywood.
I evolved from stupid. (http://www.debate.org...)
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/1/2010 4:49:11 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/25/2010 9:23:30 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 1/25/2010 9:14:54 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
At 1/25/2010 3:32:12 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Personally I hate it when people nitpick at every little detail in a movie. They're made for entertainment so who cares if there's stuff that's scientifically inaccurate, loopholes, etc.

If you're not right, you're wrong. Why advocate incorrectness?

Because it's a movie. Who cares if there's incorrect details in it. If you want to learn something you're better off reading a book or something.

Suspension of disbelief.

Now certain genres you have to get into the paradigm of the film, so you can accept superheroes or transporter accidents. But films are meant to be 'real world' should be realistic, otherwise it's annoying.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
philosphical
Posts: 1,643
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/1/2010 9:36:09 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I'm sorry wonderwoman, but i think it's kind of ridiculous to judge the quality of the movie because of religion was introduced in it. It virtually didn't reflect a whole lot on te bible anyway. This was an action movie, and the introduction of the bible in it was to try and re-spread good into the world. The bible is a symbol for to all people that generally represents goodness. The movie itself, however said nothing from the book, and reflected none of it in the movie.

What should be looked at is the symbolism of what it could mean if the bible reached hordes of people and made a difference for for the poverty stricken people. Which is indeed what I thought the movie was trying to portray.
Your mouths writing checks that your @ss can't cash!