NOAH - Grading & Discussion

[Agent Richard07]

[highlight]***SPOILERS AHEAD***[/highlight]

Darren Aronofsky's big budget take on the biblical story of Noah starring Russell Crowe is out. It's scoring well and getting a lot of positive reviews but it's also getting a lot of criticism from religious groups. Here's a negative review from a Christian group called Answers in Genesis...

Ultimately, there is barely a hint of biblical accuracy in this almost two-and-a-half-hour film. But beyond being shocked at the massive distortions of God’s Word in Noah, we can recognize one opportunity: if you know of someone who has gone ahead and watched Noah (even with all the cautions AiG and others have presented about this unbiblical film), you can point a non-Christian toward trusting in God's Word and the forgiveness offered in Jesus.

Here are just a few more of the many concerns with what we are calling a pagan film. Read more...

Here's a positive review from Christianity Today...

So yes, if you're wondering: Noah is worth your time and your ticket price.

Reason 1: Noah is a good movie made by good filmmakers who pursue important questions and think of movies as art.

Reason 2: Noah is a solid adaptation.

Reason 3: Noah is visually and imaginatively compelling.

Reason 4: Noah re-enchants the ancient world in powerful ways that counteract some of the worst excesses of modernity.

Reason 5: You should actually see it for yourself.

Read more...

And here's a fascinating interview with Aronofsky about the development of the film. What's interesting is that he talks about the midrash tradition where the reader is encouraged to find meaning and fill in details themselves rather than just take what's written in scripture at face value. This approach is what helped him develop his own unique story. More reviews and Russell Crowe defends the movie.

Official Website | IMDb Page | Wikipedia Entry
Box Office Mojo Page | Rotten Tomatoes Page | Metacritic Page

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OSaJE2rqxU[/yt]​

 

[Trekker4747]

Muscular Russell Crowe with a salt-and-pepper beard is perfectly cast as the 600-year-old Noah. I saw trailers and posters for this and just rolled my eyes. I'm no stickler to Biblical accuracy or anything like that, I couldn't care less about the Bible. But did Noah really need a "gritty reboot" in this vain?

 

[FPAlpha]

Muscular Russell Crowe with a salt-and-pepper beard is perfectly cast as the 600-year-old Noah. I saw trailers and posters for this and just rolled my eyes. I'm no stickler to Biblical accuracy or anything like that, I couldn't care less about the Bible. But did Noah really need a "gritty reboot" in this vain?

Pretty much my thoughts and sentiments.

From the trailers it looks like an action movie with fights galore.. i don't remember a single fight in the biblical story.

I really don't like movies that adapt a story and then bend it so far to appeal to modern audiences so that the original story is just a framework instead of the focal point.

It may in itself be a good movie but it sure seems to not care about the original material. Don't plan to see it at the theatre.

 

[Agent Richard07]

I saw the movie and the trailer above doesn't quite do it justice. It's very much a Darren Aronofsky film, more along the lines of The Fountain than a generic blockbuster film. It's got action and fighting, but it didn't come off like an action movie. We have a family living in hard times, facing both harsh elements and the uncivilized masses, and the story reflects that through the appropriate level of action and fighting. Russell Crowe is perfectly cast and Jennifer Connelly is always a pleasure to watch. I wasn't expecting Anthony Hopkins, so seeing him was a surprise. And the IMDb says that Nick Nolte was there but I didn't notice him. The movie started off slow and for a while I just wanted things to move along so they could get to the good stuff. I quickly got immersed in the story though, and things did pick up. I should also note that it has a lot of fantasy elements like a magic seed that can grow an entire forrest and fallen angels in the form of rock monsters that made this feel almost like a fantasy/comic book movie. They were pretty campy and I never totally got used to their inclusion. As for the rest, the drama was tense, the flood was a spectacular sight thanks to a big budget and we got a pretty good take on Noah, a man who has a life purpose he must follow, yet struggles with the fear and confusion that gets in the way of making the right choices. It's a good life lesson regardless of what you believe. That's what I took away from the movie. I didn't see the environmental preaching that the naysayers are talking about.

As for the age-old logistics of rounding up animals and loading them onto the ark, it's a leap in logic that's glossed over but the issue of having food for all of them is dealt with in a manner that makes sense if you don't want to nitpick too much.

Spoiler: The Issue of Food

The animals were put into a hibernation state using some sort of incense.

Then there's another issue that's a big part of the film… Noah has three sons. One lucked out and got a wife and one is 10 but the middle one is a teenage boy who needs a girl pretty badly but can't have one because there aren't any left.

Spoiler: No Sex?

An interesting story development solves that problem in the guise of "God Provides" but then it raises the whole issue of insest and genetic diversity.

Noah's Ark

The ark, as I understand, conforms to biblical specifications and interestingly enough, it doesn't look like the boat you often see in drawings. It's basically just a big lumber box that doesn't look sea-worthy.

The box-like structure here is the ark itself. It's not the wooden contstruction frame covering a boat like I believed…

I did a quick reading on what the ark was supposed to look like and it seems that a few artists have depicted it as something closer to a box than a ship.

The only real liberty that Aronofsky took was putting the door in the front instead of the side as the bible describes.

 

[bigdaddy]

As the director or someone said, in the Bible it said it floated, never said it looked like a boat.

And religious people complaining about facts is a joke.

 

[OdoWanKenobi]

Holy crap!

This is not the movie I was expecting. I hope lots and lots of church groups go to see this, and clergy are forced to answer uncomfortable questions. My jaw hit the floor when:

Spoiler: Noah

Noah tells his children the creation myth. "Let there be light" is followed by the big fucking bang! Then the creation of the animals shows the evolution from single celled organisms in the sea to more complex life that eventually makes its way on to land and continues evolving!

I guess I shouldn't be surprised considering Aronofsky's beliefs. But the whole second half of the movie is a huge twist too. It changes completely in tone, and asks the question: "What kind of man is Noah, if he unquestioningly condemns all of humanity to death?"

Beyond all of the bits that are sure raise ire from the fundamentalist crowd, this is a massively entertaining movie. There's epic action, and incredible suspense. Religious and atheist alike should go see this.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Haven't decided whether or not to see this one yet. Seems like it came directly from Russell Crowe's personal fantasies.

And all the metacritic user reviews make cracks about rock monsters. "I always wondered how Noah built the Ark. Now I know it was ROCK MONSTERS." That makes me wary of the film. But I am a bit curious how a film about God committing genocide out of moral rage could be taken as a message of forgiveness. Seems to me the message of the Noah's Ark story is "Seriously, follow God's laws or he'll murder you."

 

[Reverend]

^Yeah in case anyone hasn't caught on yet, this is not the Biblical tale of Noah, it's the older 'Book of Enoch' version with fallen angels, their half breed offspring and all kinds of crazy stuff removed in later texts and the highly sanitised version taught in schools.

I haven't seen it yet, but I really like this approach. There's a lot of really ancient and powerful stories in the Old Testament that pre-date monotheism by thousands of years and they belong to all of humanity, not just a handful of religious sects who can't even agree on the details.

I'd like to see them tackle Sodom and Gomorrah. Lot was a really nasty piece of work.

 

[Mr Light]

I am not religious but I am dying to see this movie! I can't wait to see the Rock Monsters!

William Shatner's vision of ST5 is finally being realized!!!

 

[StarMan]

I am not religious but I am dying to see this movie! I can't wait to see the Rock Monsters!

William Shatner's vision of ST5 is finally being realized!!!

Funny, I thought of that when I first saw them.

Great movie, BTW.

 

[Agent Richard07]

Seems to me the message of the Noah's Ark story is "Seriously, follow God's laws or he'll murder you."

More like... "You always have a choice and there's a better way if you don't give in to irrational fear, anxiety, anger, etc."

You could say that "God destroying the world so that man could start over" was Noah's interpretation of a natural disaster but the movie isn't grounded enough to make that a clear option for the viewer.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I dunno, it seems like God killed everybody in the world except for one family because they weren't living the way he'd prefer them to.

He may have forgiven humanity as a whole, but didn't forgive a grand majority of the humans composing it. I don't see how you can draw any other reasonable message from that except "Be pious or God will drown your ass."

 

[Reverend]

I wouldn't expend too much energy trying to untangle the logic of some of these stories. Most are *very* old and have been through the mill of multiple edits, translations and reinterpretations over the millennia, so whatever basis in fact or metaphorical intention of the original authors that was once there has long since been totally lost to time.

Indeed I'm pretty sure the story of Noah is thought to be a composite of several even older (possibly unrelated) stories that were edited together and re-interpreted as a single narrative. Hell, most of Genesis reads as though this is the case.

 

[Mr Light]

Okay, so I saw the movie... then I wikipedied it...

Do you mean to tell me that 20 foot tall six armed rock monsters did NOT build the Ark in the Bible???? Or that Noah and his family did NOT attempt to murder each other once they got on the Ark?????

I prefer the movie version

Also, the movie did a really poor job of explaining what was going on at the end when Noah is living by himself getting drunk and showing everybody his bare ass. It just felt really out of left field there.

Also, if this family is going to repopulate the earth... who's gonna be $&%*ing those two babies?

Also, how did the bad guys have 1700s era technology? Is that in the Bible?

 

[bigdaddy]

Is that in the Bible?

Quick lesson on what is in the Bible...

1. Slavery is fine.
2. Shrimp are bad.

What isn't in the Bible...

1. Big rock monsters because that would be too realistic for it.

 

[Agent Richard07]

Also, if this family is going to repopulate the earth... who's gonna be $&%*ing those two babies?

Spoiler: the anwser.

They were intended for the two sons who didn't have wives. One of them left at the end, so this leaves two possibilities. Either he'll be back one day when the babies are grown up and a relationship won't feel too incestuous or his leaving was meant to represent the fact that people still had choices and he made his by leaving for good.

 

[Samurai8472]

The only real liberty that Aronofsky took was putting the door in the front instead of the side as the bible describes.

I see no "0" in the registry. Aronofsky fails

 

[Reverend]

Also, if this family is going to repopulate the earth... who's gonna be $&%*ing those two babies?

I don't know. Who did the nasty with Eve's first daughters? Kind of the same issue.

Is that in the Bible?

Quick lesson on what is in the Bible...

1. Slavery is fine.
2. Shrimp are bad.

What isn't in the Bible...

1. Big rock monsters because that would be too realistic for it.

It kind of amuses me when people talk about "The Bible" as if 1) it was actually written as a complete work, rather than assembled from a myriad of pre-existing texts (some of which clearly written while under the influence of some seriously bad shrooms--*cough*Book or Revelations *cough*) the inclusion and ordering of which has fluctuated over the centuries. And 2) there's only one version and it's the King James in English version. Where in reality there's dozen, if not hundreds of variations within the Christian sects alone, to say nothing of the overlap with the Jewish and Muslim canon.

Anyway, once more, for those wondering where some of the weird stuff came from, have a gander at the Book of Enoch. No, it is not in the King James Bible, but it does appear to be in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the canon of a few other Christian sects.

 

[Trekker4747]

Okay, so I saw the movie... then I wikipedied it...

Do you mean to tell me that 20 foot tall six armed rock monsters did NOT build the Ark in the Bible???? Or that Noah and his family did NOT attempt to murder each other once they got on the Ark?????

I prefer the movie version

Also, the movie did a really poor job of explaining what was going on at the end when Noah is living by himself getting drunk and showing everybody his bare ass. It just felt really out of left field there.

Also, if this family is going to repopulate the earth... who's gonna be $&%*ing those two babies?

Also, how did the bad guys have 1700s era technology? Is that in the Bible?

Noah's bare, 600-year-old ass.

 

[Mr Light]

Also, why didn't Methuselah didn't get to go on the Ark? Why did he have to die? He was a cool guy and he had magic powers. Noah didn't have magic powers. Aside from that evil thousand mile stare when talking about killing babies.

<<"And they became pregnant, and they bare great giants, whose height was three hundred ells:[68] Who consumed all the acquisitions of men. And when men could no longer sustain them, the giants turned against them and devoured mankind. And they began to sin against birds, and beasts, and reptiles, and fish, and to devour one another's flesh, and drink the blood.">>

Oh man, they should have put the man-eating giants in there too!