The Movie Noah

I never had plans to see it much before it came out on Netflix or some cable station. Apparently though, there is a good demographic for this kind of stuff. If it woulda been GILGEMESH nobody'd go.

Theres another Godzilla coming out. I see this as a really dumb movie year. Such years occur every so often.

I am so seeing Godzilla on the IMAX screen! Much more biblical the Noah I bet.

The thread was started with a full admission that the comments being made were based on advance critical comments, and that these comments may not prove out upon viewing the film.

It was a never a case of praising or condemning the film before actually seeing it.

and you decree that because someone died and anointed you what ?

What's your problem FM? I "decree" that because I started the thread.

I have NEVER gone to a movie theater to be enlightened.

Well, bully for you.

I can't wait for the next non-sequitor.

Caught you in your own edicta from past threads that you've crashed.See, this is what its like to be a pain in the ass like you often are.

BTW its sequitUr

Farmer giving spelling advice - hilarious!

Whatever you say

Never thought of that

Well I finally watched "Noah" last night on Pay-for-View.

I give it 3 stars out of 5.

The special effects were good, but, these days, when are they not unless it's a made-for-TV flick on the SyFy channel?

I enjoyed the cinematography, of Matthew Libatique (who apparently is a favorite of the director David Aronofsky having worked on two of his other films).

I also appreciated the art direction and the filming locations in Iceland and Mexico helped to present the appearance of a barren and exhausted world. I suppose this could have been part of the intent of Aronofsky to portray humanity's capital crime as environmental degradation, but it could just as easily have been intended metaphorically rather than literally.

The acting was good to excellent with the best performances delivered by Jennifer Connolly (Naameh, Noah's wife) and Ray Winestone (Tubal-cain)

The scene in which Naameh condemns Noah for his intention to murder his granddaughters was very compelling and I can only imagine what tragedy Connolly dredged up in her mind to produce her sobbing performance. One of the best bits of acting, I've ever seen and she deserves an academy award nomination for that scene alone.

"Tubal-cain" is mentioned in the Bible as a blacksmith, but his role in the story of Noah is completely fabricated. In the Bible, Tubal-cain's sister is named Naameh, but whether that Naameh is the same Naameh who married Noah, I will leave to those who know the Bible a lot better than I do. In any case, the Tubal-cain and Naameh of the movie have no relationship, and the former is the king or leader of what appears to be the last of humanity. He's a brutal figure, but certainly not specifically a despoiler of the environment. He is however, quite the humanist though and develops an interesting relationship with Noah's son Ham. Winestone is an excellent actor who doesn't seem to get the credit he deserves nor is he well known by the general public despite his having appeared and starred in a number of very good movies, The Sweeny, Tracker and Beowulf being three.

Emma Watson turns in a performance that proves she can act in adult roles that are beyond her being the friend of a wizard, and Anthony Hopkins simply can't do a bad job although the part of Methuselah is a little bizarre.

Russell Crow as Noah is OK, but nothing special. The fellows who play his sons are unremarkable.

I read that Aronofsky sought to create his own legendary world a la Middle-Earth, and I was certainly surprised by the degree of fantasy infused in this movie. Some of it is silly like the magical substance that can be used to create Roman Candles and pregnancy tests, and some of it is entirely fabricated and very odd like the magic seed that creates a forest, Methuselah's healing powers and the Ent-like Watchers who are angels imprisoned in rock forms, and the actual builders of the Ark (or Barge based on what it looks like in the film). The Bible references fallen angels and giants having lived upon the earth, but you have to consult The Book of Enoch to find The Watchers or Grigori, fallen angels who lusted after human women and acted the role of Prometheus in teaching humans forbidden knowledge. They're described as giants (which must have been tough on the women with whom they consummated their lust) but not rock-like or even misshapen. Two have speaking parts in Noah, Samyaza and Magog. Samyaza is voiced by Nick Nolte ( I guessed wrongly Frank Langella) who himself looks like a creature made of rocks and character actor Mark Margolis is Magog who actually isn't one of the Grigori named in the Book of Enoch.

The "creation" itself is given an interesting treatment, incorporating cosmology and evolution into the process of "daily" creation, and depicting Adam and Eve as strange energy creatures. I have no clue, I confess, as to where the Aronofsky was going with the latter. At some point in the movie the earth is depicted bearing the mega-continent Pangaea which I thought was an interesting touch.

Another minor but interesting bit involved the deaths of a couple of animals on the ark. Obviously they can't be around today since their line ended on the ark so Aronofsky had to depict animals we've never seen.

I have no idea what Aronofsky’ s religious beliefs are or if he intended to express them in this film, but the God or "The Creator" of Noah seems fairly disengaged. He "speaks" to Noah, indirectly, through dreams (or in the case of the pivotal act towards the end of the film, not at all) which is often a device intended to leave the actuality of divine communication ambiguous, but the rains and the animals do come, so clearly Noah is not suffering from hallucinations. The question of what sort of a God would wipe out humanity for any sins is not addressed in any way I could discern and there doesn't at all seem to be any implied criticism of The Creator’s drastic plan for starting anew.

There are no scenes of Pagan rituals or outright defiance of God, the character of Tubal-cain can be said to represent a sense of humanity being the equal of God, while expressing a profound bitterness over the sense that The Creator has abandoned his greatest creation.

Based upon my viewing I don't see any validity to the assertion that Aronofsky’ s film is anything close to being an overtly environmentalist statement. Mankind is being done away with for its abuse of all of God’s creation, including, and possibly most importantly to this film, itself.

When asked, Aronofsky didn’t reject the notion that his film contained an environmental message, nor should he have since it does, but I didn’t find it to be the main message of the movie. Artists are foolish to deny their work carries meanings which may be seen as favorable, even if those messages were not consciously intended. There is a brief scene where the remaining humans hack up a carcass for food which does seem to have been intended to evoke repulsion in the viewer, but there are other scenes of human brutality to one another which seem much more in keeping with the Biblical tale in depicting the behavior that The Creator has decided to wash away.

Much has been made by a number of critics, who liked and disliked the film, of Noah being a vegan. How anyone can determine this Noah is a vegan is beyond me. If he ever talks about what he and his family eat, I missed it and so it certainly wasn’t a grand speech, and scenes of eating meals are practically non-existent so it would be impossible to know, for instance, that Noah not only doesn’t consume animal flesh, he doesn’t eat eggs. Claims the character is a vegan are groundless and serves only the critic’s political bias.

As well, claims that the film is pro-nature and anti-human are mistaken. This Noah’s existential crisis concerning his belief that God wants all humans to perish is, I believe a flaw in the movie and a particularly large one considering that it drives the last third or so of the plot. His belief is not derived from a message from God and, in fact, how he comes to the conclusion is not adequately explained. The ultimate resolution of the crisis is rather trite.

There is another similarity between Noah and the Biblical tale upon which it is "based," and that is the lack of any rational explanation of how Noah's small band of survivors repopulated the earth. It's even tougher for the movie's clan as its Ham and Japheth aren’t accompanied by wives. So incest has to play an even bigger part in the effort then it did in the post-flood world of the Bible.