Movie Review – Noah
March 31, 2014 by Allen W. Pilgrim
The movie based on the true story of “Noah” and his family and bearing the name of its protagonist, opened the fifth weekend of March 2014 as a Box Office hit, surpassing all movies, and raking in an astounding $44 million. In the realm of movies based on the Bible only “The Passion of the Christ” has surpassed that with $83 million on its opening weekend (2/25/04). While it is unlikely to reach the lifetime gross of that movie it is sure to set some records. In addition “Noah” has generated $51.1 million internationally as of this writing.The question on most people’s minds is whether or not it is worth parting with any of your hard-earned dollars. It is my goal to give you my assessment of the film without going to either extreme of, “It’s a great movie and you need to go see it” to “What a blasphemous piece of filth, anyone who goes to see this movie is not a real Christian and is in danger of the fires of hell.” In fact, unlike my typical reaction to a movie, I will not be making a recommendation one way or the other. Instead I will give you enough information to make the decision on your own.
Over the past several months of reading reviews by people who had either not seen it or were basing their opinions on something they heard from somebody else, I made the decision to take my wife and 18-year-old son to see it. I will tell you up front that much of what you have heard is not actually correct about the movie and some if it, sadly, is true.
The script is the result of a nearly eleven year journey by Darren Aronofsky and Ari Handel researching and studying the story of the biblical flood found in Genesis 6-9. Aronofsky is the son of two conservative Jewish teachers. While it is unclear whether he believes the story is true or not, he greatly wanted to bring a fresh telling of the story to the Silver Screen.
If you are expecting to see the sugar-coated myth of a kindly old gentleman who lovingly puts two of each animal on the ark then you will be sorely disappointed. This is one of the elements of this movie that makes it so powerful. I grew up like so many of you with flannel graph cutouts of the characters and coloring pages that depicted two giraffes with their heads sticking out of the top, a couple of hippopotami and some lions on the bow, and monkeys hanging off the sides. The writers were very careful to get the exact measurement of the ark as specified in the Bible. What we see is the most accurate representation of the ark ever presented in a motion picture. The sheer size of the ark in the movie will leave one awestruck.
Likewise, if you are looking for a word-for-word retelling of the story then you will likely be one angry camper by the time you leave the theater. It should be noted that any such telling of the story would mean that you would be largely watching a silent movie and wouldn’t hear Noah’s voice until the end. It didn’t take long to find something to support the critics of this movie. The movie starts with a poorly made retelling of creation that is loosely based on the opening chapters of the Bible. Oddly the word “God” is never mentioned and instead “The Creator” is used in its place throughout the movie.
The Watchers are introduced. These are giant rock creatures that are supposedly forged of fire and made by The Creator on the Second Day which is the same day he made the heavens. “We were not stone then, but light,” one tells Noah. “Rock and mud shadowed our glow.” They resemble the enormous tree creatures known as Ents in “The Lord of the Rings” trilogy or the rock creatures in “The Neverending Story.” The Watchers do not appear in the Canon but can be found in the book of Enoch. It’s interesting that Paramount Pictures chose to keep this addition to the biblical story quiet. They did a great job because I had not even heard about them until they appeared on screen.
We then meet Noah who is portrayed by veteran actor Russell Crowe. This is one of the better choices that was made by casting. His character is believable and his very presence demands attention.
Fast forward to the family on the ark. Noah and his family were never in any danger but the film deviates greatly from this premise and we see a version of Noah that believes that he and his family are to be the last of all mankind. In a family meeting he instructs each of them as to who they will bury. To make the story even more twisted Noah proclaims that if his pregnant daughter-in-law, Shem’s wife, gives birth to a girl then he will kill the baby girl immediately. This alone might cause many to refuse to see the movie. However, I would caution basing that decision on this alone as Noah struggles with what he believes is his duty throughout the film. It is a dark moment and causes great friction with his wife, played by Jennifer Connelly, and his sons who are planning on killing him if he goes through with it. This is a bizarre and unnecessary plot twist that actually detracts from the story of God’s redemptive work.
Early on in the movie Noah tells about the story of creation and a representation is shown of what he is saying. It is proceeding at a blinding fast speed and in those moments we see a deviation from the biblical story where evolution is presented. It happens so quickly but we are shown fish that change to reptiles and crawl out onto dry land and grow and change into dinosaurs. While this is not scriptural it is not a reason to avoid the movie. If we were upset about every detail in the movies we see I don’t think we would go very often.
While there is much that can be written about this movie there are a few things I want to leave you with:
THE GOOD
- Stunning cinematography. The ark on the ocean is spectacular and portrays this aspect about as accurately as is possible. The mountains, the animals, the birds and even the ark itself are brought to life on the screen.
- Genesis 6:5 says, “The Lord observed the extent of human wickedness on the earth.” This is a powerful aspect of the film. There is no doubt that mankind has become evil. It is a world filled with vicious assaults, corruption, obsessive lust and wickedness of every kind.
- The flood itself is dramatic and convincing.
- The acting is superb. The character of Ham is a bit weak and there are some odd twists with all of the family. The interactions between Noah and his wife and between the family help us see that these are real people. They are people that struggle with some of the same things we do, though I would suggest nothing in our lives compares to the utter devastation and challenges they were facing.
- Though it is subdued it is clear that God caused the waters to recede and spared Noah, his family, and the animals.
- The Watchers. While this made the movie more of an Epic film in the realm of “Lord of the Rings” it also seemed to detract from the truth of God’s protection and reminded me at times of a bad Japanese Sci-Fi.
- God is referred to only as “The Creator.” There is no reason for this.
- Noah is at times a maniacal, homicidal, crazy person who forgot to take his medication.
- Methuselah, portrayed by Anthony Hopkins, is a bizarre addition and comes across as a sort of New Age mystic who searches for berries, meditates in solitude and gives Noah a hallucinogenic drink so Noah can receive a vision from The Creator. This makes it seem as if God needed some help to speak to Noah.
- The Creator never speaks to Noah even though the Bible says, “The Lord spoke to Noah.” Instead he has these bizarre dreams (or visions) where he’s in a body of water filled with dead people.
- It is Noah’s decision whether or not to spare the child. First, that should have never been in the movie. Second, Aronofsky could have at least had an intervention by God or one of His angels as in the Abraham and Isaac story.
- Some very disturbing and graphic scenes that are sure to give sensitive people nightmares are woven throughout the movie. Tubal-Cain, portrayed by Ray Winstone, is about as evil as they come and when the rains come he goes around The Watchers and breaks into the ark where he becomes a stowaway. In one scene he bites the head off a lizard in the presence of Ham who has become his young apprentice. He has convinced him that his father, Noah, is wicked and must be stopped. The bloodshed and graphic violence are something that you will want to take into consideration before making a choice to see this film.
- It is irrelevant to me that Aronofsky has made controversial movies in the past.
- The belief that “Hollywood is only doing this to make money.” So when Paramount came out with “Iron Man 3” last year did people make the same comment? Perhaps. The obvious answer is that of course they are doing it to make money. It should be understood that there are thousands of people involved with this movie, just look at the 10 minutes of credits, who also make a living doing this. In addition many Christians work in Hollywood and have been trying for years to get Hollywood to make more movies about biblical subjects. As it turns out, Christians make up the single biggest “special interest” group out there. Media producer and consultant Phil Cooke has a unique perspective — he’s a Christian who works in Hollywood. “Christians have to stop looking at Hollywood as the enemy, and start reaching out,” he said. “Missionaries have discovered that you don’t change minds by criticism, boycotts or threats. You change minds by developing a relationship and a sense of trust. You work from the inside.” I also like this quote by Cooke, “Hollywood isn’t a Bible school, so if our expectation is that movies they produce will be 100 percent accurate we simply have the wrong expectations.”
Other Reviews that you might find useful: Link 1, Link 2, Link 3
1 comment:
That sure sounds like a fascinating combination of factors all bundled up into a movie. You paint a vivid picture, and it's evident you've looked at it as objectively as possible, not trying to sway the reader. In trying to imagine this film, it seems like it must be an epic mess, though much like a Rolling Stones song that still has its moments and redeeming qualities and somehow pulls things together so they're not completely incohesive. I wonder how many people might be thinking after hearing about it, "I've got to see that for myself now." Maybe that's what Aronofsky wanted to stir up. Hmmm...
Post a Comment