Do NOT go see Noah the movie!!!! I walked out of it (one of the first I have
ever walked out of). I went trying to give Hollywood the benefit of the doubt,
knowing that they would need to add some artistic interpretation given the small
storyline from Genesis. However, when Hollywood injected the idea that Noah
couldn't get answers from God and wanted to murder his granddaughter, I
couldn't stand it anymore. I was disgusted by the portrayal of an axe
wielding Noah who kills countless people. I was appalled by the fact that they
made up a storyline that a bad guy secretly snuck on to the boat and conspired
with Ham to kill Noah while on the boat. I was offended that they portrayed a
prophet as a man not preaching repentance but as a man determined to end the
human race including his own family. Besides the fact that there is a man with a
boat and animals, this movie in no way follows the story found in Genesis.
Is it a good story, well told? Not about historical accuracy. Russel Crowe was
in "Gladiator," a movie that a few critics panned for a lack of
historical accuracy. I did not see it to learn history, I saw for a good story,
well told, and own the DVD and watch it occasionally when I need a lift.
Crowe's speech to the Emperor is one I use to illustrate the power of a
mission statement. I hope Noah will be the same, and give us a good
story. If I want history of that time period, I have history books. If I want
mythology I will turn to mythology books. This is entertainment and I will enjoy
or critique it as entertainment.
Don't let Hollywood waste your time and take your money. This isn't
remotely about the biblical Noah and is an insult to the intelligence, integrity
and faith of all believers. Starve Hollywood of money and support good
alternative film makers.
Not sure why my earlier comment was put on "hold" by the
editors/moderators according to the email I received, but I'll try
again.Since Paramount is interested in giving a disclaimer about the
movie, the one disclaimer they also need to make is about another religion, the
religion of "Anthropogenic Global Warming." Based on preview audiences
and released scripts, Paramount should also warn potential audiences that they
will be preached to about how man is the cause of global warming. Also according
to preview audiences and released scripts (do a search on it), there also is
some preaching about over-population by Noah and he also wants to kill his
daughter's newborn twin girls, but is too physically weak to do so.
Let's see if that makes the final cut or not. We need more disclaimers
about some of the side agendas of this movie.
RE: Church member,I just think the best way to find truth is to look at
everything and being willing to challenge your beliefs, True,There
will be a great abundance of sin in the end times and that there will also be a
coming judgment. But as in the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of
the Son of man be.” Matthew 24:37-39 (KJV) Noah’s ark is
Biblical a "Type of Christ": …while the ark was a preparing,
wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. .).Peter makes it clear
in this verse that it is not the ritual itself that saves, but the fact that we
are united with Christ in His resurrection through faith, “the pledge of a
good conscience toward God through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1
Peter 3: 20-21). Faith in Jesus in Jesus is what saves. Baptism is
only a symbol, after-all The 8 who were saved did not get wet.
In one of the earlier posts, a person said "I don't want to challenge
my faith/beliefs". Every person is entitled to live their life the way they
want to but I find this mindset puzzling. If a person truly wants to find truth
shouldn't they want their beliefs and opinions to be challenged? If
something is true won't it still be true after you have looked into it and
looked at all sides and evidence? I just think the best way to find truth is to
look at everything and being willing to challenge your beliefs. If a person
doesn't do that they may just spend their whole life believing in whatever
church they were born into.For me personally, the evidence and
facts I read about the flood was the first thing that started to help me
question the faith of my childhood. I am so grateful I went down that road.
I am okay with a bit of artistic license, but I saw the trailer a night or two
ago and assumed (until the bitter end) that Russell Crowe had another movie
coming out. The trailer I saw looked action-packed with armies fighting etc.
(definitely not the one at the movie website). I honestly thought it was
another movie until the name Noah appeared at the end.
I was very disappointmed to learn that this movie does not even portray
Noah's family as having three sons and their wives. Apparently Noah has
the sons but there are no wives, and there is, instead, a little girl that Noah
rescued! I had heard enough at that point, but there's more and worse.
The ark is not to save faithful or repentant souls and "launch" mankind
on a fresh start. That could not be done by three men and no women! Check it
out.This isn't just fleshing out a sparse biblical account; it
is changing fundamentally even the most basic details of what the scriptures
inform us. I do not intend to contribute anything to the makers of this movies
and their collaborators. I am truly dismayed; I had been looking forward to
this for months.I suggest people check as many reviews as they need
to before committing to investing their time and money on this one. You may
find such a course enlightening and will save a huge let down.
I like Russell Crow so I'm going to go see this ...even though I understand
Hollywood is atheist for the most part.
I am LDS and believe that the Bible is the word of God as far as it is
translated correctly. But I frankly have no problem with a little artistic
license when making a movie based on part of it. Even in official LDS movies
about parts of the Bible and/or the Book of Mormon there is artistic license
used. Take The Testaments for example. It is a spiritually powerful movie for
LDS Members such as myself. But frankly it is quite liberal with its use of
artistic license when compared with the text in the Book of Mormon. And
that's okay.To be quite honest, any movie made about any
scriptural account will have to embellish on the facts as per the text of the
scriptures or at the very least, the actors and director will have to decide in
one way or another how to portray the events that are mentioned in the
scriptures. Hollywood will take it further than the LDS Church or other churches
would, but as long as they stay true to the main story, I see no problem with
I am a movie goer. I love to watch movies, be they totally fiction,
'based' on a true story or 'taken' from real events. It
doesn't matter to me. I will watch and then say "that was really
cool!" If they changed things up I will either like it or not. I go for the
entertainment value. And then I will read my scriptures, go to church and
continue to learn what really happened. Why make such a fuss? Because it will
make the film more money! Any 'controversy' will make people go to
watch it that much more. Be like me. Grab the drink and popcorn, sit back and
spend the next 2.5 hours in escapism!
I enjoy art, literature, and film too much to get too weighed down with
"accuracies." However, the last Noah story (you know the one where Lot
was in it too!) was so awful inaccurate that it was absurd. I for one
don't mind some "literary license." I'll see it just for
Anthony Hopkins and Russell Crowe-- two amazing artists. When I want to get
close to God and find power in the scriptures, I don't go to Hollywood
anyway; when I want entertainment, sensationalism, and some inspiration, then
Hollywood can sometimes do the job. We'll see with Noah.
I think very few people aren't going to be surprised in the hereafter when
they get to watch the history of the earth. Biblical literalists will be
surprised by how much of what they took literally (e.g. creation in 168 hours?)
wasn't literal, and skeptics will be surprised by how much of what they
refused to take literally was literal (e.g. Jesus' divinity and miracles).
One thing I noticed was that in the trailer they didn't even have the
correct Children of Noah. I mean the going-ons with Ham was like a basic part of
that story lol.
Every artistic production, whether it is painting, stage production or film has
its own take on any scriptural account. Friberg's Book of
Mormon illustrations are an example. Nephites worshipping at Mayan temples,
Samuel stands on a unreasonably high wall, sheep and horses in the Americas,
steel weapons galore, and everyones seems to be a body builder! This makes the
historians and scriptorians among us want to scream! But it does
NOT matter. It is art. It is not history, it is not scripture. It is art. It
moves us, it is fun to look at. It is edifying. And the differences and
discrepancies are fun to discuss and debate. It is art.
I for one will skip this Hollywood "interpritatin" of the scriptures. I
prefer to not have my faith challenged by Hollywood and its liberal views of
life and history. When we have all the correct answers in the bible there is no
reason to interpret. No thank you liberals, your "openmindedness"
won't reach this saint.
If it doesn't follow the Bible account, why watch it? Why even make a movie
based on a scriptural story if you're not going to come close to following
it correctly? It will probably blame global warming for the rain that covers the
Earth. Really? I'll definitely wait for reviews before I see this movie.
You can't make a full length film out of a few paragraphs without adding
stuff in. Film makers usually earn a c in a historical movie, I would not expect
an a for a religious based one.
I was hoping they'd portray it is a story born of the inundation of the
black sea basin at the end of the last ice age. That must have been a pretty
terrifying event; surely to generate some stories that would live on and be
embellished by people who had no idea of what was going on around them.
I'm sort of interested in seeing this. Without intending to detract from
the value of actual, direct scriptural stories, I also really enjoy ones that
aren't necessarily out of the scriptures, but that portray similiar ideas
or events, like Narnia and all that.As long as the grounding of this
film is in a clear, specific God granting revelation and aid to Noah because
He's going to flood the earth due to the wicked who follow not the
commandments and who torment the righteous, and not perverted to some sort of
quasi-spiritual or secular message about nature or portraying Noah's family
as liberals amidst crowds of "wicked" religious fundamentalists or
something, I'm fine with whatever liberties the film wants to take.
Warfare, fireballs, unicorns, I don't care about that sort of surface stuff
if they're up front about it, as they appear to be.
What's the big deal? Protestants have taken more liberties in interpreting
the bible than Aronofsky ever has.