Director Darren Aronofsky’s non-traditional ‘Noah’ gets explanatory message

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • fletche5 Savoy, IL
    March 30, 2014 12:34 a.m.

    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.

  • Stormwalker Cleveland , OH
    March 9, 2014 11:30 a.m.

    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.

  • Pssst LOGAN, UT
    March 8, 2014 11:29 a.m.

    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.

  • gittalopctbi Glendale, AZ
    March 7, 2014 10:33 p.m.

    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.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    March 7, 2014 5:36 p.m.

    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.

  • Church member North Salt Lake, UT
    March 7, 2014 2:11 p.m.

    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.

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    March 7, 2014 1:42 p.m.

    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.

  • Gildas LOGAN, UT
    March 7, 2014 12:57 p.m.

    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.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    March 6, 2014 4:25 p.m.

    I like Russell Crow so I'm going to go see this ...even though I understand Hollywood is atheist for the most part.

  • Samwise Salt Lake City, UT
    March 6, 2014 3:41 p.m.

    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 it.

  • Poppa Alan Fruit Heights, UT
    March 6, 2014 2:33 p.m.

    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!

  • Not Asleep Lewiston, UT
    March 6, 2014 1:36 p.m.

    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.

  • Jared from CT SOUTHBURY, CT
    March 6, 2014 1:25 p.m.

    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).

  • PurpleUnicorn New Zealand, 00
    March 6, 2014 12:57 p.m.

    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.

  • Oatmeal Woods Cross, UT
    March 6, 2014 12:35 p.m.

    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.

  • slcdenizen t-ville, UT
    March 6, 2014 11:47 a.m.

    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.

  • Clarissa Layton, UT
    March 6, 2014 11:08 a.m.

    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.

  • K Mchenry, IL
    March 6, 2014 11:05 a.m.

    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.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    March 6, 2014 10:34 a.m.

    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.

  • Jamescmeyer Midwest City, USA, OK
    March 6, 2014 10:03 a.m.

    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.

  • One Angry Salebarn Worker Madison, SD
    March 6, 2014 10:01 a.m.

    What's the big deal? Protestants have taken more liberties in interpreting the bible than Aronofsky ever has.