<![CDATA[Noah Review]]>Noah

Paramount

PG 13 138 min

I must admit the first thing that popped into my head upon hearing that the story of Noah was about to be a major motion picture was the Bill Cosby. comedy album from the 1960s. “Right. What's an ark?”

The second was the director Darren Aronofsky who directed BLACK SWAN which I hateed and THE WRESTLER which I loved.

Still I never expected that I would have to put a spoiler alert in a Bible story. As a guy who was annoyed that Peter Jackson left Tom Bombadil out of LOTR I can imagine that even lukewarm Christians might be put off by this cockamamie interpretation of the book of Genesis.

As per my Sunday School recollection, Adam and Eves children were many. Cain killed Abel and his tribe populated the earth and they strayed from Gods good graces. The Lord decided to send a flood to cleanse the earth and asks Noah (Russell Crowe), a descendant of Seth, to build a ship and collect a pair of each of His creatures for a whole new beginning.

Then Aronofsky plays it fast and loose.

In the film version Noah's son Shem is betrothed to a woman who has barren until Methuselah performs a miracle. Ham has no wife and turns against Noah for not allowing him to bring a slave girl on to the ark. He then helps to smuggle the leader of the descendants of Cain's marauding Army on to the ark. The two conspirators even go so far as to begin eating the animals. I kid you not.
(Maybe that's what happened to the unicorns)

I asked my friend, Reverend Bill Grimes, just how far this story strayed from gospel and the answer was a lot. First Peter 3:20 as a matter of fact says there were 8 people on that ark, Noah his wife and three married sons.
Furthermore Noah never misunderstood Gods instructions, never battles a stowaway and never tries to kill his granddaughters. Oh and there weren’t any giant stone monsters. I kid you not.

The flashback in which Noah witnesses that same bad guy kill his father must have been from the book of Batman.

So as Bible story it fails miserably, but as a science fiction or fantasy potboiler? Well unfortunately it doesn't fare too well there either. It tends to drag and the only real interest is wondering what kind of goofy plot device is coming next.

As a matter of fact the only thing of note would be some stunning visuals. And I think you know my opinion of stunning visuals. They’re impressive for 10 minutes and unless the story can carry itself, I'm bored.

C-

WSS

]]>https://brownsboard.com/topic/28872/noah-reviewRSS for NodeThu, 01 Oct 2026 07:45:40 GMTSat, 05 Apr 2014 18:07:00 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Noah Review on Thu, 10 Apr 2014 11:35:47 GMT]]>come on, we all know we came from monkeys.

just some of us haven't evolved as fast as others.

Untitled_1.jpg

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/397998https://brownsboard.com/post/397998Thu, 10 Apr 2014 11:35:47 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Noah Review on Tue, 08 Apr 2014 15:17:43 GMT]]>Of course none of that is relevant as to whether the movie is an accurate depiction of the story in the book of Genesis. The Book of Genesis is what it is. Similarly if Peter Jackson would have completely changed the Lord of the Rings it would not have been a good representation of that book whether or not dwarves and elves ever walked the earth.

WSS

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/397641https://brownsboard.com/post/397641Tue, 08 Apr 2014 15:17:43 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Noah Review on Tue, 08 Apr 2014 14:38:27 GMT]]>

@slowburn said:

There has been many well funded expeditions in an effort to find the Arc on Mt Ararat which has been parked there for over two thousand years......a of couple seconds in geology speak. If it is located as written in the Sciptures , it seems to me it would have been located.

And if there were truly a "Bigfoot", "Sasquatch" lurking it surely would have been tracked by now.

Well, it is obviously questionable at to whether an ark was ever built, or ever parked on Mt. Ararat. Beyond that, assuming the ark was ever a reality, that vessel would have been the peoples greatest resource for shelter, heat etc.

I surmise that is it did exist, then it was used by Noah and his people to build shelter and to burn for fuel. It would, after all, be the only source of fuel they could have probably found.

So look for the Ark in the ash pits.

And, oh yea, so apparently the unicorn had the tastiest meat of all the animals...so that is why it didn't make it, eh?

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/397625https://brownsboard.com/post/397625Tue, 08 Apr 2014 14:38:27 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Noah Review on Mon, 07 Apr 2014 22:29:56 GMT]]>

@diehardbrownsfan said:

As far as I know, this is the original 300 spartans. Much better then the remake.

300 wasn't a remake of that. It was a very close adaptation of Frank Millers terrific graphic novel 300. Same historical story of the battle of Thermopylae, yes. Not a remake of that.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/397543https://brownsboard.com/post/397543Mon, 07 Apr 2014 22:29:56 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Noah Review on Mon, 07 Apr 2014 21:23:40 GMT]]>There has been many well funded expeditions in an effort to find the Arc on Mt Ararat which has been parked there for over two thousand years......a of couple seconds in geology speak. If it is located as written in the Sciptures , it seems to me it would have been located.

And if there were truly a "Bigfoot", "Sasquatch" lurking it surely would have been tracked by now.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/397526https://brownsboard.com/post/397526Mon, 07 Apr 2014 21:23:40 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Noah Review on Mon, 07 Apr 2014 20:59:21 GMT]]>

@vaportrail said:

Steve, a major component of your review is that the movie isn't Biblically accurate. Now, I haven't seen the movie yet, but is that a fair criticism for something that clearly isn't aiming to be true to the Bible? Just curious as to how the score would look if it wasn't (very loosely) based on a Bible story. How would you have rated the original 300.

The story of the 300 is not based on the Bible...but on history. There is no doubt that the events of The 300 occurred, but there are grave doubts that the events of Noah are factual.

Maybe if they had stylized Noah as a graphic novel ala The 300 it would have been more well received.

Hey! There you go: do the Ten Commandment ala 300.

(I understand there is a new Sin City movie coming.)

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/397517https://brownsboard.com/post/397517Mon, 07 Apr 2014 20:59:21 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Noah Review on Mon, 07 Apr 2014 19:59:58 GMT]]>PS 300 two sucked pretty badly...

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/397509https://brownsboard.com/post/397509Mon, 07 Apr 2014 19:59:58 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Noah Review on Mon, 07 Apr 2014 19:57:27 GMT]]>honestly I kind of forget I think I liked the original 300 a little bit just because it looked cool. I didn't care about the history. I don't think Noah looked that cool and I don't think the story was that much fun even if it had nothing to do with the Bible. Also during one of his interviews I believe Aronofsky said that he believed that captured the spirit of the original story in the book of Genesis.but of course it's called Noah and it's about Noah and it's about the Ark and it's about God and it's about destroying the world with a flood at its about salvation so what the hell.

Just saying that its assumedly bullshit doesn't count. Like rollerball 1 and rollerball 2.

And just because of the subject matter it is actually a Bible story. And in that sense, remember I gave two criteria, it fails miserably. That's all. I didn't hate it as badly as Black Swan!

WSS

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/397508https://brownsboard.com/post/397508Mon, 07 Apr 2014 19:57:27 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Noah Review on Mon, 07 Apr 2014 19:37:25 GMT]]>As far as I know, this is the original 300 spartans. Much better then the remake.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/397506https://brownsboard.com/post/397506Mon, 07 Apr 2014 19:37:25 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Noah Review on Mon, 07 Apr 2014 19:20:20 GMT]]>Steve, a major component of your review is that the movie isn't Biblically accurate. Now, I haven't seen the movie yet, but is that a fair criticism for something that clearly isn't aiming to be true to the Bible? Just curious as to how the score would look if it wasn't (very loosely) based on a Bible story. How would you have rated the original 300.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/397505https://brownsboard.com/post/397505Mon, 07 Apr 2014 19:20:20 GMT