'Noah' engulfed by wave of criticism

[Tristen]

Why is it so hard to make a film about an escape from a global flood - and remain true to the original account? I have no problem with legitimate artistic liscence, so long as it remains within the bounds of the existing account.

 

And if you cannot stay within the confinds of the original account, why do you get to cash in on the name of the original account? If it is only loosely related to the original, why not call it Harry, or Joe or some other suitable alternative. There are other ancient flood accounts. Why not just say that it is loosely based on several ancient accounts of global flooding?

 

 

I have heard some concerning reviews from friends who have seen the movie - such as [Possible spoiler alert!!!!] persons other than Noah's family being smuggled onto the ark, and Noah getting help to build the ark from some special angels, and something about the skin of the satan-serpent turning a boy into a man. I will watch it. I has to be better than the Jon Voight version; where Lot (yes Lot) came sailing by Noah in his own (albeit smaller) ark to show Noah the salt finger of his wife which he keeps in a jar.

[OldSchool2]

Why is it so hard to make a film about an escape from a global flood - and remain true to the original account? ...

Probably because the film's director, Darren Aronofsky, is a self-described atheist with an environmentalist agenda.

[a-seeker]

Has anybody here actually seen it?

 

I saw it last night.  It's chief flaw was that it was an hour too long and terribly boring.  The "ecological agenda" was far more subtle than I thought based on these posts.  Noah, however, was made to be a homicidal mad-man.  There is no direct voice of God explaining what is going on, so Noah has to "figure it out" and goes terribly wrong at many points.

 

Some of the above posts complain that it strays from the story.  OF COURSE IT DOES.  The story takes about 2 min to tell and no one says a word in it but God.

 

clb

[ncn]

The story takes about 2 min to tell and no one says a word in it but God.

 

clb

 

So God's words are not important?

 

Pro 30:5  Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him. 

Pro 30:6  Do not add to His Words, lest He reprove you and you be found a liar. 

[a-seeker]

 

The story takes about 2 min to tell and no one says a word in it but God.

 

clb

 

So God's words are not important?

 

Pro 30:5  Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him. 

Pro 30:6  Do not add to His Words, lest He reprove you and you be found a liar. 

 

Are you trying to make this a debate?  This is about the flaws of a movie.  A movie is for entertainment purposes first.  If Noah did not depart from the original, it would be, except for the beginning, a silent film.  This is not about the importance of God's Word, this is about a blockbuster movie and its merits as a movie.

[ncn]

 

 

The story takes about 2 min to tell and no one says a word in it but God.

 

clb

 

So God's words are not important?

 

Pro 30:5  Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him. 

Pro 30:6  Do not add to His Words, lest He reprove you and you be found a liar. 

 

Are you trying to make this a debate?  This is about the flaws of a movie.  A movie is for entertainment purposes first.  If Noah did not depart from the original, it would be, except for the beginning, a silent film.  This is not about the importance of God's Word, this is about a blockbuster movie and its merits as a movie.

 

 

No, I am pointing out a comment you made that to my way of reading it was not pertaining to the film but rather the Word of God.

 

 

 

Some of the above posts complain that it strays from the story.  OF COURSE IT DOES.  The story takes about 2 min to tell and no one says a word in it but God.

 

clb

 

Here above is what you said in your last sentence. 

I'm sorry, but to me that comes across as pure sarcasm. 

[jerryR34]

There must be much artistic license taken in any story of Noah as it is physically impossible on so many levels.

[Guest shiloh357]

I posted this in another thread.   The movie is not retelling of the biblical account at all; it is a perversion.  It cannot be defended from a biblical basis.  Any Christian that defends the movie is defending a movie that perverts the nature of God and perverts the purpose God had in saving Noah and his family.

 

• The movie uses the generic "creator" instead of God.   The movie says that the rebellious angels were turned into "rock people" by God and helped Noah build the ark. 
• The rock people also fought as Noah's army to keep the people from destroying the ark.
• The movie says that Methusaleh was an ancient Shaman magician who gave Noah a seed from the Garden of Eden that grew all of the trees Noah needed to build the ark.
• The movie basically depicts the ark as a means of saving the animals, not the people.  The family of Noah was spared by the creator to care for the animals until the flood was over and the Noah was instructed to basically commit a murder suicide and kill his family and himself and rid the world of humanity.
• Noah's wife is a witch or has some kind of magical powers, as well. and she keeps some of the animals asleep. 
• The movie also says that they used some of the animals for food (despite having no way to cook in a wooden ark). 
• Tubal-Cain is portrayed in the movie as a stowaway and was trying to kill Noah.  He was joined by Shem in that effort . 
• Only one of Noah's sons, Shem had a wife, and she was Noah's adopted daughter.  She got pregnant and Noah vowed to kill her offspring if it was girl.   But at the end, could not bring himelf to kill her TWIN daughters.
• At the end, Noah was getting drunk because he failed to kill his family and thus failed to do what the "creator" commanded him to do.  Noah just decides to live with his mistake.

It is a horrible movie and is a isn't worth Christian consumption.  Lukewarm Christians will find a way to defend it. 

[OldSchool2]

The latest review of Noah:

Ken Ham: The Unbiblical Noah Is a Fable of a Film

"As a Creationist and also a believer in the historical account of Noah and the Flood, I agree with atheist Darren Aronofsky’s statement about his just-released film 'Noah': It is the 'least biblical' of Bible-themed films. Any other agreement I have with the filmmaker’s take on the book of Genesis and its account of Noah ends right there ..."

Ironically, "Ham" goes on to say that "Except for some of the names in the movie, like Noah, his sons’ names, and Methuselah, hardly any remnant of the Bible’s account of the Flood in Genesis 6-9 is recognizable."

It looks like Aronofsky kept his promise to make the least biblical, biblical film ever!

http://time.com/42274/ken-ham-the-unbiblical-noah-is-a-fable-of-a-film/

[Hippie333]

 

 

The story takes about 2 min to tell and no one says a word in it but God.

 

clb

 

So God's words are not important?

 

Pro 30:5  Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him. 

Pro 30:6  Do not add to His Words, lest He reprove you and you be found a liar. 

 

Are you trying to make this a debate?  This is about the flaws of a movie.  A movie is for entertainment purposes first.  If Noah did not depart from the original, it would be, except for the beginning, a silent film.  This is not about the importance of God's Word, this is about a blockbuster movie and its merits as a movie.

 

I am a bit at a loss to see how a movie , named after a person in the Bible, and events in the Bible are not about the importance of God's Word and just a movie? I agree with Ncn, I found the comment previously made to come across as sarcasm. I am sure I will be flamed for saying this.....but if you are going to make a movie about the Bible....make it as accurate as possible, if you cannot make it into a long enough film to have it viewable in a theater or stick to the actual intent, words, story....the simply don't make it. Yes, people have a right to do whatever they choose, and watch whatever it is they choose to....I am not attacking that right....but simply saying....Those are the words of God....I cherish the Word of God, and when movies like this are made....I find it absolutely heartbreaking, angry ( a little ) but saddened more than anything. I find it's merits as a movie to be making a mockery of God Almighty. People may agree or disagree with me, that's fine....but I just can't sit back and keep the opinion of ...oh, it's just a movie...look at it for it's entertainment value....sorry, mockery of God's word...for me......is not entertaining.

 

 

God Bless,

Hip