A guide to enjoying the film Noah (For A.S. folk)

Post Reply New Topic

Do NOT go to it expecting to see a documentary.

Do NOT go to it expecting to see a re-inactment.

Do NOT go to it expecting to see an exact reproduction of what you've previously read (or has been told is) in a book.

DO

Expect an epic movie.

DO

Expect good story telling.

DO

Expect a dramatic re-telling of OUR STORY.

And by "our" I mean anyone who is part of western civilization.

It's been ours for millennia, why not enjoy it?

Last edited by ehymw on 29 Mar 2014, 9:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Moved from News and Current Events to Television, Film, and Video]

I've shortened this guide to suit myself.

DO

Read reviews.

Do NOT watch it

Perhaps "I recommend" would be more appropriate than "Do".

I don't have to "Do" anything, but I might take you up on a recommendation if I feel like it. It's more congenial that way.

I do live in a bit of a bubble (in terms of pop culture, anyway), but I keep seeing all these blogs and posts and articles blasting this movie, so I've YouTubed the trailer. Looks pretty impressive.

And for those of you out there upset that it is not identicle to the biblical passages: I hope you despise Charlton Heston in The Ten Commandments just as much. The director has been very upfront in stating that he has taken many licenses in order to make the movie more impressive.

What say io9 on the movei make it seem interesting.

http://io9.com/noah-is-the-best-and-worst-bible-movie-youll-ever-see-1553829598

A guide to enjoying the film Noah (For intelligent people)

Do expect to see a movie based on a work of fiction

Wait Noah as in Noah's ark or is it something else ?

What an interesting time we live in.
An atheist makes a movie based on a Biblical story, changes the story almost completely, and people applaud his creativity and condemn people who are offended.
How enlightened society has become ! !

^since when has any story been adapted from the written work without a massive re-write? Did you watch The Passion of the Christ? Do you realize that much of that movie is not in the Bible? Why was no one up in arms over that? This is just one more example of how a certain flavor of christianity tries to play the "atheists are out to destroy us" just because the director is an atheist.

And how about the TV movie of Noah's Ark with Jon Voigt? You know, the one where Noah was a citizen of Sodom? Or Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat? The Ten Commandments? Jesus Christ, Superstar? The Last Temptation of Christ? Son of God? Pretty much any movie that portrays Jesus as a white dude? The History Channel's The Bible was rife with inaccuracy. There are very, very few biblically based movies that stay true to the original. I don't really understand why Noah is suddenly the most horrible thing ever. I have not seen it, but I doubt that any part of the movie is spent trying to convince people to become atheists, so why should you care? Maybe if the title was something like "The Thorough and Biblically Accurate Account of Noah, his Interaction with God, and Big D@mn Boat" I would understand the offense. Even if anyone involved with the movie came out and said that it was accurate or that it was intended to downplay people's belief in god, I could understand it.

Seriously, if you don't like it, just don't watch it. It is that simple.

Why no, I didn't realize much of "The Passion" is not in the Bible.
Please enlighten all of us.

My guide is simple:

Think of it as like a Carnival Cruise, except everybody *outside* of the boat dies.

It is to reality much like 300 was.

How detailed do you want me to get? For starters, they should have all been speaking in Greek. Or how about this quote from Gibson himself: "I felt that I had a pretty wide berth for artistic interpretation, and to fill in some of the spaces with logic, with imagination, with various other readings." Or the statement of Di Noia (from the Vatican): "Mel Gibson's film is not a documentary but a work of artistic imagination." Then there is the amount of blood loss during all those scenes; apparently Christ had significantly more blood than a mere mortal. How about the fact that the bad guy Jews all looked unhealthy and horrible while the good guy Jews all looked like models (especially Mary, played by an Italian sex symbol, despite the fact that Mary would have been over 50)? Additionally, Mary's part in the movie is way more involved than in the gospels (as was Simon's, who was given way too much dialogue). Then there is the implication that the destruction of the Temple was directly caused by the Jewish betrayal of Jesus. Plus the you have Rosalinda Celentano playing Satan with the demonic baby Satan was carrying and the demonic children tormenting Judas. "King of the Jews" was only in Latin above him in the movie, although in 2 of the 4, it was specifically stated that it was written in Greek, Latin and Hebrew. You have his arrest in the garden, which should have been a large angry mob. And the whole shoved off a bridge, dangling from a chain. Plus the whole snake in the garden bit. And Jesus' invention of the dining room table. Jesus using a line from the book of Revelations. The line, ""let his blood be on us and our children," which was from after the destruction of Jerusalem. Caiaphas' pervert collection. the Temple leaders dressed up ride their donkeys to watch the crucifixion. The European version of Jesus. The tattered, blood stained cloak, that apparently was still worth the Roman soldiers casting lots for.

I plan on seeing Noah this weekend.

After sonofghandi pointed it out, I refuse to see Noah because they aren't speaking in prehistoric Hebrew.