The Movie: Noah

[Duper]

So there's a lot of clamor on the net about this show. All religious descussion aside (for no I hope) has anyone seen this movie?

What did you think? How well or poorly was it written? How was the acting and directed? Is this a rental or go see it in the theater? ... those kinda things.

I posted in here just in case things break down.

[Tunnelcat]

Haven't seen it yet, but I just can't see Russel Crowe as Noah with an Aussie accent. They at least they built an Ark that looked more like something that a man with nothing but simple tools and human workers could have built back then. The sawed logs and curved keels from other movie renditions don't make the grade for something built in a hurry during that time period.

[Duper]

well technically, the account in the Bible gives about 50 year to build the Ark. .. So I'm not sure about "hurry" In the movie, "rock people" as I've heard it. Help Noah. They're actually fallen angels encased in rock. So, here's a dilemma...maybe they explain this in the movie, IDK. Why would angels case out of heaven help or want to help someone that God (or the creator as the movie calls him) has commanded to do something. like I said, maybe they offer an explanation for this in the movie.

[Tunnelcat]

I'd never heard of "rock people" either. Sounds like the director is playing loose with the Biblical story. I'm not a big fan of Breitbart, but you can decide from his rant if the movie is "accurate" or just a overly embellished a fairy tail. It almost sounds like the director took an environmentalist, anti-human moral tack, not a religious, Biblical tack, when he made the movie. I still can't envision Crowe as Noah though.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/ ... blems-Noah

As for the structure of the Ark, 50 years would be long enough to do a more machined woodworking job I guess. Whether Noah would have gone through all the sawing work, I don't know. I forgot it took that long to build.

[Nightshade]

From what I heard- it looks like a cheap knock off of The Lord of the Rings....

Except-

It's boring.

It's too long (not that LOTR wasn't)

The source material isn't really followed (more dungeons & dragons and Harry Potter than the bible.)

It's preachy humans BAD! Nature GOOD!

And again...it's based off of some derivation of a made up story from a made up book from a religion.

So it has NO redeeming qualities in my view.

(Maybe the addition of a laugh track and the sillhouettes of two robots and a spaceman would help!)

[Will Robinson]

I read there is no mention of god in the movie. Seems like that would be a major departure if it is true.

[flip]

Let's just say they took a lot of creative license with it. Noah might find it a bit slanderous, but only because they used his name. Had they not called it "Noah" then not a bad movie, except it did kind of drag on towards the end. Had it been about Noah, they would have pointed out that every dog that exists today descended from the Wolf, so he only had to take 2 wolves. They would have pointed out that God commanded the ground to produce the animals, and they would have pointed out that everyone of us are descended from a single pair, and that the reason they can't trace them back to the same time is because of a huge extinction of man. Hehe, then that would have been the story of Noah. Otherwise the only thing it had in common was the name of Noah, nothing else even vaguely follows the account from that point on.

[Jeff250]

well technically, the account in the Bible gives about 50 year to build the Ark. .. So I'm not sure about "hurry" In the movie, "rock people" as I've heard it. Help Noah. They're actually fallen angels encased in rock. So, here's a dilemma...maybe they explain this in the movie, IDK. Why would angels case out of heaven help or want to help someone that God (or the creator as the movie calls him) has commanded to do something. like I said, maybe they offer an explanation for this in the movie.

I haven't seen the movie, but could they have been stone golem?

[snoopy]

And again...it's based off of some derivation of a made up story from a made up book from a religion.

So it has NO redeeming qualities in my view.

If a story has to be "true" to be worth your time then I have to tell you that you're missing out on a lot. I think mostly you're taking the opportunity to take a shot at the Bible... if you want to dismiss the story because it shares names with something from the Bible that's your prerogative, but there lots of fiction out there that has plenty of redeeming qualities. (I'm purposely not touching on whether the Bible is fiction or not... just pointing out that fiction != useless.)

[Duper]

well technically, the account in the Bible gives about 50 year to build the Ark. .. So I'm not sure about "hurry" In the movie, "rock people" as I've heard it. Help Noah. They're actually fallen angels encased in rock. So, here's a dilemma...maybe they explain this in the movie, IDK. Why would angels case out of heaven help or want to help someone that God (or the creator as the movie calls him) has commanded to do something. like I said, maybe they offer an explanation for this in the movie.

I haven't seen the movie, but could they have been stone golem?

As I said, I haven't seen it myself. From what I read, they were pretty animate that they were fallen angels encased in stone. That's all I really know. In the trailer you get a glimpse of them. (falling angels)

that really is a weird read on wiki.