[Noah Opens in Theaters Tomorrow]
There’s nothing quite so helpful as a fatwa and threats of a Christian boycott to create buzz in advance of a new movie.
“Noah,” scheduled for its U.S. release on March 28, has become such a target. The United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Bahrain have banned the movie because it depicts a prophet, which, as Danish cartoonists will attest, isn’t the peachiest of ideas in certain circles.
Even here in the land of religious tolerance, the National Religious Broadcasters threatened to boycott the film unless Paramount, the film’s distributor and co-financier with New Regency, issued a disclaimer that the movie isn’t a literal interpretation of the Genesis story.
….
Alas, under pressure, Paramount altered its advertising to say the movie was “inspired” by the Bible story and is not the Bible story.Note the frequent use of the word “movie” in the preceding paragraphs. This is because “Noah” is a movie. It is not a sermon or a call to prayer. It cost $130 million to make and is intended to entertain, inspire and — bear with me, I know this is crazy — make money. It does not presume to encourage religious conversion, disrespect a prophet or evangelize a snake, though it does glorify virtue in the highest.
….
I recently viewed the film and can confidently report the following: If you liked “Braveheart,” “Gladiator,” “Star Wars,” “The Lord of the Rings,” “Indiana Jones” or “Titanic,” you will like “Noah.” If you liked two or more of the above, you will love “Noah.” Your enjoyment increases exponentially with each movie checked above, though I should warn that “Titanic” made the cut for only one reason, the major difference between it and “Noah” being obvious. “Noah” also includes the essential love story or two, without which no story floats.
Personally, I thought the trailer looked bland and dark and the music uninspired. I hope my impressions are wrong. The Washington Post is left-wing Darwin loving newspaper, so this is probably good news Noah is getting a good review.
Glenn Beck has a STRANGE complaint:
HA! Told ya it was creationist movie!
More from Glenn,
Literal interpretation? Either something is literal OR it is an interpretation. And given the lack of detail in the Bible Noah’s story is open to interpretation.
Joe: to take something ‘literally’ is to adopt a particular interpretation!
So it’s “literal” if and only if Holywood’s particular interpretation agreed with the NRB? That I can understand- well just because I deal with liberals and evolutionists. 😎
The word god means always the christian God. thats why it was avoided, I believe, in the American national statements back in the day.
Its stupid to complain about movies. They should not be given the status of importance beyond a story to entertain. Be consistent everyone. Truth or lie its a dumb movie.
Movies are today largely terrible and unfun. I never go to movies.
Christians complaining about this is crazy. Other things YES. Not a movie about Noah. maybe it will give interest to kids to learn about YEC convictions on noah or build arks and float around.
Atheist ‘Noah’ director brags film is least biblical Bible movie ever
OT: Former Atheists Howard Storm and Anne Rice on the Today Show talking about their book ‘My Descent into Death’ – video
http://www.today.com/video/today/7188822#7188822
My brother went to watch it and thought that it failed just as entertainment.
Robert Byers @ 6:
No. No, it doesn’t.
Barb
I’m only speculating as to why the word creator was used instead of God.
God has always meant the God of the bible or as father of Christ.
Jefferson avoided the word to avoid it meaning the Christian god. Likewise the secular society for a long time has said No to the word god but okay to the word creator.
Of coarse God means any higher thinking being(s).
I think it was avoided in this movies especially since the directer etc is jewish. they don’t want this Noah to be a affirmation of christian America’s beliefs however distorted the story.
The film “Noah” opens with the statement that they(producers) have taken liberties with the original biblical narrative. It is very clear, from all the promotional interviews with Aronofsky, that if the director had an agenda, it was – environmentalism. Aronofsky took the story of Noah and made it his own – a story about caring for “creation”.
It’s no secret that the story of Noah is adopted and is the bedrock for all the major religions of the world. In keeping in line with that, the director didn’t use God in a liberal sense, as he would have drawn the ire for taking such liberties as stated in the opening credits of the movie. Although the film has drawn some flak for not using God in its narrative more often as people would want, to be fair, it does mention God in the movie.
Ultimately, “Noah” the movie is Noah of the bible through the eyes of Aronofsky. People who are familiar with the biblical narrative and have read the reviews, would watch the movie for the dramatization on the big screen – to see the characters come to life. As stated earlier, it’s an attempt by the director who is an atheist with a heart for environmental issues , to get people to care for the environment. It’s also encouraging to see an atheist with a heart for “creation” by the emphasis placed on the Creator, throughout the narrative of this movie.
However dramatized, whatever be the individual take, the story of Noah is a story of God paving the way for the ultimate redemption of man that was to come. 🙂