It's interesting reading reviews of the movie. Despite its departure from the source material, many thought it was a good film. My friends and I (a group of about 10 of us) gathered for movie night and watched it. Several times throughout the movie, various people muttered about how terrible it was and several times, someone asked why we were still watching it. Even when I take religion out of it, it's still a bad movie. Yes, it was visually stunning, and yes, the acting was well-done, but the basic story-line, Noah's bat-crazy ideas and the cliches, plus the ridiculous rock monsters, make this movie one that I tell people to stay away from.
I'm going to preface my review by saying that, for the most part, I don't mind movies which are irreverent to Christianity and/or the Bible. I personally love Dogma and Saved!, because I think the message in both is about having the right motivations, not just a dogmatic following of rules. I could care less about the director's intent behind The Golden Compass. The way South Park skewers religious hypocrisy is great. Bruce Almighty... Evan Almighty... Oh, God. You Devil. The TV series Supernatural's angels storyline. Joan of Arcadia. Even Touched by an Angel or Highway to Heaven. I don't mind the non-traditional depictions of God and/or angels. What I do mind are movies which advertise as if they are the original story but then take major artistic license with it. They leave the bare bones of the story, with everything else some Hollywood executive's fevered dream. (Whoever green-lit this must have had pneumonia.)
It's one of the reasons why I didn't like The Bible miniseries from 2013, because of the ways that it's supposed to be portraying the story of the Bible but then it waters down things, makes righteous people live by worldly standards, and omits some of the less pleasant parts. Same thing for the recent television series about David and Saul, Of Kings and Prophets. They present themselves as being the Bible story but then don't show what the Bible says. Evan Almighty is a modern-day Noah and I loved that movie. But Aronofsky's Noah? Not a chance.Not that it couldn't have been done. It's possible to produce Hollywood blockbusters without stripping them of the faith that inspired them. Take The Ten Commandments. It's a great Hollywood blockbuster. It grossed over $122M back in *1956* (equivalent of $1.1B today). It's obvious that there's faith and reverence toward God in what they made. (I can think of several other movies made in the same time period, like The Robe in 1953 and Barabbas in 1961, that exhibit and are empowered by this attitude of faith.) Sixty-one years later and it's still a popular movie that gets played on TV each year. No one is going to be watching this movie (or Exodus: Gods and Kings, which is a re-imaging of Moses's story and The Ten Commandments) in 50 years.
In The Ten Commandments, incredible things happen, but they're things that are *in the Bible.* The backstory it provides isn't hollow; it actually helps to add to the emotional impact of the film. When Moses is reunited with his mother, it's moving. When the plagues happen or when Red Sea parts, it's pretty incredible and inspiring. But that is not the same feeling you get in Noah, when the flood happens and violent waves crash into the Ark. That moment feels more like Master and Commander than The Ten Commandments.
The actual story of Noah is one with real lessons about faith, godliness and character. Noah was devout and good, he persevered and persisted for years when those around him thought he was nuts. His family stood by him and supported him in his endeavor. In the end, their faith and obedience saved them from the flood. Those lessons transcend any one religion and apply to any of them. This is not Aronofsky's Noah. Aronofsky keeps the basic elements - like names, the ark, the animals on board and the flood - but he sensationalizes the story (that is already pretty incredible) to give it 'drama,' make it a blockbuster and create the world Aronofsky that thinks Noah and his family lived in. But there's way too much dramatic license and because this Bible story isn't backed up with faith or belief, it ends up falling painfully short.
I mentioned earlier what reviewers liked about the movie: the special effects and the acting. The visual effects were pretty inspiring, but that's more the result of special effects developments rather than an emotional connection with the material. The acting was also well done, especially by Jennifer Connelly and Emma Watson. Both made their women strong and compelling while not being hard. Jennifer's rebuke of Noah after the babies are born was fantastic in how she lived it. Russell Crowe was Russell Crowe, gladiator or ship commander, not Russell Crowe the informant or mentally-ill mathematician. I've always considered him a great actor, but this movie made me wonder just how much range he has. He's always really manly or weak and flawed, but I have yet to see him play strong but soft at the same time. Strong but soft (aka humble) is what this movie needed, not someone zealously ready to dispatch anyone getting in his way and certain of his own infallibility (Crowe's interpretation). Someone less macho would have brought a much-needed vulnerability and anguish to Noah's struggle and made the movie tons better.
[It's kind of like how Tom Cruise always seems to play the same self-confident (cocky) character in his movies, even when he's a hit man, a clone or a policemen in the near future. He does a better job of bringing vulnerability to his characters, but it's basically the same guy (just like John Wayne).]
But Aronofsky wanted Crowe's Noah, and that's what he gave us: not someone I would characterize as a godly man by any stretch of the imagination. He was volatile and full of hubris. He was irrational and obdurate. He treated his family like a task master treats slaves and his interpretations of The Creator's messages were extreme, verging on fanatical. I honestly didn't really see much difference between Noah and Tubal-Cain, even though the Bible describes Noah as "a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked with God." (I also don't necessarily buy that the antagonist should have been named Tubal-Cain.) That kind of guy, the one in the Bible, is one I can see myself liking and empathizing with. Not Aronofsky's/Crowe's Noah. This guy was a jerk. I mean, he let a girl get trampled to death, constantly played favorites and put down his middle son, never listened to anyone else's opinions or even *once* apologized for any of his appalling behavior and (as I mentioned before) pretty much treated his family like property.
There are moments in this movie that were pretty powerful. (I mention them in my blow-by-blow recap of the movie.) The entire movie could have been that, but that's not the movie that Aronofsky wanted to make. He made a movie to earn his the Hollywood paycheck instead of making something to inspire people.
My Rating: 3/10
No comments:
Post a Comment