Noah (2014)
Starring Russell Crowe, Jennifer Connelly, Ray Winstone, Anthony Hopkins, Emma Watson, Logan Lerman, and Douglas Booth; with the vocal talent of Frank Langella and Nick Nolte
Directed by Darren Aronofsky
I also go to movies.
When I go to movies, they don't need to reflect any of the teachings that are espoused in the church, but if they do, I prefer not to be hit over the head with them. I'm an intelligent enough guy to read between the lines and grasp any philosophical or religious undertones. You won't ever catch me heading to the insanely (though perhaps dubiously) popular God's Not Dead for this very reason. Blatant religious proselytization is a complete turn-off to me perhaps because it's not how I live my religious life. (I'm one who you'll never find preaching my beliefs to others -- which perhaps makes me a bad Catholic, but I can't help but feel my beliefs are my own.)
The reason for that preface is to illustrate the point that those who are ragging on Darren Aranofsky's Noah for "taking liberties" with a Bible story that is two pages long don't know what they're talking about. The criticisms lobbed at this one are utterly unfounded and quite honestly paint "religion" in a bad light. Then again, I'm one of those religious folks who believe most aspects of the Bible are simply "stories" that present "how to live one's life" as opposed to "actual happenings." But you Noah-complainers can go on believing that Noah lived to be 950 years old...
Noah is a beautiful film told by a talented director headlined by a movie star giving what could very well be the best performance of his career...and it espouses the overall tone of the biblical story of Noah to boot. All of those reasons are why Noah is a success. Granted, the film doesn't quite hit all the right notes -- Aronofsky (who also co-wrote the film with Ari Handel) throws in a "bad sheep" subplot revolving around one of Noah's sons Ham that proves to be the biggest issue -- but I greatly appreciated the film's attempt to display a man's religious convictions and how they shape his life. While it's true that Noah may "go off the deep end" a little bit in the film's third act as he attempts to bring an end to all mankind as he feels that was God's plan for him, the film more than justifies that stance while also supplying an appropriate ending and epiphanic-type moment for the title character to realize the error of his interpretation of God's word.
Everyone knows the story of Noah (played by Russell Crowe) and his ark, but Aronofsky and Handel expand upon the short tale in great detail and with significant "free reign." I'm pretty certain the Transformers-like Watchers -- six-armed stone creatures who protect Noah as he builds his ark -- didn't make an appearance in the Bible. Nor was there an epic battle between Noah and the descendants of Cain headed by Tubal-cain (Ray Winstone) who desperately want to find refuge on the ark to live through the water apocalypse. Personally, I found that this expansion of the biblical Noah story added depth, heart, and even strengthened the religious aspects of the tale.
Noah is a man who wants nothing more for his family to live a life at peace with the Earth and the creatures and humans who inhabit it. When we first meet Crowe's Noah, he's a humble, quiet man who we can tell deeply cares for the well-being of his family and has a strong faith in the Creator. (This "Creator" nonsense is perhaps the biggest "uproar" the movie caused. With only one mention of the word "God," opponents of the film are up in arms. This criticism is utterly unfounded.) However, when he "hears" God speak to him, telling him to build an ark to safely shepherd his family and two of every creature through the approaching storm, his calmness shifts to diligence and steadfastness to the Creator. However, upon seeing the Creator's wrath upon humanity, Noah admittedly starts to go off the deep end, feeling that this horrific event imposed upon humans must mean that God doesn't want them to inhabit the Earth anymore. (This religious fervor that Noah feels is essentially mirrored in the religious folks who don't want you to see this film. To me, they're eerily similar in that they both feel they are fully aware of what God would want from them.) Nevertheless, Aronofsky's Noah character is a tricky one and Crowe absolutely succeeds at portraying every aspect of the complicated and thought-provoking character.
Jennifer Connelly as Noah's wife Naameh and Emma Watson as Noah's adopted daughter Ila also provide powerful performances in a film that also heavily focuses on the women in Noah's life. In fact, it's when the film attempts to shift to the trials of Noah's two oldest sons Shem (Douglas Booth) and Ham (Logan Lerman) that the film falters. Their "love triangle" of sorts with Ila is disappointingly trite and Ham's attempts to undermine his father oftentimes feel cheap and overly dramatic.
As far as the cinematic aspects of the film are concerned, despite the subject matter this is most certainly Darren Aronofsky's most "mass appeal" film to date. After the quick cuts of Requiem for a Dream, the somewhat erotic Black Swan, and the inward "simplicity" of The Wrestler, Aronofsky allows the story to take center stage (despite having a much bigger budget for this one than any of his other features). That isn't to say that there aren't some typical trippy moments -- the "creation" story Noah details in the third act is beautiful in that it stands in such stark contrast to the rest of the aesthetic of the film while still feeling like it naturally belongs in the piece -- but this is the "least Aronofsky" Aronofsky film I've seen. Personally, I love what he brings to the table and I think he created a very thoughtful big budget flick.
Everyone knows the story of Noah (played by Russell Crowe) and his ark, but Aronofsky and Handel expand upon the short tale in great detail and with significant "free reign." I'm pretty certain the Transformers-like Watchers -- six-armed stone creatures who protect Noah as he builds his ark -- didn't make an appearance in the Bible. Nor was there an epic battle between Noah and the descendants of Cain headed by Tubal-cain (Ray Winstone) who desperately want to find refuge on the ark to live through the water apocalypse. Personally, I found that this expansion of the biblical Noah story added depth, heart, and even strengthened the religious aspects of the tale.
Noah is a man who wants nothing more for his family to live a life at peace with the Earth and the creatures and humans who inhabit it. When we first meet Crowe's Noah, he's a humble, quiet man who we can tell deeply cares for the well-being of his family and has a strong faith in the Creator. (This "Creator" nonsense is perhaps the biggest "uproar" the movie caused. With only one mention of the word "God," opponents of the film are up in arms. This criticism is utterly unfounded.) However, when he "hears" God speak to him, telling him to build an ark to safely shepherd his family and two of every creature through the approaching storm, his calmness shifts to diligence and steadfastness to the Creator. However, upon seeing the Creator's wrath upon humanity, Noah admittedly starts to go off the deep end, feeling that this horrific event imposed upon humans must mean that God doesn't want them to inhabit the Earth anymore. (This religious fervor that Noah feels is essentially mirrored in the religious folks who don't want you to see this film. To me, they're eerily similar in that they both feel they are fully aware of what God would want from them.) Nevertheless, Aronofsky's Noah character is a tricky one and Crowe absolutely succeeds at portraying every aspect of the complicated and thought-provoking character.
Jennifer Connelly as Noah's wife Naameh and Emma Watson as Noah's adopted daughter Ila also provide powerful performances in a film that also heavily focuses on the women in Noah's life. In fact, it's when the film attempts to shift to the trials of Noah's two oldest sons Shem (Douglas Booth) and Ham (Logan Lerman) that the film falters. Their "love triangle" of sorts with Ila is disappointingly trite and Ham's attempts to undermine his father oftentimes feel cheap and overly dramatic.
As far as the cinematic aspects of the film are concerned, despite the subject matter this is most certainly Darren Aronofsky's most "mass appeal" film to date. After the quick cuts of Requiem for a Dream, the somewhat erotic Black Swan, and the inward "simplicity" of The Wrestler, Aronofsky allows the story to take center stage (despite having a much bigger budget for this one than any of his other features). That isn't to say that there aren't some typical trippy moments -- the "creation" story Noah details in the third act is beautiful in that it stands in such stark contrast to the rest of the aesthetic of the film while still feeling like it naturally belongs in the piece -- but this is the "least Aronofsky" Aronofsky film I've seen. Personally, I love what he brings to the table and I think he created a very thoughtful big budget flick.
The RyMickey Rating: B+
I can't disagree with anything you said, just that the bad parts you noted affected my opinion more I guess. It's still like an 8/10 but meh.
ReplyDeleteIt felt kinda really long as well.
I liked the world and the animation for the Watchers and Russell Crowe was fantastic.
We're awfully close...I mean, I'm probably an 8.5/9 out of 10. I didn't find overly "long," but I did recognize it as being a bit drawn out in the final act. I wasn't bored by any means, however, and found myself more frustrated with the focus on Logan Lerman's character.
ReplyDeleteCrowe really was great with a character that had huge depth.