Skip to comments.Religious tide turns against 'Noah'
Posted on 03/28/2014 9:15:41 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Whenever Hollywood makes a movie from a well-loved story or saga Batman, Tolkien, "50 Shades of Grey" there's usually a period of ... well ... let's call it adjustment, along with a "spirited" give-and-take among fans over such things as casting, content and approach.
Usually, though, the material's devotees don't believe the filmmakers will burn in hell if their ideas are ignored. (OK ... maybe the Dark Knight crowd does. We all know they can get a little intense.)
But that's precisely the belief with "Noah," Darren Aronofsky's $130-million retelling of the Old Testament account of apocalyptic deluge and a floating ark that opens on March 28. The same people who gripe that Hollywood never makes any faith-based movies are complaining because Hollywood has gone and made a religious movie, albeit one that might not be as literal-minded as they'd like.
"It's tough to make movies for the easily offended," Pepperdine University communications professor Craig Detweiler said. "Studios assume these biblical stories are public domain, but a lot of believers consider the Bible their private property, and if you don't interpret them the same way they've been taught, they're going to speak out."
Hollywood and religious groups have long been leery of each other, often with good reason. Cecil B. DeMille invited a host of religious representatives Catholics and Protestants along with Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and Christian Scientists to offer blessings on the first day of filming "King of Kings," his epic on the life of Christ. And what did DeMille do after receiving the consecration? He opened "King of Kings" with an orgy scene that set up a love triangle among Jesus, Judas and Mary Magdalene. The man knew you needed more than just salvation to sell tickets. You needed a little sin too.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Erik Erikson of Red State did a review of Noah this morning. If this is accurate, I don’t see any reason for anybody to see this movie.
Noah the movie. Not a Church documentary. Live with it.
Oh look. The LA Slimes is trashing Christians again.
Gee. Hooda thunk.
BTW, Erikson peppered his review with 11 (ELEVEN) “I’m not kidding”s!
There was a movie about a movie being made and after another conflict with the author the director said: Look, movies are made for 19-25 year olds who only want to see 3 things, 1) defy authority, 2) destroy property, and 3) take off clothes.
Last night Hannity had a panel on this movie. One of the three panelists had seen it. He stated that the movie did not mention God, only ‘creator’ and that it replaced the moral sins of mankind with mankind’s sins against the earth. Toward the end (SPOILER ALERT) Noah is seen standing over his two new grandchildren trying to decide whether or not he should kill them, so as to end mankind forever and thus allow the earth to return to a natural state.
There is a line that Noah says in the Bible that is put into the mouth of the man who is against Noah building the Ark. That reversal clearly shows, in my view, that the intent of the movie maker was to make a movie worshiping the earth mother Gaia, and not God.
“Studios assume these biblical stories are public domain, but a lot of believers consider the Bible their private property, and if you don’t interpret them the same way they’ve been taught, they’re going to speak out.”
No we just don’t like lies, twisting history to attempt to undermine God (like that can be done), and crappy acting.
No thanks. I won’t live with God’s Word being used to create a phony-baloney big budget piece of propaganda that leaves God out. You live with that.
That about sums it up.
Yeah, I don’t need to see this movie. Too bad about Russell Crowe—thought he was better than this.
You know you’ve lost it with Hollywood Californicatia when you find yourself rooting for the villains in all their stupid movies... I was rooting for Daniel Day Lewis all the way in Gangs of NY, and this thing with Ender’s Game basically tore it, rooting for Harrison Ford the whole way, and I’m not going to watch some Hollywood religious movie which might force me to root for Satan...
from the article”
“The film is a remarkable display of special effects. It is also one of the funniest comedies I have seen in a very long time. Aronofsky deserves a great deal of praise for turning a serious subject into a non-stop laugh fest of techno-electro music, orchestral scores, blasting special effects, and even rock monsters.”
I hear Noah isn't a matter of interpretation, but that isn't even recognizable as the Noah story....more a sci-fi with monsters and wars
If the movie is as described in this article, it’s bizarre and an insult to all Christians and Jews.
Now it’s time for Hollywood to make a movie about Mohamed. Lets see them stand up to that outrage.
Darren Aronofsky is an atheist.
Not sure an atheist is all that concerned about biblical accuracy. Indeed, he probably wants to skew the Scriptural account, in a cynical effort to make money off of gullible Christians.
Hmmm. Well, Cecil B. DeMille died in 1959, whereas King of Kings was made in 1961 and directed by Nicholas Ray. So I seriously doubt Cecil B. DeMille did any of the things attributed to him in this article.
Thanks for your post # 7. I expected this distortion.
How come nobody ever said that kind of thing about "Brokeback Mountain"? Obviously, without the Bible.
RE: Now its time for Hollywood to make a movie about Mohamed. Lets see them stand up to that outrage.
The movie, Noah is BANNED in Egypt, Pakistan, Qatar and other Muslim countries for sacrilege against an Islamic prophet.
“It’s tough to make movies for the easily offended,” Pepperdine University communications professor Craig Detweiler said.
Seriously? A lefty said that? He obviously has been under a tock for the last few decades if he doesn’t know that it’s the Left who are easily offended.
Believers in Christ read the Bible to know the true story of Noah and the reason why God raised up Noah.
It is not just that it is a movie, “that might not be as literal-minded as they’d like.”
That is a gross understatement.
Listening to people who have seen it, it is clearly meant to turn the teachings of the Bible associated with the flood on its head.
1) It represents God as the “Creator,” which in itself I do not have an issue with. The Founders, in the Declaration, named Him as the Creator...which He is. But when it becomes clear that God in this sense is meant to be the Earth itself, then that is something quite different. Mother Gaia is not God or the Creater, the earth was created by God the Creator for mankind, God’s children. This movie is a progressive effort aimed at changing people’s hearts and minds about the very Being of God.
2) When it reflects the great evils of that day as something different than they were in the Biblical account...this is also very serious. In that day Idol Worship, sexual immorality, perversion, murder, etc. were rampant amongst the entire population according to God. So miuch so that God decided to begin again with a rightous family. This movie makes the great sins of that day out to be, building huge cities, mining the earth in “excess,” and polluting the ground. Basically everything that the rapid environmentalists say we are doing now. In other words, this movie depicts the “earth” of that day’s great sin as being too much like “us.” And that, I believe is its intent.
3) When it portrays Noha’s biggest moral decision assocaited with the whole episode being him, in the end, having to decide whether or not to allow mankind to survive (which was God’s whole purpose in calling him to build the ark), by showing him struggling to decide whether to use a knife to kill his own grandchildren...then the movie clearly goes right over the cliff. Presenting the idea that man is not worthy to live because it will just mess it up again.
Now, in the end, Noah decides to let his grandchildren, and thus mankind, live. But the very idea of it is an affront.
I like Russel Crowe movies. Always have. He’s a good actor. In this movie and there are a lot of neat scenes and compelling acting. But the entire underlying theme is an affront and is also why Christians everywhere are in an uproar about what could have been avery good Biblical movie...but in reality turns out to be an attack on the very teachings of the scriptures.
The Director, who is an avowed atheist, couldn’t help himself. He spilled the beans before the movie ever aired by stating that Noah is the least biblical, biblical movie ever made, which drew all of this attention to it. That admission and comment was a God send IMHO.
In the end, I believe that admission will...and should...cost them tens of millions of dollars at the ticket counter. And, as I say, well it should.
Why is everyone so worked up about this? Guess what...there’s a sure-fire way to not get offended by this movie...DON’T SEE IT.
Now can we get back to endless arguments between Freeper Catholics and Protestants? Thanks...
Saving my money for Captain America: The Winter Soldier.
“Ma’am, there’s only one God. And I’m pretty sure he doesn’t dress like that.”
Dang! He needed a “spoiler alert” in the title. Now he’s totally ruined the movie for me!
But, didn’t Cain’s band of un-merry men all ride around in SUV’s with a carbon footprint big enough to melt the icecaps and glaciers?
I’m looking forward to seeing it. Not that I expect much accuracy in the story in regards to the Biblical account, but to see what redeeming qualities and message it has, if any. Also, with that budget, the special effects should be amazing.
“...a lot of believers consider the Bible their private...”
No. Not my property. Just the money that you wish to extract from my account to view your garbage is my property.
Anyway, I have always heard that Hollyweird believes that any publicity is good publicity. Not so much, huh?
‘King of Kings’ was released in 1927 and starred H.B. Warner as Christ. It was directed by Cecil B. DeMille.
This strikes me as an odd criticism.
The word "God" is not His personal name. It is a common noun used as a title, which many assume to be His name. Just as the common noun for deity in Arabic is used as the title/name of Allah.
It seems to me that "Creator" expresses exactly the same idea of Who is being referenced.
Good point, I had forgotten about the silent version.
What Genesis 6 says on the subject is:
11 And the earth was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence.The only explicit mention of offense is "violence". The types of "corruption" is not further explained. The offense of "idol worship" comes from the Islamic version of the Noah story.
12 And God saw the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth.
13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
Interested in where you found this in the Bible. Genesis 6 reads (Amplified Bible): "The earth was depraved and putrid in Gods sight, and the land was filled with violence (desecration, infringement, outrage, assault, and lust for power)." .
I don't see anything specifically about "Idol Worship, sexual immorality (or) perversion" as such. Murder is covered, to be sure.
You may be conflating the accounts of God's destruction of Sodom with that of the pre-flood period.
If you've got an additional verse, I'd like to see it.
They should make a movie where all of Hollywood’s most extreme liberals star in a Biblical epic in which they are turned into pillars of salt or some such.
You make it “R” and fill it with depictions of debauchery and idol worship before God smites them all in a truly awesome display of computer-generated holy wrath.
Just before the devastating end, Sean Penn screams “Surely THIS is Global Warming!” before gasping his last.
Now, I’d pay to see something like THAT!
Right. A Fatwa has been issued. If they were to make a movie about Moe, that would probably result in a Jihad.
No thanks.....and I would not for the world want to be anybody who had any part in this travesty. Would not want the curse.
Someone should point out to Hollywood that the Quaran and Mohammed are in the public domain as well, and that they as the second largest religion, they also have a huge potential audience.
They can be true to the Quaran, or misrepresent it as they choose, but let’s see the irreverent movies.
“The Last Temptation of Mohammed” “Mohammed’s Dogma”.
I liked the review.
But after that many crazy spoilers, I'll wait for it to stream on Netflix.
Mohammed does A’isha.
Almost 30% of the article is devoted to the (anti)Christian film that the media adores and has promoted and advertised endlessly for 26 years so far, a movie that has only grossed 8.4 million dollars, yet which is treated as the first or second top Christian film ever made, by the media.
The article is hilarious and the movie is JUST as described in it.
I am not kidding.
I was expecting some poetic license and for it to be a little off, but it was just WEIRD.
Spot on. I agree. I didn't realize that Crow had such vitriolic hatred in his heart for believers in God and the Bible (aka Christians) after listening to him rage against them or anyone daring to have an opinion different than his own about (t)his film in an interview on his way in to see the official preview in Hollyweird yesterday. Shameful.
An excellent observation. Do you think they could find any place in the world they could hide and not be found and beheaded?
I am so glad that you and Erik Erikson has saved me from seeing it! The early trailers looked pretty good, and I was ignoring all the slams against Russell Crowe on FR.
this movie is a mockery
Would you still feel the same way if this movie was made about the Muslim deity Mohammed in the same distorted and disrespectful manner?
Well the review was so bizarre that I wasn’t sure that it was accurate. But, others say that it is, and that is enough for me. Evil rocks? Really? Unless the movie is about the recent landslide in Washington State, I don’t think that I know any instances of evil rocks and glow in the dark Adams and Eves.
Great movie. Saw it this morning. Be sure to read what most evangelicals ignore This movie was INSPIRED by the biblical account of Noah. Absolutely great special effects and Russell Crowe and Jennifer Connelly should be nominated for academy awards.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.