Posted on 03/12/2014 7:26:38 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
As a Christian and a fan of Hollywood’s past biblical epics, I got excited upon viewing the first trailer for Darren Aronofsky’s Noah. The story of Noah and his ark has resonated through every culture of man, yet has never been the subject of a major Hollywood motion picture.
Alongside my enthusiasm, skepticism lurked. Modern Hollywood producing a biblical epic adhering to the written narrative and theological themes seemed unlikely given a culture increasingly opposed to the source material. That doubt grew with last month’s report that a disclaimer would be attached to the film’s marketing explaining that “artistic license has been taken.”
Any adaptation requires artistic license. Certainly, narratives were added to Cecil B. DeMille’s The Ten Commandments which fleshed out the characters and layered the world in which Moses lived. Adding Anne Baxter’s Nefretiri to spice things up between Moses and Rameses is one thing. But you don’t add or subtract commandments from the ten. In the case of Noah, the disclaimer added by Paramount addressed criticism from Christian groups who claim that the film deviates substantively from the biblical narrative.
A clue to Aronofsky’s approach emerged alongside reports that actress Emma Watson had become sick during production after the director banned bottled water from their location. Watson told Wonderland magazine that the ban comported with the “pro-environmental message” of the film. The Telegraph recalled that Aronofsky called Noah “the first environmentalist” in a 2011 interview.
Now we have begun to see clips from the film. The one above revealed Aronofsky’s revised reason for Noah to build an ark. “Our family has been chosen for a great task, to save the innocent… the animals,” Noah tells his family.
When one of his sons asks what makes the animals innocent, Noah’s daughter beats him to the punch: “Because they still live as they did in the Garden [of Eden].”
From this we may infer that God regards animals as morally superior to human beings. In the clip, Noah adds, “I guess we get to start over too,” as if the involvement of his family were an afterthought secondary to God’s purpose.
The Bible tells a different story. All creation shares the curse of sin, including animals. The flood surged as judgment against that sin, and Noah’s family was preserved in fulfillment of God’s covenant to provide salvation for mankind.
By turning the story of Noah into an environmental tale, Aronofsky has missed the point. Beyond artistic license, he seems to have defiled the story’s essence. Imagine a film about the terrorist attacks of 9/11 which portrayed the hijackers as Hindu, and you understand the difference between artistic license and fraud. If Aronofsky’s Noah ends up as divergent as the above clip, it will trivialize something sacred, the treasured relationship between God and mankind.
PFL
8See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.
Colossians 2:8
What a surprise. Al Gores scam has now reached the level of being more important that the Bible. A freakin sociopathic, sexual abusing, flim flam drunk is more important that the Bible. A guy who scammed his way to half a billion dollars in only 12 short years yet and is still incredibly walking around a free man needs to have his scam furthered by using the Bible. Un-freakin-real.
"Did I tell you the story of me in the Bible?"
What a surprise. Al Gores scam has now reached the level of being more important that the Bible. A freakin sociopathic, sexual abusing, flim flam drunk is more important that the Bible. A guy who scammed his way to half a billion dollars in only 12 short years yet and is still incredibly walking around a free man needs to have his scam furthered by using the Bible. Un-freakin-real.
"Did I tell you the story of me in the Bible?"
I both smell and pray for a giant flop.
They take an ancient story and use it to pound home a message about the flavor-of-the-month issue of today. If I wanted a lecture on Global Warming, I would spend time more time with my family.
If word gets around that this is just more Gaia-worship claptrap, it will tank, big time. The religious won’t want to go near it, and the irreligious will avoid anything with a Bible-story theme.
There is also work in progress on another version of a major flood movie which you might rather wait for and this is courtesy of Joe Bardwell and ijnp.org, who are totally straight up (www.injesusnameproductions.org).
The story of our early solar system and the events leading up to the flood...
I’ve watched a bunch of documentaries over the years about Easter Island. The one we watched last night had the libs spinning like crazy to make sure we knew that the fluffy bunny natives were not to blame but it was the rats and the eating of the sea birds and maybe clearing some of the trees for agriculture but that since there were other places that had rats and farmers it must have been something else. Oh, and no cannibalism. Those stones tools that they found in people’s skulls? Just tools, not weapons. The native spokesperson seemed confused by that last bit but did at the end say that the moving of the Moi was one of the greatest accomplishments of the human race which seemed a bit much.
Bible fan-fiction, the way it ‘ought’ to be, ala Hollywood.
“Might” have warned? The book of Genesis says otherwise.
Hollywood needs a new job, people called “book slappers”, where there job is to slap the director in the face with the book everytime he deviates from it. Whoever directed World War Z would have been knocked unconscious.
Well, then, I’m sure the film neglects Genesis 1:28, in which God tells Adam to subdue the earth, and to have dominion over the fish, fowl, and every other living thing.
I’m also guessing the movie won’t mention the extra number of sacrificial animals which were taken onto the ark for post-flood sacrifices.
I say all this, BTW, as a lifelong animal lover.
Christians better not support this crap.
So we’ve had “Captain America: The First Avenger”, now we have ‘Noah: The First PETA Member”?
Well, normally I might be outraged at this, but at the age of 42, I’ve seen countless examples of animals being quite clearly greater than people.
Mankind has ceased to impress me.
But yeah, I’m not interested in seeing this useless movie either.
That wouldn’t be a valid argument to the OP,
because obviously he doesn’t give authority to Scripture as you do,
or he wouldn’t have posted his “theory”.
How about dinosaurs? This movie is clearly b.s. if it doesn’t put dinosaurs on the ark.
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.