OrthodoxChristianity.net

General Forums => Reviews => Topic started by: wainscottbl on March 26, 2014, 04:07:35 PM

Title: Noah movie
Post by: wainscottbl on March 26, 2014, 04:07:35 PM
Just wanted to get an idea. I saw Emma Watson on David Letterman last night. The movie looks like it might be decent so I'll see it, even if Emma Watson is the best thing in the movie. Russell Crowe is a great actor but it will be interesting to see if he can pull off a Noah. I always pictured Noah as having long hair and a long white beard, but that's because I saw him that way in a children's picture Bible story book. But I do dislike the fact that he is so young looking. Emma Watson said in the interview last night that she could not think of another actor playing Noah and I suppose Crowe is a good actor for the part but could they not at least have given him long white hair and a beard? Letterman I think was saying that he needed to be big and muscular to build that ark. I do not think so because I always pictured Noah as an old man with normal muscle of an old man but that he and his sons were able to build it by God's grace. But Crowe is a good actor and it will be interesting. Emma Watson is playing some adopted daughter of Noah. She said this character is not in the Bible but that women were not mentioned too much and the writer took some liberty. I suppose that liberty is not too much since the narrative of Noah may not have mentioned every detail. As long as there is not too much liberty I think the movie will be decent, though I doubt as good as The Ten Commandments.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: quietmorning on March 26, 2014, 04:39:16 PM
I don't know. It looks ok. . . depends on when it comes out on dvd and whether I'm still interested then. 
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: podkarpatska on March 26, 2014, 04:45:51 PM
Just wanted to get an idea. I saw Emma Watson on David Letterman last night. The movie looks like it might be decent so I'll see it, even if Emma Watson is the best thing in the movie. Russell Crowe is a great actor but it will be interesting to see if he can pull off a Noah. I always pictured Noah as having long hair and a long white beard, but that's because I saw him that way in a children's picture Bible story book. But I do dislike the fact that he is so young looking. Emma Watson said in the interview last night that she could not think of another actor playing Noah and I suppose Crowe is a good actor for the part but could they not at least have given him long white hair and a beard? Letterman I think was saying that he needed to be big and muscular to build that ark. I do not think so because I always pictured Noah as an old man with normal muscle of an old man but that he and his sons were able to build it by God's grace. But Crowe is a good actor and it will be interesting. Emma Watson is playing some adopted daughter of Noah. She said this character is not in the Bible but that women were not mentioned too much and the writer took some liberty. I suppose that liberty is not too much since the narrative of Noah may not have mentioned every detail. As long as there is not too much liberty I think the movie will be decent, though I doubt as good as The Ten Commandments.

I saw the interview as well and thought she was sweet and genuine. Letterman is always uneasy when celebrities come off as being real people rather than some media consultant's nightmare.

As she said, the Biblical context of the Flood and Noah is not lengthy so some 'creative license' would be expected for the backstory as is the case in almost all Biblical movies...As you said, let's hope it is not too outlandish.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Arachne on March 26, 2014, 05:01:13 PM
The story is brought into the far future, in a post-apocalyptic setting. In short, forget most of what you know about the Biblical account.

Not that it's necessarily a bad thing. I squeed out loud at the cast list. Crowe, Watson, Jennifer Connelly, Anthony Hopkins and Frank Langella in the same gig? Definitely watching it; the theatre is out of the question, but Sky is good with premieres.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Asteriktos on March 26, 2014, 05:04:32 PM
...Jennifer Connelly...

I just became interested in this film for the first time...  :angel:
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: LBK on March 26, 2014, 05:04:46 PM
From what I've seen of the trailer, ISTM that this film's adherence to the Biblical story will be about the same as 300 was to the story of the 300 Spartans.  :P
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Arachne on March 26, 2014, 05:07:03 PM
...Jennifer Connelly...

I just became interested in this film for the first time...  :angel:

I was sure Mrs Noah would bring her own fan club to the yard. :D
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: NicholasMyra on March 26, 2014, 05:36:43 PM
This guy is playing Ham:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f4/Logan_Lerman_at_the_Toronto_International_Film_Festival%2C_September_9_2012.jpg/214px-Logan_Lerman_at_the_Toronto_International_Film_Festival%2C_September_9_2012.jpg)

"Then Noah began farming and planted a vineyard. He drank of the wine and became drunk, and uncovered himself inside his tent. Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside. But Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it upon both their shoulders and walked backward and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were turned away, so that they did not see their father’s nakedness. When Noah awoke from his wine, he knew what his youngest son had done to him. So he said, Cursed be Canaan; A servant of servants He shall be to his brothers."

The Talmud deduces two possible explanations, one attributed to Rab and one to Rabbi Samuel, for what Ham did to Noah to warrant the curse. According to Rab, Ham castrated Noah on the basis that, since Noah cursed Ham by his fourth son Canaan, Ham must have injured Noah with respect to a fourth son. Emasculating him thus deprived Noah of the possibility of a fourth son. According to Samuel, Ham sodomized Noah, a judgment that he based on analogy with another biblical incident in which the phrase "and he saw" is used: With regard to Ham and Noah, Genesis 9 reads, "And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness." In Genesis 34:2, it reads, "And when Shechem the son of Hamor saw her (Dinah), he took her and lay with her and defiled her." According to this argument, similar abuse must have happened each time that the Bible uses the same language. The Talmud concludes that, in fact, "both indignities were perpetrated." -Wikipedia
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: wainscottbl on March 26, 2014, 07:20:35 PM
Just wanted to get an idea. I saw Emma Watson on David Letterman last night. The movie looks like it might be decent so I'll see it, even if Emma Watson is the best thing in the movie. Russell Crowe is a great actor but it will be interesting to see if he can pull off a Noah. I always pictured Noah as having long hair and a long white beard, but that's because I saw him that way in a children's picture Bible story book. But I do dislike the fact that he is so young looking. Emma Watson said in the interview last night that she could not think of another actor playing Noah and I suppose Crowe is a good actor for the part but could they not at least have given him long white hair and a beard? Letterman I think was saying that he needed to be big and muscular to build that ark. I do not think so because I always pictured Noah as an old man with normal muscle of an old man but that he and his sons were able to build it by God's grace. But Crowe is a good actor and it will be interesting. Emma Watson is playing some adopted daughter of Noah. She said this character is not in the Bible but that women were not mentioned too much and the writer took some liberty. I suppose that liberty is not too much since the narrative of Noah may not have mentioned every detail. As long as there is not too much liberty I think the movie will be decent, though I doubt as good as The Ten Commandments.

I saw the interview as well and thought she was sweet and genuine. Letterman is always uneasy when celebrities come off as being real people rather than some media consultant's nightmare.

As she said, the Biblical context of the Flood and Noah is not lengthy so some 'creative license' would be expected for the backstory as is the case in almost all Biblical movies...As you said, let's hope it is not too outlandish.


Yeah, I am not sure her beliefs but she seemed very friendly to the story and not all skeptical about it. Maybe she does not believe it, but she was friendly about it. And she is real, yes, and not fake. Aside from her beauty that is why I like her. She is real and has a real personality. And she can act. Letterman seems to be quite fond of her though. I think the uneasiness you see is his attraction to her. He said she looked beautiful in the movie and then kissed her hand as she left in a very clearly affectionate way.

Still, Letterman was really smug when he made it out to be that God called Noah up about the flood. She played it off by saying it sounds like God called Noah on a cell phone, but smiling so as to be cordial. Letterman was just ready to poke fun a Bible fairy tales in his own smug way and she was able, in her polite British way, to make humour of his jokes and defend the story. Still, I like Letterman as a late night comedian for some reason.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: LizaSymonenko on March 27, 2014, 01:20:09 PM
According to Samuel, Ham sodomized Noah, ....

 ???

What?
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: NicholasMyra on March 27, 2014, 01:32:22 PM
According to Samuel, Ham sodomized Noah, ....

 ???

What?

"Uncovering the nakedness" of someone is a euphemism. There is some disagreement as to what for.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: scamandrius on March 27, 2014, 02:26:13 PM
Whenever Hollywood pedals "the untold story" of anything, especially when it comes to the Scriptures, I just face palm.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: wainscottbl on March 27, 2014, 03:40:26 PM
According to Samuel, Ham sodomized Noah, ....

 ???

What?

Remember this is from the same book, forgive me, that calls the Most Blessed Virgin a harlot. Though it may be true on this case because Noah got pretty mad for Ham looking on him naked. Maybe it was a cultural thing, but it might imply sodomy in this case.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Cognomen on March 27, 2014, 04:19:41 PM
According to Samuel, Ham sodomized Noah, ....

 ???

What?

"Uncovering the nakedness" of someone is a euphemism. There is some disagreement as to what for.

And to settle this disagreement, we turn to the wiki article on Talmudic interpretation?
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Asteriktos on March 27, 2014, 04:23:48 PM
That it's a euphemism isn't in dispute. Is it? It's in several places in the OT related to some type of violation of someone else, usually a woman (I think), and usually sexual contact implied (I think)?
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: JoeS2 on March 27, 2014, 06:20:22 PM
Anytime Hollywood tries to depict any portion of the Bible I get concerned.  I've not seen this movie so I can not really judge either way, but I would be interested in knowing if Noah, in his thanksgiving to God, built an altar and had a sacrifice to GOD?  Was there the Rainbow?  Two of every perfect animal, but 7 of the imperfect ones.   I saw some Film shorts that the deluge the earth itself gave up its water which is correct, that is in addition to the rain from the firmament of heaven....  So, until I actually see the film I can not objectively criticize or applaud the way Noah was portrayed...  
PS I also understand from others that the word 'GOD' is not mentioned but a term "The Creator" is......would anyone have a problem with this?
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: LizaSymonenko on March 27, 2014, 06:34:35 PM

Well, God is the Creator.

I would like to see this movie....it's just finding the time that is always an issue.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Cognomen on March 27, 2014, 06:47:09 PM

PS I also understand from others that the word 'GOD' is not mentioned but a term "The Creator" is......would anyone have a problem with this?

Seems a bit silly, but even the word God can put people off.  While God is the Creator, the term "creator" doesn't necessarily include most aspects of God we would associate.  The creator was likely judged a safer bet though.  Not as lame or inaccurate as terms like "the universe," "cosmos," or "energy/energies" but still somewhat goofy to me.  Either way, my hopes aren't high for this movie.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: LBK on March 27, 2014, 06:50:21 PM

PS I also understand from others that the word 'GOD' is not mentioned but a term "The Creator" is......would anyone have a problem with this?

Seems a bit silly, but even the word God can put people off.  While God is the Creator, the term "creator" doesn't necessarily include most aspects of God we would associate.  The creator was likely judged a safer bet though.  Not as lame or inaccurate as terms like "the universe," "cosmos," or "energy/energies" but still somewhat goofy to me.  Either way, my hopes aren't high for this movie.

Cog, have you seen the trailer for this movie? It's clear that it's made with entertainment in mind, not authenticity to scripture. Colored lights and whizzies.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Gkterra on March 27, 2014, 07:01:12 PM
Gonna catch it at a matinee with the wife, this, or next Saturday.

but I'm really waiting to see how Ridley Scott does with The Exodus. supposed to be out in time for Christmas, Christian Bale is playing Moses
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Cognomen on March 27, 2014, 07:14:25 PM

PS I also understand from others that the word 'GOD' is not mentioned but a term "The Creator" is......would anyone have a problem with this?

Seems a bit silly, but even the word God can put people off.  While God is the Creator, the term "creator" doesn't necessarily include most aspects of God we would associate.  The creator was likely judged a safer bet though.  Not as lame or inaccurate as terms like "the universe," "cosmos," or "energy/energies" but still somewhat goofy to me.  Either way, my hopes aren't high for this movie.

Cog, have you seen the trailer for this movie? It's clear that it's made with entertainment in mind, not authenticity to scripture. Colored lights and whizzies.

Yeah, and I'm familiar with the director, so I had an idea of what was coming.  The decision to avoid using the word "God" doesn't surprise me at all, really.  I hope it's got some sweet explosions and shiny things though.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Αριστοκλής on March 27, 2014, 09:39:56 PM
I would not spend dime one to view this one. A waste.

I would rather put an extra $25 in the basket at church instead.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: NicholasMyra on March 28, 2014, 12:44:11 AM
According to Samuel, Ham sodomized Noah, ....

 ???

What?

"Uncovering the nakedness" of someone is a euphemism. There is some disagreement as to what for.

And to settle this disagreement, we turn to the wiki article on Talmudic interpretation?
Rather, it presents the disagreement in a general/introductory way.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: DeniseDenise on March 28, 2014, 01:03:58 AM
Why does this sound so -unappealing-? 

 :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Nicene on March 28, 2014, 01:23:52 AM
I heard there was rock people who talk to Noah and that Noah wants to kill his entire family in the movie at some point.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Agabus on March 28, 2014, 08:44:29 AM
Sounds boring.

The apocalypse as a genre has been played.

Maybe it's a sign of the times, but I've seen the world end enough times to stop being fascinated by it.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: hecma925 on March 28, 2014, 08:46:09 AM
Who plays the floating salesman that sells Noah liquor?
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: JoeS2 on March 28, 2014, 08:47:28 AM
Sounds boring.

The apocalypse as a genre has been played.

Maybe it's a sign of the times, but I've seen the world end enough times to stop being fascinated by it.

If I were going to see this movie, I would surely bone-up on Genesis and see if the Movie matches the story line.   In any event, it is always wise to take movies such as this with a 'grain of salt'.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: LizaSymonenko on March 28, 2014, 11:32:57 AM

I can count on one hand the number of movies I have been to in the last decade.

However, this seems action packed, easy on the eyes, and perhaps even "Biblical".  ;)  I wouldn't go see it to learn about the Faith, however, I might simply enjoy it as a movie about characters whom I already know and hold dear.

Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: john_mo on March 29, 2014, 10:28:43 AM
So... anyone seen it yet?  Skimmed through some reviews on Rotten Tomatoes.  Mostly positive. 

Slightly on topic; is there a consensus on the historicity of Noah in the OC?
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: JoeS2 on March 29, 2014, 11:11:43 AM
So... anyone seen it yet?  Skimmed through some reviews on Rotten Tomatoes.  Mostly positive. 

Slightly on topic; is there a consensus on the historicity of Noah in the OC?

I dare say that if one is Not familiar with this part of the OT  he or she would not be able to discern any errors or the liberties that may have been taken to produce this movie.  But, if you are looking for entertainment I guess it wouldn't hurt to see it.  I understand it is a play on environmentalism but we all know that's not the reason for the flood. 
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 29, 2014, 11:12:39 AM
It was pretty weird.  It was ok as a movie, as a retelling of scriptures not so much.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: john_mo on March 29, 2014, 11:35:32 AM
So... anyone seen it yet?  Skimmed through some reviews on Rotten Tomatoes.  Mostly positive. 

Slightly on topic; is there a consensus on the historicity of Noah in the OC?

I dare say that if one is Not familiar with this part of the OT  he or she would not be able to discern any errors or the liberties that may have been taken to produce this movie.  But, if you are looking for entertainment I guess it wouldn't hurt to see it.  I understand it is a play on environmentalism but we all know that's not the reason for the flood

Revelation 11:18 says that God will destroy those who destroy the earth.  Of course, this isn't connected to the flood.  It's simply the only verse in Scripture that I know of which can be said to be about environmentalism.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: hecma925 on March 29, 2014, 11:37:28 AM
A man on the radio was talking about it.  All he talked about were the rock monsters.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: john_mo on March 29, 2014, 11:38:35 AM
A man on the radio was talking about it.  All he talked about were the rock monsters.

Are you sure he wasn't talking about the first Hobbit film?
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: hecma925 on March 29, 2014, 11:40:59 AM
A man on the radio was talking about it.  All he talked about were the rock monsters.

Are you sure he wasn't talking about the first Hobbit film?

 :D
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: JoeS2 on March 29, 2014, 11:46:21 AM
So... anyone seen it yet?  Skimmed through some reviews on Rotten Tomatoes.  Mostly positive. 

Slightly on topic; is there a consensus on the historicity of Noah in the OC?

I dare say that if one is Not familiar with this part of the OT  he or she would not be able to discern any errors or the liberties that may have been taken to produce this movie.  But, if you are looking for entertainment I guess it wouldn't hurt to see it.  I understand it is a play on environmentalism but we all know that's not the reason for the flood

Revelation 11:18 says that God will destroy those who destroy the earth.  Of course, this isn't connected to the flood.  It's simply the only verse in Scripture that I know of which can be said to be about environmentalism.

I tend to think that the word "destroy" may not refer directly to this environmental issue but maybe to the morality of mankind in general.  The environment may only play a very little part IF AT ALL,of what Revelations implies...
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 29, 2014, 01:00:22 PM
A man on the radio was talking about it.  All he talked about were the rock monsters.
Not monsters, fallen angels trapped in rock bodies as punishment for descending to Earth.  Think Nephilim meets the Thing.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: hecma925 on March 29, 2014, 01:07:40 PM
A man on the radio was talking about it.  All he talked about were the rock monsters.
Not monsters, fallen angels trapped in rock bodies as punishment for descending to Earth.  Think Nephilim meets the Thing.

Which is probably something the radio announcer couldn't explain.  Makes as much sense as "rock monsters".
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: LizaSymonenko on April 01, 2014, 10:30:43 AM

So, I was made aware of this review:

http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/03/29/im-a-christian-and-i-think-noah-deserves-a-four-star-review/

I am now not so sure I am willing to dish out the cash to go see it.

I was hoping for something edifying.....bummer.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Laird on April 01, 2014, 11:11:09 AM

So, I was made aware of this review:

http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/03/29/im-a-christian-and-i-think-noah-deserves-a-four-star-review/

I am now not so sure I am willing to dish out the cash to go see it.

I was hoping for something edifying.....bummer.

 :o This movie is a train wreck and a mockery of the Bible and Christianity. I mean seriously, Noah being friends with the fallen angels and having murderous infanticide obsessions? Why are we allowing Hollywood to hijack the Bible? We should copyright it or something.  ;)
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: john_mo on April 01, 2014, 12:19:07 PM

So, I was made aware of this review:

http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/03/29/im-a-christian-and-i-think-noah-deserves-a-four-star-review/

I am now not so sure I am willing to dish out the cash to go see it.

I was hoping for something edifying.....bummer.

 :o This movie is a train wreck and a mockery of the Bible and Christianity. I mean seriously, Noah being friends with the fallen angels and having murderous infanticide obsessions? Why are we allowing Hollywood to hijack the Bible? We should copyright it or something.  ;)

Did we ever expect this to turn out any differently?  Me? As soon as I saw Russel Crowe was in it, I lost all hope of it being anything Christian.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Jetavan on April 01, 2014, 02:34:27 PM
A man on the radio was talking about it.  All he talked about were the rock monsters.
....fallen angels trapped in rock bodies....
...an idea straight from The Book of Enoch (which, if I'm not mistaken, is canon in the Ethiopian Orthodox Church):

Chapter X (http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/boe/boe013.htm):

"(4) And again the Lord said to Raphael: 'Bind Azâzêl hand and foot, and cast him into the darkness: and make an opening in the desert, which is in Dûdâêl, and cast him therein. (5) And place upon him rough and jagged rocks, and cover him with darkness, and let him abide there for ever....' "
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: orthonorm on April 01, 2014, 03:15:08 PM
According to Samuel, Ham sodomized Noah, ....

 ???

What?

Odox don't OT.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Papist on April 01, 2014, 03:22:45 PM
A man on the radio was talking about it.  All he talked about were the rock monsters.
Not monsters, fallen angels trapped in rock bodies as punishment for descending to Earth.  Think Nephilim meets the Thing.
I was hoping The Fantastic 4 would make it back to the big screen.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Jetavan on April 01, 2014, 03:32:58 PM
A man on the radio was talking about it.  All he talked about were the rock monsters.
Not monsters, fallen angels trapped in rock bodies as punishment for descending to Earth.  Think Nephilim meets the Thing.
I was hoping The Fantastic 4 would make it back to the big screen.
2015...2015 (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1502712/).
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on April 02, 2014, 03:02:11 PM

So, I was made aware of this review:

http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/03/29/im-a-christian-and-i-think-noah-deserves-a-four-star-review/

I am now not so sure I am willing to dish out the cash to go see it.

I was hoping for something edifying.....bummer.

Thanks for the reference--great review. This caught my eye:

"The Bad Guys attack Noah, not realizing that he’s a vegan Martial Arts master. Noah proceeds to kick some serious butt, leaving all of the Bad Guys bleeding on the ground.

One of them looks up at him in awe and terror. “What do you want?”

“Justice,” Noah growls with a determined gaze.

I was expecting him to then whisper, “I’m Batman,” and disappear, but I realized that superhero movies wouldn’t have dialogue nearly so clichéd as this embarrassing farce.

At any rate, Noah wants justice. Of course, this is coming from the same dude who will spend the rest of the movie contemplating murder-suicide and threatening to stab babies in the face.

But, hey, nobody’s perfect."

So, Noah/Maximos/Gorebot all in one package. Joy! /s
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Hawkeye on April 02, 2014, 03:36:59 PM

So, I was made aware of this review:

http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/03/29/im-a-christian-and-i-think-noah-deserves-a-four-star-review/

I am now not so sure I am willing to dish out the cash to go see it.

I was hoping for something edifying.....bummer.

A link at the bottom of the page led me to this other review. (http://drbrianmattson.com/journal/2014/3/31/sympathy-for-the-devil)

After reading that, I'm still not sure if I want to see the film but it has certainly piqued my interest.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: podkarpatska on April 02, 2014, 03:42:09 PM
A man on the radio was talking about it.  All he talked about were the rock monsters.
Not monsters, fallen angels trapped in rock bodies as punishment for descending to Earth.  Think Nephilim meets the Thing.
I was hoping The Fantastic 4 would make it back to the big screen.

A friend described it as Titanic meets the Day after Tomorrow with cooler CGI...
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Jetavan on April 03, 2014, 02:10:56 PM
Stephen Greydanus (warning: he's Catholic!  :o ) has one of the best reviews (https://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/noah-controversy/) of Noah.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Jetavan on April 03, 2014, 02:42:01 PM
Eastern Orthodox film critic Peter Chattaway has not one (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/filmchat/2014/03/first-impressions-noah-dir-darren-aronofsky-2014.html), but two reviews (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/filmchat/2014/03/second-impressions-noah-dir-darren-aronofsky-2014.html) of Noah.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Jetavan on April 03, 2014, 02:49:58 PM
....
A link at the bottom of the page led me to this other review. (http://drbrianmattson.com/journal/2014/3/31/sympathy-for-the-devil)
Chattaway responds (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/filmchat/2014/04/no-noah-is-not-gnostic-say-that-ten-times-fast.html).
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: rakovsky on April 09, 2014, 02:35:57 AM
Eastern Orthodox film critic Peter Chattaway has not one (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/filmchat/2014/03/first-impressions-noah-dir-darren-aronofsky-2014.html), but two reviews (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/filmchat/2014/03/second-impressions-noah-dir-darren-aronofsky-2014.html) of Noah.
Chattaway likes the movie, and the Biblical theme is fun, but unfortunately as a critic he undermines his review:

Quote
Thanks to a lengthy blog post by Brian Mattson, a theologian with the the Center for Cultural Leadership in California, the latest meme to work its way into public discussion of Darren Aronofsky’s Noah is that the film is somehow Gnostic, and that it presents a worldview in which God is really Satan and vice versa.

Is there anything to Mattson’s claims? Not really, and here’s why.

First, like a lot of successfully misleading claims, Mattson’s has a fair bit of truth. And one of the key truths he elucidates is that Noah, like other Aronofsky films, borrows some of its ideas from a form of Jewish mysticism known as Kabbalah.

Aronofsky told them he had turned to a number of extrabiblical Jewish sources for narrative material, “including the Zohar,” a key Kabbalistic text.

His main rebuttal to Mattson is partly:
Quote
He also doesn’t address the fact that many of the Kabbalistic elements he finds so sinister have their counterparts in Christian thought, especially perhaps in the Eastern churches. (Full disclosure: I’m an Eastern Orthodox communicant myself.)
Chattway is not all wrong- Kabbalah says that Abel's descendants were the "good side", according to Chattway, while the movie says that the good side came from Seth, which Chattway considers a common view.

Although Mattson is Protestant and Chattway is Orthodox, it looks like Mattson's review is more in keeping with what we would expect from an Orthodox writer.

Quote
where Mattson really goes off the rails is in his simple identification of Kabbalah as a Jewish form of Gnosticism.
Correct me if I am wrong, but while Kabbalah is not one of the ancient Gnostic mystery schools, it has a similarity in that they were about secret knowledge. There are restrictions on who is allowed to learn Kabbalah even within the rabbinical community, and views about it are sometimes controversial even there.

The only other thing Chattway equates with Orthodox elements are the idea of the fallen angels' redemption, proposed by St. Gregory of Nyssa. But that is not enough I think to show that "many of" the movie's unusual elements are shared with Eastern Orthodoxy.

Mattson explains:
Quote
The world of Gnostic mysticism is bewildering with a myriad of varieties. But, generally speaking, they hold in common that the serpent is “Sophia,” “Mother,” or “Wisdom.” The serpent represents the true divine, and the claims of “The Creator” are false. It is not God that commissions them to now multiply and fill the earth, but Noah, in the first person, “I,” wearing the serpent talisman.
http://www.aleteia.org/en/arts-entertainment/aggregated-content/the-secret-gnostic-key-to-aronofskys-noah-that-everyone-missed-5237320601042944
Maybe Mattson is being too judgmental, but I would recommend readers look at both Mattson's article as well as Chattway's.

They agree that Aranofsky is basing the movie on Kabbalah, and Mattson finds this troubling and reads into it ideas that contradict Christianity, while Chattway tries to read into them ideas that don't contradict it.

Chattway's view is that the snakeskin reminds them of the pure creation that was lost. However, why is the snakeskin the only thing that should do this, an object associated with a creature that itself went astray? Granted, as Chattway says, it portrays the eating of the fruit based on the snake's instruction negatively, as it is later that Cain kills Abel.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Jetavan on April 10, 2014, 01:55:45 PM
....
Chattway's view is that the snakeskin reminds them of the pure creation that was lost. However, why is the snakeskin the only thing that should do this, an object associated with a creature that itself went astray?
Jesus Himself compared himself to a serpent (John 3:14). It's makes perfect sense that the creature that went astray, is the same creature who saves.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: rakovsky on April 10, 2014, 02:46:33 PM
....
Chattway's view is that the snakeskin reminds them of the pure creation that was lost. However, why is the snakeskin the only thing that should do this, an object associated with a creature that itself went astray?
Jesus Himself compared himself to a serpent (John 3:14). It's makes perfect sense that the creature that went astray, is the same creature who saves.
And Paul said to be clever like a snake and also merciful like a dove, as I remember.
Nonetheless, Jesus did not actually say that he would be like a snake, but rather treated like one- lifted up like Moses' snake.

The fact is, the serpent is often seen as a bad creature, like in Psalm 90-92. Thus, I think one has to be strict and sharp about how one uses these kinds of analogies. After all, the snake is a dangerous creature. One kind in Vietnam can kill you within a few minutes.

The creature that saves is often seen as a sheep or lamb or ram, as the atonement rituals reflect. This is not to say that the snake can have no relation to what happens in salvation. The lifting up of the snake can mean the treatment given to the snake- not that the snake is an animal that saves. I could go into more detail about this, but just want to leave you with the underlined part, just as the snake is a dangerous creature.

I would say the same thing about Kabbalah. There is a warning against strange fire, and those rabbis themselves who used it restricted reading of the Kabbalah.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Jetavan on April 10, 2014, 02:54:17 PM
....
Chattway's view is that the snakeskin reminds them of the pure creation that was lost. However, why is the snakeskin the only thing that should do this, an object associated with a creature that itself went astray?
Jesus Himself compared himself to a serpent (John 3:14). It's makes perfect sense that the creature that went astray, is the same creature who saves.
After all, the snake is a dangerous creature. One kind in Vietnam can kill you within a few minutes.
And the venom that kills, is the venom that can save (http://biologybiozine.com/making-medicine-from-snake-venom/2081).




Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: rakovsky on April 10, 2014, 04:13:40 PM
....
Chattway's view is that the snakeskin reminds them of the pure creation that was lost. However, why is the snakeskin the only thing that should do this, an object associated with a creature that itself went astray?
Jesus Himself compared himself to a serpent (John 3:14). It's makes perfect sense that the creature that went astray, is the same creature who saves.
After all, the snake is a dangerous creature. One kind in Vietnam can kill you within a few minutes.
And the venom that kills, is the venom that can save (http://biologybiozine.com/making-medicine-from-snake-venom/2081).
Again, you are right that a snake is related to improvement and overcoming, but people have to be very careful with this kind of thinking.

Wikipedia on antivenom:
Quote
Antivenom is created by milking venom from the desired snake, spider or insect. The venom is then diluted and injected into a horse, sheep, rabbit, or goat. The subject animal will undergo an immune response to the venom, producing antibodies against the venom's active molecule which can then be harvested from the animal's blood and used to treat envenomation.

So directly speaking, you are wrong. The same venom that poisons you does not directly save you from poison.

Rather, another creature's reaction against that venom can be used to save you.

I am not ruling out that anything in Kabballah can be found helpful, but for Orthodox, it is "strange fire" and one should be wary, very careful, strict and cautious with this fire.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Jetavan on April 10, 2014, 04:22:10 PM
....
Again, you are right that a snake is related to improvement and overcoming, but people have to be very careful with this kind of thinking.

Wikipedia on antivenom:
....
So directly speaking, you are wrong. The same venom that poisons you does not directly save you from poison.

Rather, another creature's reaction against that venom can be used to save you.
....
Actually, I was referring not to anti-venom, but to medicines (like eptifibatide and tirofiban) derived from snake venom, which could treat heart attacks, brain injuries, cancer, and strokes.

I only recommend Kabbalah to the over-40 set.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: rakovsky on April 10, 2014, 04:55:38 PM
....
Again, you are right that a snake is related to improvement and overcoming, but people have to be very careful with this kind of thinking.

Wikipedia on antivenom:
....
So directly speaking, you are wrong. The same venom that poisons you does not directly save you from poison.

Rather, another creature's reaction against that venom can be used to save you.
....
Actually, I was referring not to anti-venom, but to medicines (like eptifibatide and tirofiban) derived from snake venom, which could treat heart attacks, brain injuries, cancer, and strokes.
Yes, I know you were, brother. However that line of reasoning is actually weaker.

Your point was that the venom that infects you also saves you and you were analogizing this to the idea of suffering from the effects of sin and being saved from sin. If one were to follow that analogy, it would be that one is suffering from the effects of venom and the venom saves the person from the venom.

That is, in your analogy, the effects of sin were being compared to the illness from venom, and you were proposing that one would be saved from sin in an analogy to salvation from the illness from venom.

I know your follow up example was about illness from cancer, heart disease, etc, but those do not match your proposition.

You can't say Look, the same venom that hurts you saves you, so the snakes save you, as the analogy is mismatched. At best, one can come across related ideas, like the apostles handling snakes as a sign of protection.

Quote
I only recommend Kabbalah to the over-40 set.
Personally, I don't agree with restricting Kabballah in that way based on age. I just think one must be very cautious with it. Personally, I am skeptical about its claim to authenticity as an ancient school of thought, although I think it naturally does have some roots in ancient mysticism. Alot must be done to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Let's give an example- one way it might be helpful is that some descriptions about God do sound reminiscient of Christianity. But I would just be careful with this for several reasons. I think the Talmud is a much easier book to use, as are the writings of rabbis like Maimonides. But again, care must be used there too.

Peace.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Jetavan on April 10, 2014, 06:16:29 PM
....
You can't say Look, the same venom that hurts you saves you, so the snakes save you, as the analogy is mismatched. At best, one can come across related ideas, like the apostles handling snakes as a sign of protection.
....
On the other hand, the original meaning of "seraphim (http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13437-seraphim)" -- heavenly creatures near the Throne of God, seen in Isaiah's vision, and deemed angelic in the Book of Enoch -- was "serpents".
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Sinful Hypocrite on April 10, 2014, 07:00:17 PM
I voted "other", I simply do not make movies my priority any longer, I prefer to read books.

I think that the world has been negatively affected by hollywood. And I am guilty too, but it seems life is often defined according to hollywood movies or television, I have tried to eliminate that from my life, I no longer have a tv at home. I watch movies with others sometimes .
I feel that reading allows much more understanding, although I have always enjoyed movies about the Bible.

Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: rakovsky on April 10, 2014, 07:13:18 PM
I came across a website claiming that the cross is an occult symbol connected with serpentry going back to Egypt and pagan cultures and Azazel and the snake in the desert. It then connected this with the Templars, the modern Red Cross, and the Rosicrusians. It was as if the cross and the snake and false gods are the fundamental idea and passed down into Christianity.

This proposed claim though is too loose a connection though to believe. Just because the Greeks had a snake symbol does not mean they automatically took all the properties of the snake symbol from another culture. I also had a tough time following their logic about how Azazel should be considered a snake deity when other sources associated it instead with a goat deity like the god Pan.
(www.scribd.com/doc/62144636/The-Red-Cross-of-Azazel)

Nonetheless, Jetavan, if you are going to make this argument that the Red Cross organization's symbol is an occult symbol, I would love to debate you on it in a friendly way on Debate.org.

Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: rakovsky on April 10, 2014, 07:30:43 PM
Quote
When Adam and Eve are expelled from the Garden, it says God gave them a garment of skin—sort of a parting gift from God to mankind as we leave Eden and go out into the world. So we wondered what that was—and as we looked at commentaries about it, one of the common ones was that it was the skin of the snake. We wondered why that would be, and it occurred to us that God made the snake. The snake was good, at first. But then, the Tempter arose through it. In our version, we have the snake shed that skin, and the shed skin is the shell of original goodness that the snake left behind when it became the Tempter. It’s a symbol of the Eden that we left behind. It’s a garment to clothe you spiritually.
Read more at http://www.relevantmagazine.com/culture/noah%E2%80%99s-co-writer-explains-film%E2%80%99s-controversial-theology#ug6v8PFW2PlkkMzU.99
Don't you think that being given a garment of skin might refer to their normal skin after they were supposedly light beings?
Is the snake that large that the snake's skin would wrap around their bodies as clothes? It would have to be an anaconda or something.

Quote
he part with the snakeskin tefillin was clearly a Gnostic appraisal of God. The snakeskin was clearly supposed to represent the “wisdom” of the serpent, as if the wisdom was actually good, and even the righteous people, the descendants of Seth, were accepting it. The director of the movie has had Gnostic symbolism in other movies, and the glowing magic snakeskin tefilllin on Antonio Banderas (who played Noah’s dad) was so blatant
http://bltnotjustasandwich.com/2014/03/29/noah-a-rabbis-review/
Yes. It says that the snake was the wiliest creature in the Garden. In its purer state, the animal is related to cleverness but not in a bad way. Naturally, Noah could have put on other things from the garden, but in this case the movie writer chose something related to cleverness.

It is the writer's own idea that that garment would be from a snake. Why did he pick the snake?
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: rakovsky on April 10, 2014, 07:33:28 PM
Quote
in the Gnostics, it's not the bad guy. It represents knowledge.

[Mitch] That's right.

[Darris] Sophia.

[Mitch] Sophia. The serpent is called Sophia, which is wisdom, and this whole snake skin ceremony represents that. Spoiler alert – at the end of the movie, you know, Noah's all drunk on the beach, he's naked, he hasn't reconciled with his family after trying to kill his grandchildren, but then he gets this snake skin back, and suddenly everything's good. So there's a clear transition here from you know, angry Noah, who is trying to follow this creator god, and he's becoming more violent, into good Noah, who's got this snake skin, because he's got love and mercy, things that the creator doesn't have.
http://www.ucg.org/beyond-today-daily/bible/noah-movie-diving-deep
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Jetavan on April 12, 2014, 06:31:08 PM
Nonetheless, Jetavan, if you are going to make this argument that the Red Cross organization's symbol is an occult symbol, I would love to debate you on it in a friendly way on Debate.org.
In the Indus Valley culture (http://www.imagesofasia.com/html/mohenjodaro/swastika-seals.html), the cross symbol was a version of the swastika (which in Indian cultures is a sign of goodness).

(http://www.imagesofasia.com/html/mohenjodaro/images/large/swastika-seals.jpg)

In any event, I have to stick up for my friend, the snake. The snake is not a traditional biblical symbol for godliness, but a closer look at the Bible reveals that the snake's apparently irredeemably bad reputation is probably not justified.

After the service, our younger daughter, Laura, had said, "Didn't you see what that woman was drawing with her hands?"
"Where?" we asked.
"In the wood," Laura said. "She was drawing a cross with a snake wrapped around it."
-- Dennis Covington, Salvation on Sand Mountain: Snake Handling and Redemption in Southern Appalachia (http://www.amazon.com/Salvation-Sand-Mountain-Redemption-Appalachia/dp/0306818361/ref=sr_1_1_bnp_1_pap?ie=UTF8&qid=1397344090&sr=8-1&keywords=salvation+on+sand+mountain)
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: rakovsky on April 12, 2014, 06:39:19 PM
Come on, Jetavan. You know you want to do the debate with me.

All said, I think it's interesting discuss the role of the serpent, because it looks like there can be more going, with seemingly strange things like the snakes in the desert and on the staff and in the garden and in poetry.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: methodius on April 13, 2014, 01:30:31 AM
out come the animals, two by two; 'Be fruitful and multiply'. then the snakes come out and are very despondent. 'But Mr. Noah, we can't.'
'Can't; can't what?' 'Multiply, Mr. Noah'  'Well, why not?' 'well we're adders.'
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: methodius on April 13, 2014, 01:36:36 AM
@ jet. and Rak. symbols look good; but I'd better not put them on the Paschal prosphora I'll be baking later in the week. (How do you spell 'anathema' anyway? - isn't that the plural form?)
Best I stick with the IC XC   NI KA seal
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: methodius on April 13, 2014, 01:41:16 AM
and in any case; the Red Cross symbol is just the colour reversed image of the Swiss flag - since Switzerland is where it is based - well, originally.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Peacemaker on April 13, 2014, 03:36:52 PM
I asked my spiritual father if I could see the new movie "Son of God" and he said to read the Bible instead  :laugh: so I'm sure his reaction will be the same with this.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: hecma925 on April 13, 2014, 06:31:14 PM
I asked my spiritual father if I could see the new movie "Son of God" and he said to read the Bible instead  :laugh: so I'm sure his reaction will be the same with this.

Since you're looking into monasticism, that makes sense.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Laird on April 13, 2014, 09:54:08 PM
out come the animals, two by two; 'Be fruitful and multiply'. then the snakes come out and are very despondent. 'But Mr. Noah, we can't.'
'Can't; can't what?' 'Multiply, Mr. Noah'  'Well, why not?' 'well we're adders.'

Haha Lol
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: rakovsky on April 13, 2014, 10:31:03 PM
and in any case; the Red Cross symbol is just the colour reversed image of the Swiss flag - since Switzerland is where it is based - well, originally.
I am able to argue either way on that question, but it gets into conspiracy theory territory.
The knights templar had the same flag - an equal lengthed red cross on white background, and France cracked down on them. Switzerland was a conveniently located place for them to go, and the Swiss were not persecuting them. Meanwhile, switzerland, including afterwards began to grow and in some ways became what the Templars were - a force somewhat independent of other governments and also quite wealthy in commerce and finance - a way in which the Templars excelled. This is a bit strange for a country in that geography, as mountains are less a place of finance and commerce than ports would be. It was some time after the creation of the Knights Templar I believe that Switzerland took on its flag.

However I am not making a solid conclusion that the ICRC is "Templar" either.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Asteriktos on April 13, 2014, 10:35:10 PM
I have to stick up for my friend, the snake.

We are still keeping an eye on you in the matter related to whether you are a witch. Tread lightly here...
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Jetavan on April 13, 2014, 10:53:11 PM
I have to stick up for my friend, the snake.

We are still keeping an eye on you in the matter related to whether you are a witch. Tread lightly here...
"The boy can talk to snakes, Dumbledore, and you still think he's trustworthy?"
—Cornelius Fudge (http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Parseltongue)
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: stanley123 on April 13, 2014, 11:19:30 PM
"The boy can talk to snakes, Dumbledore, and you still think he's trustworthy?"
—Cornelius Fudge (http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Parseltongue)
I know a few young women who talk to cats, a young lady who talks to parrots, and some neighbors who talk to dogs, but I haven't heard of anyone talking to snakes, frogs or lizards.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Jetavan on April 13, 2014, 11:41:16 PM
"The boy can talk to snakes, Dumbledore, and you still think he's trustworthy?"
—Cornelius Fudge (http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Parseltongue)
I know a few young women who talk to cats, a young lady who talks to parrots, and some neighbors who talk to dogs, but I haven't heard of anyone talking to snakes, frogs or lizards.
Mammals and birds have more interest in talking with humans. Reptiles and amphibians don't really care all that much.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: methodius on April 13, 2014, 11:43:54 PM
If you check back to Jetavan's profile, you will see that HE is MALE so he  would in no circumstances be a witch; - a wizard, maybe, but not a witch.
just coven't be done....
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: SolEX01 on April 13, 2014, 11:51:01 PM
He could be a warlock ... OK, I've been watching too many reruns of Bewitched.   :laugh:
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: DeniseDenise on April 14, 2014, 12:00:12 AM
out come the animals, two by two; 'Be fruitful and multiply'. then the snakes come out and are very despondent. 'But Mr. Noah, we can't.'
'Can't; can't what?' 'Multiply, Mr. Noah'  'Well, why not?' 'well we're adders.'


Best Post of the thread...and possibly, nay, quite likely better than the silly movie.
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: methodius on April 14, 2014, 12:08:17 AM
Hi, DD:
I have to admit it's not original.
(Isn't it a bit late for you to be up, young lady?)
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: DeniseDenise on April 14, 2014, 12:11:42 AM
Not even 10 yet! 

*refrains from an agey comment*

 :P
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Asteriktos on April 14, 2014, 04:00:28 AM
If you check back to Jetavan's profile, you will see that HE is MALE so he  would in no circumstances be a witch; - a wizard, maybe, but not a witch.
just coven't be done....

They have a saying in the black arts--"With witchcraft, anything is possible."  :o
Title: Re: Noah movie
Post by: Timon on April 14, 2014, 08:34:02 AM
I haven't seen the movie yet, but a lot of my friends have made a huge deal about the "rock monsters." Although the director seems to have taken some "artistic liberties," which I don't think is a bad thing, the rock monsters may not be as unbiblical as they seem as that idea comes from the book of Enoch.  Guess it depends if your Bible contains that book.

I never understood all the controversy surrounding this. Its not a daggum documentary. Its a movie thats based on a story that a lot of people believe to be true.