Noah_Russell_CroweI didn’t get the chance to see Noah this weekend, but it appears the movie has done respectably at the box office, enough to fuel future biblically themed epics.

The intriguing thing about Noah is not the movie itself but the Christian response, particularly the evangelical response. I don’t ever recall seeing evangelicals so divided about a film. By and large, we stick together.

Evangelicals en masse rejected Scorsese’s Last Temptation of Christ. I was just a kid then, but I remember hearing about this “blasphemous” movie. On the other hand, we flocked to Prince of Egypt, an animated though reverent portrayal of Moses’ story. And, of course, The Passion of the Christ stands out as the biggest biblically-themed blockbuster of all time. In the decade since Mel Gibson’s Jesus hit the screen, we shrugged at Evan Almighty, ignored the TV movie of Noah, and rallied around Sherwood Baptist Church’s films.

But then came Noah.

It’s a movie that’s made waves among evangelicals (pun intended), but let’s be honest: we’re not all in the same boat here. In fact, I struggle to remember any film that has drawn so much praise and criticism from churchgoing Christians.

Here’s the rundown of options as I see them, scrolling daily (hourly) across my FaceBook and Twitter feeds:

1. Cheers

I haven’t seen any evangelical leader claim that Noah gets the Bible right, but many have lauded the cultural opportunity this movie affords. Focus on the Family President Jim Daly and pastor Erwin McManus appeared in a video encouraging Christians to attend. Popular film reviewer, Phil Boatwright, pointed out the extra-biblical elements, but recommended it as a discussion-starter:

“Noah is an epic movie experience that engages not only the cerebral but the emotional. On the way to the car, people discuss it… That’s when you know you’ve experienced true art. It’s not just a time-filler before going to some other time-filler. It’s a film that demands debate.”

Christianity Today featured an extensive, seven-page review of the film. It begins with an encouragement for evangelicals to engage this film and then offers five reasons why:

  1. Noah is a good movie made by good filmmakers who pursue important questions and think of movies as art.
  2. Noah is a solid adaptation.
  3. Noah is visually and imaginatively compelling.
  4. Noah re-enchants the ancient world in powerful ways that counteract some of the worst excesses of modernity.
  5. You should actually see it for yourself.

Greg Thornbury, president of The King’s College in New York City, points out two major theological objections but believes the film is path-breaking and will help re-enchant a new generation with the biblical narrative:”

Aronofksy’s Noah is a way of putting ourselves before the Bible’s “dangerous question” as Barth put it. The grim, gritty, and supernatural antediluvian biblical world takes us back into ancient history, of origins. Who are we? What has gone wrong with the world? Where is justice? Is God there? What does he have to say? That ancient world sets us back on our heels and forces us to take stock in this strange new world inside the Bible.

Jerry Johnson, president of the National Religious Broadcasters, offered 5 positives and 5 negatives, and then encouraged Christians to engage rather than boycott:

The main events from the Noah story are depicted in a powerful way on the big screen by name brand actors and quality production. Christians should be ready to engage moviegoers in conversation about biblical and cultural themes that are portrayed in this movie.

2. Jeers

Those who are critical of the movie fall into one of two camps. First, you have the Christians who think the movie fails at the level of storytelling. Brian Godawa (a Christian who’s no stranger to Hollywood productions) thinks the movie fails at fundamental levels:

“On the nose” dialogue. Flat characters that you just don’t care about. A sick twisted hero that you just don’t care about. Look, I know your hero has to have a character flaw, but this is so extreme that you can’t stand Noah, and you just want to leave the theater.

The second category of critics are those who believe it fails because of its unfaithfulness to the biblical story. Ken Ham didn’t mince words:

Friends, last night I watched the Hollywood (Paramount) movie Noah. It is much, much worse than I thought it would be—much worse. The director of the movie, Darren Aronofsky, has been quoted in the media as saying that Noah is “the least biblical biblical film ever made,” and I agree wholeheartedly with him.

Sophia Lee of World sees the film as missing the mark, primarily for being an epic that shows God’s judgment without His mercy:

Expressed only through dreams and nature, Noah‘s God is mythical, impersonal, and devastatingly involved. Any references to God are seen through Noah’s perspective. That’s a good sum-up for the film itself—a wholly human approach to figure out deep yet simple theology with great intellect, emotion, and creativity, yet somehow missing the crux of it. That’s the true tragedy of Noah.

Al Mohler’s response is similar:

The odd elements are not the problem, the movie’s message is. Furthermore, the way that message distorts the Genesis account is a far larger problem when it becomes clear that the misrepresentation extends to the master narrative of the Bible – including the character of God.

3. Mixed

While some are jumping out of their theater seats to applaud Noah and others are taking to social media to express their disdain for this film, a smaller number are greeting this movie with mixed feelings. They are neither ecstatic in support or categoric in their rejection. For example, Joe Carter sees his take as falling somewhere in between the cheers and jeers:

Noah is an art movie masquerading as a big-budget Hollywood blockbuster, an incongruous hybrid that is unlikely to satisfy most movie goers. Yet despite all its flaws, Noah is a worthy addition to the deluge apocalypse genre. It’s not a great film—it’s barely a good one—and it certainly isn’t the biblical masterpiece many of us were hoping for.

And my friend Aaron Earls views the film from the perspective of the director, Aranofsky, who is a secular Jew. He concludes his review with an insightful analysis of a backwards-facing Noah, and why Christians are bound to see the film’s theological component as lacking:

Aronofsky can give us a Noah who longs for creation, but he cannot show us a Noah who looks forward to the cross. There is no covenant from the Creator to promise a future redemption. This time, the serpent’s head goes uncrushed.

The ark in this film can only remind us of what was lost and try to salvage as much as possible, it cannot point beyond itself to the place we can run into and find ultimate salvation and the eventual redemption of all of creation – humanity included.

The film raises tremendous and worthy questions about sin and grace, justice and mercy. I’m thankful any time we have a chance to discuss those in culture. We can enjoy it as a film and an opportunity for significant discussions.

But it cannot give us the right answers because this Noah is faced the wrong way. With only creation in view, Noah has its back to the cross, leaving viewers adrift in an ocean of opinions and wishes without any solid ground to provide true hope for what comes next.

Noah found salvation in the ark, but without turning our gaze to the cross, there is no room for us.

What about you? Who saw Noah this weekend? And would you recommend I go or wait until it’s out on DVD?

Print Friendly

Comments:


86 thoughts on “How Christians Are Responding to the Noah Movie”

  1. I practically never go the movies and haven’t been in years, but I went on Saturday to see this. This film is a mocking, blasphemous, bible butchering, occultic, science fiction affront to the God of Genesis. On every conceivable level. Lyndon Unger has the best review I’ve read yet. He saw it too. http://mennoknight.wordpress.com/2014/03/28/a-no-holds-barred-review-of-noah-the-movie-2014

    Trust me Trevin. His review is the last one anybody ever need read. He’s a much writer than I am too.

    1. Ben says:

      Over the top much, Greg? I thought the movie was brilliant and respectful of the Genesis narrative. The evangelical freakout over the film is simply embarrassing.

      1. Dan Kreider says:

        Right, Ben. Evangelicals are so embarrassing. A godless man shoots a film that makes a dangerous mockery of God, and Christians just fly off the handle. How uncool. How can we ever expect the world to like us if we keep getting worked up over matters of biblical inaccuracy? They’re going to think we’re fools. And we can’t endure the thought of that.

        1. Anita says:

          I just want to say this- I saw Noah. Yes, there are many evangelicals that are getting upset about this film but everyone please remember that while biblical accuracy is important and nothing to be embarrassed about, please remember that this film was not meant to be biblically accurate or evangelistic in any way. Some of the ungodly reactions that have came about because films weren’t biblically accurate can be embarrassing but speaking up in a Godly way in favor of biblical accuracy is not. This film can be a good conversation tool. I did find the movie to be beautiful visually but the script and acting had a lot of problems! I think that my actual words were at one point, “The dialogue is stupid.” That is just my opinion.

    2. Martin Brook says:

      Us Christians need to get a grip. We complain about everything and particularly Hollywood but when they do something brilliant we still complain. Nobody goes to a Hollywood movie to improve their theology so why are we worried about the theology. Take an unsaved friend, they won’t know if it’s ‘accurate’ but they will be faced with the living God and then you can talk to them about it.
      Thank God that Hollywood is getting involved in what really matters.

    3. David Westrum says:

      I found the depiction of man’s sin nature being so destructive and deserving death very true and faithful to the Biblical account. Though not a central theme – Noah’s wife says “God will provide” and I think Christians should pick up on this. And of course we can encourage people to take a Bible personally in their hands to determine how far off or on track the movie is. Give the author a break! Mel Gibson had four gospels to work from, here he has just a few chapters to work with leaving a lot up to the imagination.

  2. “Trust me Trevin. His review is the last one anybody ever need read. He’s a much better writer than I am too.”

    Sorry. Hopefully one day I’ll learn to stop posting before I’m too tired to miss typos like that.

  3. Kevin Keating says:

    I think many Christians are failing to appreciate what the film is doing because they’re making comparisons between it and the Genesis account without first doing a deeper analysis of how the film works on its own terms. For example, those claiming that it denies God’s mercy are the prime example of this. Within the world of the film, God does not speak in clear ways. This is an assumption that obviously does not fit with the Biblical worldview, but it drives the conflict in the film. Noah, as an imperfect human interpreter of God’s unclear signs assumes that God is unrelenting in judgment and has no room for mercy, which drives him toward his attempt to kill the child (which, on an unrelated note, I can’t help but think was meant to echo Abraham – especially given the whole barren womb being healed thing). But Noah’s attempt to kill the child is set up as ironic within the context of the film’s focus on the Cain and how since him man has killed man throughout history. Quite likely what the film is trying to convey is how religious people, thinking that they have a clear sign from God, end up doing the very thing that God hates: kill others. That Noah is mislead is made even more evident by 1) how others on the Ark read the signs from God differently than he does, as pointing to God’s mercy (the girl points to how God stopped the rain when the child came, the wife points to how the choice was put in his hands, you could also point to the boat crashing, the flower earlier in the film, the waters residing once they decide to keep it, etc.) 2) the rainbow at the end shows that God affirms the baby being spared. Also, on an unrelated note, has anyone else considered the possibility that the snake skin being related to the passing on of the blessing of the line of Seth as pointing to the protoevangelion?

  4. Derek says:

    Thanks Trevin, this is handy.

    When I published my review the reactions where strong (“no evangelical would give this movie a positive endorsement” were the criticism’s I received).

    I think this movie raises questions about what it means to “get the Bible right” and to “be biblical”. These are questions I think evangelicals need to reflect on very carefully.

    For example, does a movie have to be “word for word” to get the Bible right and be biblical? Or does it just need to have “every exact element, nothing more and nothing less” to get the Bible right and be biblical? This evangelical doesn’t think so.

    The question I have is, is the story of Noah there? Is the message for which God inspired it there? After watching the movie (embellishments and all), I was blown away with how biblical it is in that sense. The fall, the call, the corruption, the extent of human depravity (the movie even implies Augustinian original sin since Noah feels that not even he and his family are worthy to survive the flood). I read one early reviewer who suggested that the movie had a “global warming” agenda. If that was so I’d suggest that the movie was not being “faithful to the Bible” because global warming is not the message in the text. Fortunately the final cut did not have a global warming agenda. So in my opinion this movie does “get the Bible right” – embellishments and all.

    Obviously I find myself sitting on the fringe for some reason (which isn’t a comfortable place for a fellow evangelical to be.)

    What are your thoughts about all of that? What does it take for a movie “based on the Bible” to “get the Bible right?”

    Here’s my review if anybody is interested: Is Noah Biblical?

  5. Melody says:

    I never bend over backwords to make a movie seem worth 8 bucks. I find it embarrassing that any of you are willing to do that for any reason. It’s dishonest.

    1. Kevin Keating says:

      Is it really loving (or even constructive) to impute dishonesty and shamefulness to those with whom one simply disagrees? – especially without giving a counter-analysis or a rebuttal to the argument. I know that you probably don’t intend to offend, but these kinds of comments do little more than that.

      1. The truth is supposed to be offensive Kevin. I fully hope and pray I offend somebody every time I touch his keyboard in public. As long as it’s for the right reasons.

        I saw this movie. Squirmed through the whole thing and left with my hands trembling and tears in eyes. Not because a God hating pagan had made a God hating pagan film. I expect that. Most of em are. But because I knew that there I would have to endure watching the name and reputation of My God and His Christ reproached by those calling themselves His. :(

        Like for instance:
        Ben: “Over the top much, Greg? I thought the movie was brilliant and respectful of the Genesis narrative. The evangelical freakout over the film is simply embarrassing.”
        I will heroically resist giving the only possible explanations for a simply outrageous alleged Christian response like this to the mangling of God’s holy word.

        Trevin. Ya gotta go see it brother.

        1. Kevin Keating says:

          Greg – I’m not denying that truth will often be offensive (I don’t know if I would say “supposed to be”) but I am questioning whether it’s for the right reasons in this case. If you want to point out how specific things I say that are blasphemous, I welcome it, because that helps me grow. But if you want to say that simply because I am trying to understand a film and sift out good and bad in it that I am dishonoring God, that is unfair – it fails to extend the same trust to your Christian brother that you would desire for yourself. In the same way, if I had responded to your response derisively by claiming that you were a judgmental person (I’m not saying that, but if I did), it would be unfair – I don’t have the evidence to prove that. It is better for me to extend the same trust to you that I desire by assuming that you are sincerely concerned for the health of your Christian brothers and just disagree with me on how clear an issue this is.

          1. No matter how I say this it will sound wrong in today’s feminized church so I’ll just say it. Call me what you want Kevin. Reading your comments on this page I don’t trust anything about you. I have been in almost constant conflict with your clones for months on end now on these very topics. I don’t actually care at all what you think about anything and neither do you care what I think. I am learning to be more choosy about my battles. Nothing anybody will say from the scriptures will make a bit of difference to you. Yes, I know that’s assumption and yes you WILL absolutely prove me right if I were to get into this with you. But I won’t. Not here for sure.

            Trevin won’t allow it anyway. and I don’t blame him. There are plenty of people who will be impressed with your tie dyed, peace and love routine. I will not be among them. Click the link next to my name. If you want to engage about something I haven’t already addressed 15 times in those comments then do it there please. (Yes folks, I know how arrogant you think I am. Thank you)

          2. Kevin Keating says:

            I agree with you Greg that this conversation probably won’t do anything for the sake of God’s glory, and so it would be best not to continue it. I hope that your assessment of me is not accurate, but in the case that I am as closed to the Scriptures as you say, I ask that you would forgive me and pray for God’s Word to shatter my stony heart. May the God of truth, righteousness, grace, and peace be with you and your opponents in your other conflicts, that you may display his glory.

          3. Kevin Keating says:

            As I have reflected back, I have realized that I probably spoke too quickly in heat and probably would have done better to not give so much weight to this matter and to have thus let it cause division. I have also spoken with self-righteousness and pride. I am sorry.

      2. Melody says:

        The offensive part? Truly offensive is that you assumed that I was speaking to you when I didn’t even read what you wrote in the first place. It was a play on words of someone further up though you did seem to go to great lengths to make it seem like some kind of God honoring thing.

        1) It’s God’s story, His covenant and if you are a believer your loyalty should be to that before all else. It’s not a “God-inspired story about Noah”. It’s about God’s covenant, His faithfulness, His wrath in the face of sin which tells us that we can also count on His promises. Adding or taking away from what God has given to us about Himself is okay how?

        2) Lumping Christians together to speak against if you are a believer is just wrong just because they (under Romans 14)see a secular film differently than you do. What if you convince someone weaker to go? Do you feel any responsibility for their spiritual health?

        3)A partial truth is a lie. So no little nuggets of truth can change the fact that the movie does not portray our God factually and completely. Job had to present sacrifices for his foolish friends who actually believed in the living God but spoke wrongly about Him. Should we be making excuses for something that defiantly does the same thing?

        4)A poorly made movie is a poorly made movie. People are not making that part up. If we were talking about 2012 or The Day After Tomorrow no one would be calling us intolerant, yada yada yada

  6. Flyaway says:

    I will not be wasting my money. From what this blogger says it is a poorly made move with a lot of hype.
    http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/03/29/im-a-christian-and-i-think-noah-deserves-a-four-star-review/

  7. I have not gotten to write my own review yet, but I would say this is a movie to engage people with. Is it good? The acting is and it’s production is beautiful, but is it a good movie, I would say 6 out of 10. Does it get anything right, a few things, but for the most part all the drama comes from cutting out the fact that God was crystal clear what he wanted from Noah. By cutting that out you are left with an ambiguous “creator” who leaves choice in the hands of an admittedly sinful man. Noah becomes the hero not the covenant keeping God who saved him. I’d wait till blu ray.

    1. Kevin Keating says:

      Obviously the choice of the filmmaker to make God’s communication with Noah unclear is not accurate to the biblical text, but I don’t think this should be the only criteria for evaluating the choice to do so, especially given that the film clearly does not present itself as fitting into the historical genre. It’s doing something more along the lines of 300* – imaginative historical revisioning – as the rock giants, fantastical creatures, and magic golden rocks make clear. If we allow that the movie can make deviations from the biblical narrative because its not trying to be history, then we can ask ourselves the more interesting question – what does God’s unclear communication do for the story and themes of the film? From the perspective of making an interesting narrative, the choice to make God’s communication unclear adds tension and internal conflict within Noah that would not have been otherwise possible. From the perspective of character, leaving Noah without direct revelation from God makes him much more relatable for modern audiences who are in a similar position. From the perspective of theme, Noah’s lack of clear revelation almost leads him into major hypocrisy – the destruction an innocent child, when all along he believes that destroying the innocent is what God is judging the world for. As I noted above, this seems to be an indictment of religious people who fail to see the hypocrisy of destroying what is innocent in the name of God, all because he assumes he has clearer revelation from God than he actually does. This leaves the viewer asking himself “Are there things that I am taking as signs from God that really might not be? Could I, in the name of religion, be doing something horrible that God actually despises?” The unclarity also serves to drive further home how deeply murderous humanity is – that we will find ways to destroy regardless of what line we are descended from or whether or not we worship God. This indicts the self-righteous viewer who thinks that because he is of a particular family or because he is religious that he knows what way is best and everyone else is misguided. These are very interesting themes, and they are very powerfully communicated, but when we rush immediately to doing book to movie comparisons without instead doing thoughtful analysis of the film on its own terms, we miss out.

      *Another parallel between how Noah and 300 work would be how each film re-contextualizes the story it is based on by giving the characters concerns that would be anachronistic in order to give them a motivation relatable to a modern audience. Thus the Spartans (who in reality were notorious enslavers) are all about Freedom! and Noah becomes concerned with the environment. Note, although we trust that, unlike these examples, the Scriptures are not making something up from thin air but merely emphasizing details that could have otherwise been left out, still we see something similar going on in the actual Genesis narrative itself where details such as there being 7 pairs of clean animals for sacrifice and the prohibition on eating animals with blood in them seems to be included/emphasized to make the Noah account relatable to the original Israelite audience.

      1. cherylu says:

        I have not seen this movie. But I have read multiple reviews of it. Some of which are very detailed accounts of the plot.

        You know what? If someone had made up a totally fictional account where the hero was mistaken in what he believed God told him, there would not likely be much if any uproar about it.

        But when a movie names itself after a famous biblical narrative and even calls itself a biblical movie (even if Aronofsky said it was an unbiblical biblical movie) and then proceeds to turn the facts of that narrative into total fiction in many ways, then you are going to have many Christians up in arms.

        Making a mockery out of the biblical narrative is not something that a lot of us will take well. This IS God’s written word that we are talking about here. I don’t think God has taken mocking his word lightly either.

  8. tobi says:

    i did not see it yet, but i think it is probably been very misunderstood. maybe it’s impossible to really ‘get’ the movie without reading this comment: http://drbrianmattson.com/journal/2014/3/31/sympathy-for-the-devil

  9. Brian Gass says:

    Here’s my simple scale to find out how people felt about the final script or movie. It’ll generate less buzz than a TULIP scale for sure. ;-)

    My Noah scale: 1=Blasphemy to see! 2=Annoyed they mocked Scripture 3=Whatever; it’s a movie 4=Happy a Bible movie was made 5=People will be saved!

  10. steve windon says:

    I resolve never to get my theology from a movie, I know that movies are intended as entertainment, not necessarily worship events (though an argument could be made), and I don’t expect the director, star, or cinematographer to be my pastor. That said, I probably won’t spend the money to this film in the theatre, just too many brothers and sisters warning me against it!

  11. Steve Potts says:

    I saw it last Friday. Went with low expectations because of the controversy. My take: not as bad as some who criticize it; not as good as some who laud it. It’s basically Aronofsky channeling Tolkein via Genesis, or something. The casting and performances are excellent. The special effects are mostly superb (especially the ark, animals and flood). The Watchers and Noah’s torment about his granddaughter(s)were the most problematic to me. One thing that was brilliant: by generating some controversy, the film surely increased its box office numbers.

  12. Scott Youngman says:

    Brian Mattson has an insightful analysis of the movie as an expression of Kabbalah (Jewish Gnosticism)
    http://drbrianmattson.com/journal/2014/3/31/sympathy-for-the-devil

    1. Scott Youngman says:

      After posting my comment, I see that Flyaway had already linked to the same blog post. But it’s worthwhile to highlight here Mattson’s analysis and specifically the heavy emphasis on Kabbalah in the movie. I don’t see how we can say this movie is a wonderful depiction of the Bible story; really, it’s somebody else’s story, and a totally different philosophy.

  13. Carlcan says:

    Saw the movie yesterday, how can any christian see any positive things about this movie??
    It’s a blasphemy against Our God

  14. sharon says:

    One of the best reviews I have read is Mattson’s review. It gives us the why of this movie. This movie is NOT the story of a Biblical Noah Mattson says it’s a “form of Jewish Gnosticism. I dusted off (No, really: I had to dust it) my copy of Adolphe Franck’s 19th century work, The Kabbalah, and quickly confirmed my suspicions”

    According to Mattson any Christian leader who has been to bible college, or seminary should have easily picked this up…if this is true then why are so many leaders suggesting we should see ?

    Here is the link to the full review. http://drbrianmattson.com/journal/2014/3/31/sympathy-for-the-devil

  15. linda says:

    I was disappointed the movie wasn’t more scriptually based and those UGLY rock type crreatures who helped him build the ark –what exactly were they supposed to be–i just didn’t get it.

  16. David Westrum says:

    I was thuroughly awed by the movie. Yes there are some departures from the biblical narrative. But I think there are two themes that are so fundamentally Biblical that they can not be overlooked. I have never see anything that has so well decpicted the sinful nature and the depravity of man. It is so bad that it truly deserves wrath of God as depicted. Second there is the conflict between father and son – “where is my wife” and Noah’s wife answers. God will provide! If Christians don’t pick up on this God will provide train of thought: Woe be to us. Let’s not get side tracked in all the things that don’t “seem” right. Did not God indeed provide a “cure” for the sin nature in Jesus??? Do we want the movies to do our evangelism for us or does God want us to personally interact with our fellow brothers and sisters in Adam and personally let them know that God indeed does provide.

    1. Stephen Pierce says:

      I like what you said , would today’s Christian reject the works of Shakespeare and call them unscriptural also. Perhaps metaphor and fiction is the same thing to the low information we find ourselves surrounded by, at least on the Internet .

  17. emrys says:

    im not a christian and dont know the biblical story of noah and i thought the movie was weird and boring. the story was confusing and i dont understand why noah wasnt trying to get people to believe in a creator instead he thought everyone should die and didnt give anyone a chance. honestly what i got from the movie was anthony hopkins was evil, russell crowe was confused and emma waston cried. i didnt understand the watcher angel things and i didnt get why cain was still involved seeing as noah was generations after him. the movie wasnt made well and the animals were portrayed weirdly and man was blamed for all. i mean you had weird watcher angels and cain descendants why wasnt lucifer part of it too. i didnt get the story and it Noah seemed just as bad and possibly even worse than the people he destroyed. it wasnt just one bad decision and then he saw his faults. no. i dont know how this movie was good and Logan Lerman as Ham was actually my favourite character and he was the evil son. i expected it to be better and i wanted to understand the biblical story of noah and that didnt happen. it just left me confused because i dont know what was going on and did the people have some sort of magic because the “grandfather” healed the girl and i think that made man seem like god it wouldve been better if if the twins were a miracle from god instead of some healing magic from an old man i did get some bibal references though like the whole universe created in six days and man was created in the image of god. i expected better.

  18. Eso says:

    I went to see the movie because I read that it had been endorsed by Christian leaders whom I respect. I was disappointed to say the least but I was glad that I had gone with a fellow adult christian as I didn’t want to be left with the task of untangling the mumbo jumbo presented by Aronofsky (please do not take your kids to see this movie if you have been sharing Scripture with them and bringing them up in the way of the Lord, anyway its too violent for kids)

    I don’t expect faith based or faith inspiring movies from Hollywood but selling this film to Christians on the back of some shady endorsements just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. The story is not inspired by the Bible I read; it presents God in the worst possible light and romanticizes the devil and his fallen angels. Aronofsky borrowed some names from the Bible to make a film in the hope of luring an audience that would ordinarily not pay to watch his movies.

    1. Stephen Pierce says:

      What Christians and Christian publishing has done to the original power of the story of Noah is to turn it into a ” Precious Moments” happy bedtime story for children , and now someone who attempts to make a more compelling recreation , not just for Christians , but to explore the narrative and bring back some of that grittiness needs to be commended, not rejected I think . At the time I saw this film , we were studying the Flood in adult Sunday school class looking at all available information , the Class had Many diverse individuals , some directly from India, Africa , and Asia, they shared with us the stories of Noah and the flood from their cultures , we looked at the kind of practices the Babylonians and the pre flood populations might have had. The movie did its research, What I am saying here is , many unschooled Christians had no right to see this film and could not understand the purpose of it because it was way over their heads. The Bible is most powerful in presenting the metaphors, describing God’s heart during all parts of Earth history, but this film is from the perspective of a Noah that is more like ourselves , that New Christian who just wants to do God’s will but it is unclear… This is not the Noah you can worship at the feet of , it is a re telling , better and less damaging than
      ” Precious Moments” . You should be compelled to look up what you do not understand , obviously This Noah is not 600 years old building a boat the size of an ocean liner by himself . Creative Figurative changes make this story compelling , and I wonder why they that a pose, did not bother to read why the director , right or wrong , placed the elements in his story the way he did . Christians have failed to tell this ancient story to a big world without it sounding stupid , this film gives us back some of the gritty power and punch it had . To all that think this film terrible….. Tell it better , the bar has been raised …it is your turn …

      1. Mel says:

        And about as believable as Guardians of the Universe. Seriously?

  19. Rixter says:

    From 1 to 10, I give this a 7 for special effects and action, and a 1 for biblical accuracy. Because I was hoping it would be more like a 7+ for accuracy, I’m overall disappointed.

    This movie had me disliking Noah and thinking he was mad and capable of violence, nowhere near the non-violent “righteous man” of Genesis.

    And what is up with the missing wives, or the stowaway bad guy?

    What really had me shaking my head was those “watchers”, walking stone creatures. These are supposed to be the ‘angel’s that came down to the form of men, take wives, bear big bad children? Instead, they are rock creatures that are doing the actual ark building??? And then they are protecting the ark???

    Other than his 2 minute story of the “7 days” of creation and the original sin (the glowing adam and eve was creepy-odd) that had some connection to the actual account, the rest of this movie is PURE fiction.

  20. Stephen Pierce says:

    Did anyone catch that the director wrote a graphic novel .. Comic book first ….and based his script on multiple sources not just the Biblical narrative ….did anyone catch that? He used the Book of Enoch …to flesh out the story and fill in the gaps so why do you hold him to creating a Biblical documentary when this was not his stated intention ?, after all is said and done, the final cut of the film is much closer to the Biblical than it was to start , and it was never about Noah of the Bible any way .. But it was more about us as those devoted to Our creator wanting to get it right , but we get either off and wrong … It is a beautiful movie in so many ways , and to many people have missed the boat completely

  21. Hayley Marjolin says:

    You might see this as mocking but I think from my personal view it is brilliant. I am a Catholic and I have had a major problem with the children disregarding children who are adopted and not focusing on it like the way they concentrate on homosexuality, women in the church and the disabled. This film has emphasised this theme for people who are Christian and gives children or adults who have been adopted like myself, a purpose because Ila has the purpose of procreation which she receives as a gift to replenish the earth. Who knows if Noah’s ark even happened but the themes of family and what it means to be one resonates with the Christian concept of Love.

    1. Stephen Pierce says:

      I love this good feedback about the unexpected benefits found in the Movie ,thank you

  22. mary says:

    I do believe in God, I read the bible and you’re exactly right. The film was totally confusing! It is nothing like the story in the bible and they could have made it so much better. Firstly getting rid of the stone transformers, and Noah’s urge to murder twin granddaughters. None of which is in the bible! Nor his grandfather in a cave. Or flares! I couldn’t believe my eyes! The bible says noah was a righteousness man and that why he and his family were saved! Oh! And guess what! all Noah’s sons had wives. So all that about Hams wife is codswallop! This film has totally twisted the word in the bible. And you’re comment has exactly hit the nail on the head. How on earth are people who don’t know the bible supposed to get an idea of what its about when its been twisted to this extent! Take no notice of this film. Read the story yourself. Its in genesis and you can read the bible online. Its nothing like this film, except there’s a flood and an ark! I don’t believe in religion but i love God and believe in Jesus . In the bible God asks us to prove him and see. You don’t need to go to church and you can pray from your heart and ask him to show you he’s there. I did and he has. Good luck, and good comments! Better than a lot of people who have read the bible and say the film is good! The mind boggles! … Mary

    1. Hayley Marjolin says:

      Hi Mary,

      My question to you is why you feel that the movie portrays Noah in a negative light. This is simply a portayal of a story which had been passed down just like the biblical account. Having studied theology I have delved into my own beliefs and know that people who wrote the bible were not there when the stories were written. Who was there when the world was created? It was passed by mouth. I don’t care for accuracies but themes which make them important. The film Noah concentrates on family and trust in God and mercy. Who knows whether Jesus cured many people, perhaps he didn’t but it was because he showed such love and compassion and empathy. That is what we should focus on not the minute details which you are looking for. Another example Jesus wasn’t born on 25th December but the fact he was born is important. Hope it makes sense.

  23. Stephen Pierce says:

    So many people have asked , where is Jesus in this movie , do you not know that Christ is the ark of our salvation? And that Noah’s ark was a symbol of that for us today ? So the second star in this movie was the Ark itself . I wish to say , how blind so many of you are , and that you wanted a movie to mend your theologies for you and tell you more about The Bible Noah you did not bother to study on your own . Noah belongs to the whole world , not just Christians , even though I am one , Noah is recorded in the memories of many cultures perhaps because there really was a world wide flood that gave us all a second chance . How simple minded are we , to not consider that Satan does not have fallen Angels at his comand working in the spirit world to keep Christians from being effective or to attain a certain level of maturity that could ascertain the purpose of this movie . This movie is a gift for conversation , I can and have had long conversations about it with Atheists , with those of Islam… With men and women who deeply believe in evolution …. Everyone is open to talking about this film and the reality of God . You want a fast food gospel message that does all the work for you ? I humblely suggest that Christains take full advantage of this Gift from Paramont , and help build the Ark of Jesus Salvation in the minds and hearts of the not yet saved instead of putting holes in the boat . You can now talk to Jews with this film as an opener , comic book fans , and Newagers … Too ! What is your problem , are you mad because it makes you think or pour over the scriptures you thought you had a Handle on? Here is a flash , we know very little about what it was like in Noah’s day , Noah preached repentance for 100 years while he built the Ark . In the Graphic Novel I baught at Walmart that the film was based on … Noah goes to the evil city and preaches to them , but they reject him and toss him in a ditch …. We know very little about the everyday life of any early Bible characters . Moses had to update these stories so we could have them .. So when you claim Noah must be absolutely gospel derived and only what is from the Bible to make an action movie .. You have a 600 year old man who builds a boat because God told him to . You know that already I hope , and not much action there , unless you want God to be the Action hero , loading the Ark by His gient Hand while Old Noah and his old wife watch .. Not very interesting and it has been done before…

  24. Chad Brewer says:

    Brother, why would you post an article about a movie you haven’t seen? Just wondering.
    I watched this movie tonight. Cinematography was great, music was awesome, acting was superb, and the intensity kept my wife up (she always falls asleep).

    However, I am abhorred. Not because they don’t get the events correct, that is what makes a splash in Hollywood. This is nothing new. I am abhorred because the movie argues that the biblical view of the flood is absolutely so outlandish that it can only be mythological. There are multiple liberal theories and agendas picked up on in the movie: war is meaningless, veganism, etc.

    Noah is a psychopath who is blood thirsty because God told him to kill every man on the planet, including his own family through starvation and loneliness. God is a deistic deity who doesn’t speak to man, and Noah was a drunk because his family hates him.

    By making the Flood so outlandish, it argues that it is just as outlandish as Gilgamesh and Hercules.

    Because of that, I would not recommend this movie. It can only give added doubt to the struggling believer, and added fuel for the non believer.

    Thoughts?

    1. Mel says:

      My pastor said it is more accurate than the sanitized version that people learned in Sunday school. Why else would there be songs about animals two by two being sung by little kids like they are all going to a big party? And mothers making nurseries with Noah and the ark themes?

      I didn’t see the movie because I’m picky. I’ve only seen one Russell Crow movie and it wasn’t enough to entice me to spend money on him again. I wouldn’t be able to sit thru this anymore than I did Frozen. Some of us just have better taste than the majority of the world. ;)

    2. Stephen Pierce says:

      Chad, you again I think underestimate the human , saved or un saved. As a former professional Seeker myself , I believe a human is lead by The Almighty into many situations that would get them to cry ” Uncle, I give up , God, what ever you say , you are right”. These humans are smart, I believe they can figure things out eventually , and you do not need to worry that a fiction style movie made to suspend your reality for a few hours is going to imprint on them that this is a true literal re telling of Noah , nobody is going to think this , perhaps a few half wits that should not have gone any where to see anything perhaps , but no , most humans can figure it out , and be better for the experience . There were many biblical details , like the size of the ark and that God sent the animals to it , these are in this film , but the whole film was not to be taken as literal docudrama …. Some of the Biblical symbols and scriptures were used in the film yet everybody it seems knows it is not trying to be The Gospel , except for a few mis apprehending religious folk who are sounding the Biblical Accuracy Alarm on a comic book movie adaption …

  25. Riqrat says:

    It is a FACT that the media has an affect on our sensitivities, whether it be towards sex, violence, alternative lifestyle, etc.

    When a movie comes out with the title “Noah”, and it includes the Ark, the assumption is that it will be a movie about “Noah and the Ark” as depicted in the Bible…at least as close as can be for the limited about of time.

    We’ve all seen the Ten Commandments, and we know it is not 100% accurate and leaves out a lot of details. Hollywood likes to dramatize a few things as well. But face it, they did a pretty good job of showing Moses as a pretty decent person with limitations who nonetheless did what was asked of him. You don’t walk away with a drastically distorted view of Moses.

    But this Noah movie, “for which I DID watch”, was a total fiction and made Noah to be NOTHING like the Noah in the Bible. With so many people willing to be influenced by what they see on the screen as how the man was, you walk away looking at Noah as some kind of psychopath child killing disfunctional father-head.

    Then it is distorted further with rock creatures that are supposed to be fallen angels that end up helping Noah and building the Ark for him. What? That’s a 180 degree twist of the facts.

    If it were ones agenda to further muddy the waters in respects to Bible realities, this movie goes a long way towards this.

    1. Stephen Pierce says:

      I think it speaks to the cluelessness of unquestioning believers , that they would go to a movie just because of its title and blame the movie industry for not presenting what they expect. Get a clue please , A 600 year old Biblical figure is not going to be played by a Hollywood gladiator hunk without some story changes, what did you expect ? Really ? I went to see this movie because I knew it would give me new insight and give me new things to study up about , I had
      No idea that the mental state of so many Christians in America has been so impeded that they can not tell the difference between allegory and fiction . Yes there was a real Noah , but we do not have actual information about his personal thoughts , so just get a grip… The Movie Noah is about you , the father figure of the household making decisions based on only a few facts , and a limited amount of insight , just like passing judgments on a movie you were not prepared to see, and just can not get your mind around it , so you call it stupid … And wish for something simple that you can get , right off . The works of Shakespeare would be lost on you too , so just admit it was over the heads of average low information Christians and you should have been more descending than you were . There are bright students in every class , and there are some students who do not comprehend the lessons….should the ones that do not understand more advanced lessons , demand that the brighter ones be dumbed down and only like what they like and can understand?

      1. Riqrat says:

        “A 600 year old Biblical figure is not going to be played by a Hollywood gladiator hunk without some story changes, what did you expect ? Really ? I went to see this movie because I knew it would give me new insight and give me new things to study up about …”

        Wow, really?

        Some story changes? How about a complete re-write of history?

        For anyone to think that stone creatures came from heaven and built the Ark and then defended it, with each getting some kind of reprieve and getting to go back as just “some changes”, is really someone who has not spent any time reading the ACTUAL HISTORICAL RECORD for which the Bible happens to be.

        This is not some mythical telling, this is a record of history. I wonder how you might feel about it if a movie came out called “Abraham Lincoln” in which he was a slave-owner who raped his slaves while his wife was having an affair with General Lee, while near the end General Lee comes to Lincoln’s aid and warns of John Wilke’s plan in time to stop it.

        Will it be called “creative” or simply clouding the facts of history.

        If a person does not believe the accounts written in the Bible, then I would suppose they really should not chime in on the discussion of whether this Noah movie is good or not, for they’ve already written it off as fiction to begin with. And to simply take the word of “my pastor” or to not even have seen the movie in the first place, that is no better than someone handing you a book and you start giving opinions about it without even opening and reading it.

        What’s the saying, “don’t judge a book by its cover”? How about “don’t judge a movie without watching it first.”

        1. Stephen Pierce says:

          For Rigrat, sorry they should have spelled out the words Sci – Fi adaption in bigger letters , for those who do not like that form of film . I knew going in to it , by the tone that it was another planet just like our own but with slightly changed narrative , but it was based on the directors graphic novel and he used fictional methods to explore a pre flood universe to great effect , The director is a seeker , and wanted to explore this lost world with other seekers , a comic book movie will tell you it is ok to let go and ask questions too. Sorry that you could not enjoy the Experiece. Abe Lincolon Zombie Slayer , another real movie, used some history to tie it in also , but the use of Sci Fi here was not to mock , but to let you know this was not a documentary , yet it made deep points and fleshed out many questions I had too. Like when the family inside the Ark heard the cries of the doomed outside the Ark, what reaction would you have had? Anyway I hope that someone can make a movie about the real Noah that will make you cry ….

  26. mary says:

    For Stephen pierce and mel

    With the movie “Abraham Lincoln the vampire slayer” you sort of get it that its a sci fi movie. Just as if the film Noah was called “Noah the grandchild slayer” (which would be more appropriate) I’d get it too! But it isn’t. Its just Noah. With a picture on the advertising boards and DVD of Russell crow with an ark and water flooding. So many people will watch this thinking its based on the true story.

    The film is totally distorted from the truth and I wonder how many people have watched this film having not read the but bible and think its based on the real story?

    I feel that if the director was going to make a film based on the bible he could have done it so much better. But to twist the story of noah to make money in my opinion is disgusting! But that seems to be the only thing many people care about now, money and obtaining it at any cost!

    Also for Mel

    I think you should tell your pastor that the sanitized version is for children if its read in Sunday school! That’s why its simplified! Or would he also prefer the children to see Noah as a grandchild murdering monster? If he feels like that, maybe he could take them on a Sunday school trip to watch it!

    This film is as far from the story in the bible as it can be, its a disgrace! Especially as its advertised as being the story of Noah.

    And I have seen it, and I read the bible. So I know! I’m not just relying on the words of others.

    Mary

  27. Mel says:

    For Mary

    My pastor would prefer children were told the truth instead of making the it into a distorted lie. The movie is not the truth so your point is just rude.

    While teaching through Genesis this summer the subject of the movie came up. He mentioned it more to point out the hypocrisy of people screaming about the movie in front of unbelievers when so many people treat it as a nice story of Noah saving animals when teaching their children which is also a distortion.

    Do you think the Hebrews taught their children about God’s redemption by singing them
    The Lord said to Noah: there’s gonna be a floody, floody
    The Lord said to Noah: there’s gonna be a floody, floody
    Get those children out of the muddy, muddy, children of the Lord
    ..The Lord told Noah to build him an arky, arky
    The Lord told Noah to build him an arky, arky
    Build it out of gopher barky, barky, children of the Lord
    ….The animals, they came in, they came in by twosie, twosies
    The animals, they came in, they came in by twosie, twosies
    Elephants and kangaroosie, roosies, children of the Lord
    ……………..Now, this is the end of, the end of my story, story
    This is the end of, the end of my story, story
    Everything is hunky dory, dory, children of the Lord Is this less of a distortion?

    Nothing in that song about the sin of the world. Nothing in that song about how God only saved Noah and his family. In fact it mentions children but leaves out that children would have died in that flood. Obviously children aren’t ready for all those graphic details but don’t lie to them in the mean time. And don’t act self-righteous about the Bible if you are lying to your children about it.

    The story of the flood is about God. It’s about God’s redemption. It’s about God’s promise.

    Sunday school teachers and the atheist made the story about Noah. Both are wrong. The one doesn’t know any better because he hasn’t the Holy Spirit to open his eyes. To him it is just a fairy tale. Other than cutting his head off like Islam would do if it was about Mohammed, I don’t know what the solution would be. I don’t know why Christians about so dense about that. It’s in the Scripture too. The Sunday school teachers should know better but maybe they have the same problem. Who knows.

  28. mary says:

    Hi Mel

    I actually didn’t mean to come across as rude, but I can’t get over how people, especially those who believe in God and read the bible say this is realistic! With rock transformer type angels and a child killing noah and Japheth going crazy to get a wife, its not in anyway true to the story.

    Maybe you should watch the film, as I think you may have a shock. That’s if you believe the story of noah. I feel its giving a very wrong view to people who don’t know the story.

    As for Sunday school I personally don’t believe in any religion and we have house meetings. I feel the bible is made too sweet in general, and everyone is all waving arms and halalujah. Personally I feel we should worship God with love in action by living our life the way jesus taught us to. And its not all happy clappy. But I do like the stories made easier for the children to read. As its too hard for them to take in.

    All the best
    Mary

    1. David Westrum says:

      Mary – doesn’t Abraham raising the knife on his own son grant the director some room to have Noah do the same??? Yeah – the stone angels are a bit far fetched. And someone raised the snakeskin question – didn’t Moses lift up a snake in the wilderness that healed people – and in the new testement Jesus was lifted up just like the snake in the wilderness??? It seems to me the director went thru great pains to put a lot of that stuff in there!

  29. Stephen Pierce says:

    One last thing , I do not think I can win any of you over with my observations as to the merits of this film , yet as I hold the DVD in my Hand it Clearly states ” RUSSELL CROWE NOAH ” and that is what it is .. A spectacular version of a Russell Crowe type Noah …. It did not say VEGE-TALES Noah and it did not say this is a word for word Biblically exact documentary , or dramatization of such … It is Gladiator , Brave Heart , even a bit Middle Earth but it no where says this film is ripped literally from the Holy Koran or The Holy Bible … And there are lots of kids born today with the Name “Noah” in fact it is the most popular name given to boys at this current time , so maybe one can Call a film by that title and not have to be so documentary about it …. And that is all I can say……

    1. mary says:

      For stephen pierce.

      You say Quote: “nowhere does this film say it is ripped literally from the Holy Koran or Holy Bible” and you say lots of children are called noah

      Well see this confuses me. Seeing as all.the characters in the film are named after Noah’s family in the bible. Also leading up to this film it was said on tv that there are biblical films coming out in 2014 one of them is Noah! And that was said many times over the months leading up to the film. So I sort of expected a true adaptation. Not some made up codswallop to make mega bucks!

      If it wasn’t based on the bible, then maybe it shouldn’t have included the ark and the flood and all Noah’s family in the story, and just called it noah and the stone transformers!

      So it wasn’t just the case that the film was called Noah was it really?

      Mary

      1. Stephen Pierce says:

        Mary , I was very clear , it says across my DVD Russell Crowe Noah , he just played Superman’s Dad in Man of Steel and Hopkins played Thor’s dad, in Thor the movie and The girl was from Harry Potter , the wife of Noah is un named in The Bible but the Name She has in the film comes from the Koran , not The Bible , the Ark was very real and came from how the Bible describes it but you should have figured out from the very beginning of the film that it was going to be different … Raiders of The lost Ark had an ark in it , what about that? Indiana Jones can go after the Holy Grail , the Ark of the Covenant and link it with aliens and German Gestapo and this is ok, but put a realistic ark and names from the Bible to tell a story and you flip out . I am wondering what kind of thought police we are becoming as Christians , if we demand such control over the thoughts of those who want to explore what is true on their own , we call them atheists and greedy for money liars, I know you did not call them liars Mary , but I have heard the turn here a lot . How can someone be called a liar when they are telling their story ? My crazy uncle wants to tell me his view of reality , do I stop him in the middle of his story and tell him he is a liar? He is my crazy uncle , he tells a very interesting and entertaining story , he reinvents a few things so what , he is telling his version , no one is going to suffer the Wrath of God for telling an entertaining story , some of the folk posting here think that God is going to judge them for being in, or producing a movie that had ideas about God in it , a story they did not like . Around and around we go over the nerve this director had , to tell his story like a crazy uncle …. I like this biblical movie better than any other Biblical movie I ever saw because it is honest to itself . The Watchers are not realistic on purpose , their glowing eyes and cracked heads were to get your mind free to see this is not a documentary , this is not Veggie – Tales … The central characters could die , we do not know how this is going to end ……that is a great way to tell a story … To bad you missed it . Oh yes the movie was falsely advertised as a biblical epic and tons of gullible Christians expected the Gospel, think about this , what could you possibly put in a movie all about Noah and the Ark? What could you tell without making inferences and additions to make the film make sense? I have seen every other film about this topic and there is just not enough information to make it believable when taken literally, so you must fill in the gaps with stone monsters or something.. I am done here .

        1. mary says:

          Stephen,

          You have missed my point entirely! I love sci fi films and action films etc. But my point is. Seeing as this is a film based on the bible. Many people who don’t believe in God will watch the film and get a completely wrong picture of noah! A grandchild killer! Come on, you seem to believe in God surely you can see this is going too far! Noah was made out to be a maniac! God said he was a rightous man. He didnt seem it in this film. Its just a shame people have to twist the scriptures to sell a film. You have clearly given your opinion. But I have every right to mine too! And I feel in my heart that it is wrong to twist Gods word

          Anyway we are not going to get anywhere here. So you’ve said what you feel, but I’m afraid I still feel its wrong, I love God and respect his word.it says in the bible nothing should be added or taken away from the book. And I feel that should be in every way!

          Mary

          1. David Westrum says:

            Why does Noah raising the knife on his grandchild bother you? Abraham raised a knife on his own son. Abraham did it in obedience and in the movie Noah was doing it out of obedience as well.

          2. Stephen Pierce says:

            Mary , I am standing up for the people you say are to Dumb to figure out this is a comic book movie and not the Word for word Gospel presentation . You remind me of a person who before the play begins , must remind the towns people and their children that the Lion is not a Real lion , but just a man dressed up in a costume . So no one should be scared … This is what bugs me about your comments , God uses our failures, our miss steps , too.. All to reach the lost , every way He can … He loves to do the impossible .. He will even use the Persian Kings to correct or save His Chosen ones .. Or even Donkeys , so why won’t you let God help Hollywood ? And see the movie again Mary , you are manufacturing more into the movie than is there , Noah was not Mad child slayer , he had proper dramatic motivation to act as he did given the situation , He had the Whole world to save and all mankind to destroy , not a good place to be in …..some day , you can have me comment on your wonderful Biblical Movie about Noah and the Ark that you directed and put together and it will last about a half hour . Please do not write a comic book first and hire actors from other fantasy films , or I will be confused and think you meant to make a fantasy allegorical film and not a Documentary.. ……

            1. mary says:

              Hang on stephen, I havent once said anyone is dumb! I’m sayng If I saw a movie based on a true story. I’d believe what I saw in the film! (Maybe excluding the rock monsters!) But I would basically assume its the same as what is written! There’s lots of true story films I’ve watched and never read about them! So don’t make out that I think people are thick please. I never once said that! Let’s just say we won’t agree on this and leave it!

  30. Courtney says:

    I don’t understand how it is a mockery. Is this less of a mockery than VeggieTales? Radishes and beets acting out the word of God don’t offend you but someone adding creative flair to events not detailed thoroughly do?
    The Prince of Egypt changed things too, it left out how much Moses complained about his task, but no one complained about that.

    1. Mel says:

      How about the Book of Ruth? Totally turns it into a stupid love story and leaves out how the kinsman redeemer points to Christ. Yet you find it in the Christian book stores. Makes my eyes bleed

  31. Keith Simmons says:

    I saw Noah for the first time on DVD last night. I have several Atheist friends whom I would ask to view in a mini second. This would allow me another opportunity to share my faith and belief in the God of Abraham and personal relationship with Jesus Christ. This would get us into the bible.

  32. zaza says:

    I think it totally misrepresents God! It is my story as a christian, and if you decide to tell my story do it justice. Tell it right! I dont might the creative flair being added but when doing so the story teller should not make up things that totally twist and take away from the original story! And make up things that will make it look bad when it was not a bad story!

  33. zaza says:

    My problem with tjis movie is that is misleads people, it is a lie that the fallen angels became stoney because they trying to help human kind! When did the fallen! And my emphasis being on fallen angels ever try to help humanity and trying to help with what? And when and how did the fallen angels help Noah to carry out the assignment from God! Noah was not a crazy man hearing voices and did not have to go somewhere else to get a plan for the ark! And by the way the three sons were on board with their three wives! Plesase! It is just ridiculous! I enjoyed some creative flair in the passion of the Christ because
    that did not take anything away from the story!

    1. Stephen Pierce says:

      Zaza, you did not Read the Book of Enoch , Enoch was asked by the watchers to represent and plead their case in front of God , but he said no . The director used that and then made the end more happy , but it is not in your Bible so you are not able to understand it, also Noah’s wife’s name is not mentioned in the Bible yet the Name the director used for Noah’s wife is in the Koran , so what scripture and Noah story do you want to hold him to? He used many to bring many stories together , sad that you only know one story , it is Not the Bible , it is a movie made for insight and entertainment …

      1. Shane says:

        It this movie is not about the Biblical account of Noah then why call it NOAH? All it is is entertainment, since it is not scriptural. As for only knowing the Bible. YOU would not know of this tale if it were not for CHRISTIANS and the BIBLE. The book of Enoch is only a source of interest because of the Bible. If it were not for the Bible this false work would have no voice at all that goes for all ‘hidden’ works that are not ‘cannonized’. Christianity is the largest faith world wide and that is why it grossed over 300 million at the box office like the Passion of the Christ. Unlike the Passion of the Christ however it is not even close to Biblical Narrative. I think Christians should have protested by refusing to spend money to see it. I believe that If an atheist wants to produce a slam in the face to God and the Bible Christians ensure that only Atheist pay to see it. People who believe in God however just paid this guy millions for a movie that is nothing more then a slap in the face to God and the Great Patriarch Noah. If only Atheists went to see this movie It would shock me if it would even gross 200 000 at the box office. When Hollywood can actually get it right, I’ll spend the money. Until then………………………….YAWN……………………………….I’ll pass.

        1. David Westrum says:

          Wow Shane – did he really get it that bad? How many people have you seen that tried to deal with “the sons of God falling in love with the sons of men”. How about anyone trying to figure out why Noah got drunk after the flood? How many people have been able to put forth a reasonable way to feed all those animals for tht many days? Why does Noah trying to kill his grandchildren make people so mad. First he did so because he believed it was God’s will – a righteous man tries to do God’s will. So the problem is not with him but with God or his understanding of God. Second we have Abraham raising the knife on his own son – Abraham can but Noah can’t? The whole creation scene seemed pretty accurate. Tubal Cain – wasn’t he a pretty bad guy in scripture??? Let’s face it – Mel Gibson had a lot more material to go on to make a film on the last 24rs of Jesus’s life. Here the director only has a few chapters on Noahs whole life. How does God talk to you today. Do you know how many people come to faith in the Lord Jesus today thru visions? Yes there are some pretty serious errors – like God not closing the door. The snake skin is pretty weird. But overall I think he’s done quite a bit of research. He does a great job of depicting human depravity – and is not that the start of the gospel – when someone finally admits they’re a sinner. Isn’t the truth that we all are a lot worse than we’d like to admit?

          1. Stephen Pierce says:

            David , I have the DVD and after the battle out side and the Ark comes up from under the water Noah gets inside, and guess what, the door closes again behind him mysteriously… Hah … Ha … The Creator eventually closes the Door behind Noah ..just thought that was a good Save some might have missed .

            1. David Westrum says:

              Wow – I didn’t catch that – but it makes me appreciate it even more. In fact I wrote a tract after I watched the movie and challenge people to read the biblical account!

        2. Stephen Pierce says:

          Shane, you are so sure of your self and what God wants, but yet I thought , I might have been mistaken , but I thought I saw God there , with A big box of Popcorn , enjoying the Movie … God works in mysterious ways … Perhaps this is a test for you … Perhaps God has a bigger plan for this movie than what would please you . Just saying ……..

  34. zaza says:

    I think the problem with people today is they try to sound politically correctand please everyone! The truth is the truth whether it makes people happy or not! And this one is not the truth about Noah!

    1. Stephen Pierce says:

      So Zara is not happy that a Hollywood movie did not tell her the truth from The Bible ? I think you are dreaming …. Why do you demand them to present Truth as only the Bible says? It is Hollywood you expect to much , ask Billy Gram to make your movie , not Hollywood .

    2. David Westrum says:

      Could you say a few concrete words on what is not the truth about Noah. Generalizations are a waste of time. Be specific please

  35. Shane says:

    Noah Movie,

    In a word…..Boooo!! This movie was dark, unhistorical, and very very loosely based on the Bible.

    Did Noah kill people??
    Did God leave it up to him to kill his own family??
    Did God not have him ‘preach’ for the salvation of those who mocked him while he built the Arc?
    Where in the bible is the ‘snake’ skin used to bestow the ‘blessing’?
    Rock Monsters??
    Tubal Cain as leader of the evil army of men?

    Small but important things. Noah talking to God about the Arc, getting measurements for it. God shutting the door of the Arc.

    Fundamental and parallel Christian teachings concerning the Arc left out. Gods intention was ‘restore’ that which he Created and so he looked for ‘one righteous man’. He found Noah and spared mankind. The movie give the impression that God was to keep the earth and animals but destroy mankind. The contradiction is that God created the Earth for Mankind. The flood was intended to cleanse the world of evil and provide a new beginning. The parallels could not be better seen in reference to water baptism and what it signifies concerning salvation from sin. 1 Peter 3:15-21 explains this. The movie rather allows God to be seen as a baby killing tyrant who allows men to simply decide. This however was not the case in the Biblical account nor expressed in the tale of Abraham offering Issac on an alter to God. it was not Abraham who stopped the death of Issac It was God. It blows my mind that Christians are praise this movie as it clearly has nothing good to say about God or Noah. It is the kind of movie I would expect from people who cannot accept the true Biblical Narrative. It does not shock me that Rock Monsters were added since when you believe that God is mythological then really anything goes.

    1. David Westrum says:

      Very clear specific comments – thanks – I appreciate that and though I have been very supportive of the movie I agree with your statements about God and Noah. However, the problem in the modern world is people don’t think they need salvation because they don’t see their sin nature. I think the best thing about this movie is it clearly portrays human depravity and man’s total sinfulness. That is a good starting point. I personally think that Ila having twins was God’s way of providing the two missing wives – and thus makes the movie quite redemptive. Can someone verify – didn’t Noah’s wife say – “God will provide”?

    2. Stephen Pierce says:

      Thank you Shane, I value your comments too , I ponder on how Our loving God could have also destroyed women and children in the flood , that must have been so hard to see for him too. When the first rain drop fell from the sky while the Movie Noah looked up , it seemed to be like God’s single tear , just like when Christ was on The cross in the Mel Gibson movie . God must have been very sorrowful , that all of the generations of Adam had to die, except for Noah and his family . Has some one ever seen that depicted in a movie before?

      1. Mel says:

        Do you have a verse for that Stephen? Does it say that God cried? Or would that be your vision as a director?

        1. Stephen Pierce says:

          Mel , I first noticed it was like a nod from Mel Gibson film , then I just thought of the shortest verse in the Gospels , ” Jesus wept. ” It is all directors dramatic touchs , But don’t you think Jesus wept , over the death of millions of Sinners who go to Hell without repenting ? It is an Art movie , and being art , you can find deeper things in it that even the Director had not planned .. But I do believe he planned the rain drop tear and used it in the trailer for rest emotional effect .

  36. Dan says:

    This movie was not made for the Christian right. although many Christians supported it by paying for it at the box office. If it was for the Evangelical it would not have been made by THIS director. However, it was the second movie made in recent memory about characters in the Bible produced in and by Hollywood. Christians in general should be glad that Hollywood is making movies about the Bible even if the account is skewed. How else would unbelievers get any account of the Bible. My friend, a new believer first told me about this movie. I hadn’t really been paying attention. He had so many questions but I told him to hold on until I saw it for myself. After watching this film, I immediately saw the flaws that many of you question in your post. However, the overall theme of man’s inhumanity to man, the Godless nature of man during this period and GODs promise to SAVE where all depicted in this film. After watching it I called my friend and we had a lively discussion about the film. He had never read the Biblical account for himself but after hearing my take he immediately went to the scripture as he said to me “I need to read for myself and not just take your word.” It truly made my heart glad to hear him say that. This is a movie for discusssion with the unsaved. Use it as a tool to reach out.

    1. David Westrum says:

      Great testimony – I love it!

  37. Stephen Pierce says:

    Amen Dan.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Trevin Wax


​Trevin Wax is managing editor of The Gospel Project at LifeWay Christian Resources, husband to Corina, father to Timothy, Julia, and David. You can follow him on Twitter. Click here for Trevin’s full bio.

Trevin Wax's Books