Noah. One of the best known stories of the Bible. Lot of powerful imagery, raises some serious issues. And it's got animals in it as well. So potential for a good film, then?
Except that this film isn't about the same Noah at all, but a different person entirely. True, there are some similarities. Apart from the names, this Noah also has a lot to do with animals and a big flood. But that apart, it's really not the same person at all.
For one thing, this Noah doesn't actually build his ark. It's done for him by animated rocks, who it seems are actually fallen angels. Not really evil fallen angels, mind you, just a little misguided, who were punished for trying to be too helpful to mankind, and thus unleashing the true evil, which it seems was industrial pollution.
And then there's Noah's Granddad, Methuselah. Now he is in the Bible, but doesn't appear in the Biblical story of the flood. In the film, he's quite crucial, since he brews the dodgy tea that gives Noah the vision of what he needs to do to save all the animals from the coming flood. He also cures a barren women, and suffers from a mild obsession with berries - none of which is mentioned in Genesis.
Another name apparently nicked from the Bible is Tubal Cain. There, he is credited with being the first person to make tools out of bronze and iron. And to be sure, he does a little smithy work in the film. But that's mostly making weapons, because Tubal Cain is here portrayed as a cruel, bloodthirsty warrior-king, intent on saving himself by capturing the Ark. Oh, and he also killed Noah's dad, and pinched the family heirloom - apparently a bit of snakeskin left by the Serpent who deceived Adam and Eve in the garden. I never did work out what that had to do with anything.
All this, though, is relatively superficial. The place where the film really diverges from the book is in the central moral issue that Noah has to contend with. His eldest son's wife is barren, his other son's have no wives, and the human race will therefore end with them. Noah is convinced that this is the will of the Creator, that his only purpose is to see that the world is re-populated by the animals, thus putting right the ecological damage done by humanity. When Methuselah's interference leads to the birth of twin daughters, Noah believes he must kill them or be responsible for the new world being corrupted by people just as the old world was.
In the Bible, none of that happens. Noah's sons are already grown men with wives when the flood comes, and there's never any question of human beings not being meant to survive. The story the Bible is telling is about a Holy God passing ultimate judgement on sin, and preserving a remnant of righteous people, i.e Noah and his family.
This raises all sorts of issues and points for discussion, but they're not ones that come out of the film. Fundamentally, it's a different story altogether.
Having said that, I wouldn't rubbish the film completely. Taken on it's own merits, it was a reasonably entertaining bit of fantasy, with some top actors, nice special effects, and a message about being good stewards of the world that is certainly relevant for today. As long as you don't get side-tracked by the details (like the snake skin) it'll pass an hour or two pleasantly enough.
But keep in mind that it's got nothing to do with the Biblical story of Noah. Otherwise you'll just get confused.
Except that this film isn't about the same Noah at all, but a different person entirely. True, there are some similarities. Apart from the names, this Noah also has a lot to do with animals and a big flood. But that apart, it's really not the same person at all.
For one thing, this Noah doesn't actually build his ark. It's done for him by animated rocks, who it seems are actually fallen angels. Not really evil fallen angels, mind you, just a little misguided, who were punished for trying to be too helpful to mankind, and thus unleashing the true evil, which it seems was industrial pollution.
And then there's Noah's Granddad, Methuselah. Now he is in the Bible, but doesn't appear in the Biblical story of the flood. In the film, he's quite crucial, since he brews the dodgy tea that gives Noah the vision of what he needs to do to save all the animals from the coming flood. He also cures a barren women, and suffers from a mild obsession with berries - none of which is mentioned in Genesis.
Another name apparently nicked from the Bible is Tubal Cain. There, he is credited with being the first person to make tools out of bronze and iron. And to be sure, he does a little smithy work in the film. But that's mostly making weapons, because Tubal Cain is here portrayed as a cruel, bloodthirsty warrior-king, intent on saving himself by capturing the Ark. Oh, and he also killed Noah's dad, and pinched the family heirloom - apparently a bit of snakeskin left by the Serpent who deceived Adam and Eve in the garden. I never did work out what that had to do with anything.
All this, though, is relatively superficial. The place where the film really diverges from the book is in the central moral issue that Noah has to contend with. His eldest son's wife is barren, his other son's have no wives, and the human race will therefore end with them. Noah is convinced that this is the will of the Creator, that his only purpose is to see that the world is re-populated by the animals, thus putting right the ecological damage done by humanity. When Methuselah's interference leads to the birth of twin daughters, Noah believes he must kill them or be responsible for the new world being corrupted by people just as the old world was.
In the Bible, none of that happens. Noah's sons are already grown men with wives when the flood comes, and there's never any question of human beings not being meant to survive. The story the Bible is telling is about a Holy God passing ultimate judgement on sin, and preserving a remnant of righteous people, i.e Noah and his family.
This raises all sorts of issues and points for discussion, but they're not ones that come out of the film. Fundamentally, it's a different story altogether.
Having said that, I wouldn't rubbish the film completely. Taken on it's own merits, it was a reasonably entertaining bit of fantasy, with some top actors, nice special effects, and a message about being good stewards of the world that is certainly relevant for today. As long as you don't get side-tracked by the details (like the snake skin) it'll pass an hour or two pleasantly enough.
But keep in mind that it's got nothing to do with the Biblical story of Noah. Otherwise you'll just get confused.
RSS Feed
