Noah the movie, not based on bilbe facts ?

  • 66 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by LexLas (4431 posts) -

So my church had a special event last night, they rented out the entire theater, and we watched what we thought was going to be a biblical story about Noah. Little to our knowledge, the story was made up by the director in a way that took the biblical portion right into a Michael Bay type movie. It was disappointing, and improper. Mel Gibson did not do that with The passion of the Christ. It should say under the title of the movie, not based on the actual bible, lol .. I was like why are transformers building the ARC, lol .. And the story has so much added to it. I should have known that it was going to be something way different then a bible based movie. I don't know why i expected it to be a actual story from the bible. I don't know why any of us thought it was, lol ..

by the way, before it becomes a ugly religious thread. I am not saying anything in the bible is real, or that they should have based it on the bible. I just automatically assumed, because of the name, and some of the films copies of the bible itself, that it would be more based on the bible facts. But yes, he is the director, and he can twist it however he feels best. From the trailers i saw, it was not what i expected. Especially rock monsters destroying humans, like a lord of the rings movie, lol ..

#2 Posted by Aljosa23 (25643 posts) -

I heard a lot of religious folks are raging over it, which just makes me lol even if I don't care for the film. Should have researched it properly before watching you have no one to blame but yourselves.

#3 Posted by LostProphetFLCL (17655 posts) -

What's a bilbe?

#4 Edited by comp_atkins (31734 posts) -

my guess would be a true account of the biblical record would be utterly ridiculous. even in the context of a fictional movie.

#5 Edited by vl4d_l3nin (971 posts) -

@LostProphetFLCL said:

What's a bilbe?

TOPIC: After hearing Glen Beck lose his shit over the "rock people" in the movie, I knew it was a shameless cash in.

#6 Edited by Boddicker (2923 posts) -

@comp_atkins said:

my guess would be a true account of the biblical record would be utterly ridiculous. even in the context of a fictional movie.

Spot on.

#7 Posted by lostrib (40135 posts) -

@comp_atkins said:

my guess would be a true account of the biblical record would be utterly ridiculous. even in the context of a fictional movie.

It would probably be pretty boring as well.

But if you've seen the trailer, it would seem pretty obvious that they are going outside the biblical story

#8 Posted by Kenocratic (104 posts) -

Sort of on topic, it's the way they show the facts. The movie making realism of the ark story. This isn't the first high tech CGI ark movie imo because Evan Almighty although it's a comedy had a version of the ark and all the animals complete with fancy computer animation. Closer to the topic Noah's star Russell Crowe said the criticism of the movie is irrational so that must mean the movie is correct for the most part right?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2014/03/27/russell-crowe-calls-noah-criticism-irrational/6969677/

#9 Edited by SaintLeonidas (26628 posts) -

Way I hear it, Aronofsky approached it like the fantasy story it is. Seems he realizes the stories in the bible aren't true, but can still work as parables. I personally have little interest in the film, though I'll see it; but I find the outrage towards it hilarious. Mirrors that outrage from other fandoms when films make changes to the original story.

#10 Posted by Korvus (5512 posts) -

@vl4d_l3nin said:

TOPIC: After hearing Glen Beck lose his shit over the "rock people" in the movie, I knew it was a shameless cash in.

I never had any interest in the movie, but because of this thread I went ahead and watched a trailer. One of the comments also said the movie got adapted to graphic novel and here's a cover.

Definitely promising and realistic =P

#11 Posted by HailtotheQueen (283 posts) -

@LostProphetFLCL said:

What's a bilbe?

What's a biblical FACT? lol Never heard of such a thing existing.

#12 Posted by Reaper4278 (338 posts) -

@LostProphetFLCL said:

What's a bilbe?

#13 Posted by AmazonTreeBoa (16745 posts) -

@LexLas said:

So my church had a special event last night, they rented out the entire theater, and we watched what we thought was going to be a biblical story about Noah. Little to our knowledge, the story was made up by the director in a way that took the biblical portion right into a Michael Bay type movie. It was disappointing, and improper. Mel Gibson did not do that with The passion of the Christ. It should say under the title of the movie, not based on the actual bible, lol .. I was like why are transformers building the ARC, lol .. And the story has so much added to it. I should have known that it was going to be something way different then a bible based movie. I don't know why i expected it to be a actual story from the bible. I don't know why any of us thought it was, lol ..

Thanks for the report. I was interested in seeing it until I read your post. I lost all interest in it now. Sucks too because I was really wanting to watch it.

#14 Posted by lamprey263 (24704 posts) -

Well, you bring up it offended your religious sensibilities? How does this compare to the Biblical account?

#15 Posted by Nibroc420 (13567 posts) -

1.) As people pointed out, a "Bilbe" isn't a thing.

2.) If you'd meant to write "Bible" which is probable, I'll remind you there is no such thing as a "bible fact". The bible is a collection of fictional stories, designed to make you think a certain way. Usually it's interpretation is shown by a "pastor" or "priest", but that in no way makes the teaching of the bible, facts. And while one can state facts associated with the bible ex: "The bible contains scripture about Moses", that doesn't mean the characters portrayed in the stories, ever existed, or did the things it says they did.

TLDR version: Saying Noah the Movie isn't based on "Bible facts", is like saying the new TMNT movie isn't based on "TMNT facts"

#16 Posted by jimkabrhel (15422 posts) -

It's one thing to decry a movie that takes fantastical liberties with the life of Jesus (which I imagine would never make it to theaters), but it's another to really criticize a story from the Bible that is already incredibly fantastical. There is no way to make the story of Noah close to realistic.

Perhaps they should have tried to age Anthony Hopkins more, you know, closer to 900 years.

#17 Edited by alim298 (1820 posts) -

You didn't see the trailers did you?

#18 Posted by -Sun_Tzu- (17384 posts) -

@jimkabrhel said:

It's one thing to decry a movie that takes fantastical liberties with the life of Jesus (which I imagine would never make it to theaters)

Never seen Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ have you?

Great movie, very sacrilegious

#19 Posted by jimkabrhel (15422 posts) -

@-Sun_Tzu- said:

@jimkabrhel said:

It's one thing to decry a movie that takes fantastical liberties with the life of Jesus (which I imagine would never make it to theaters)

Never seen Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ have you?

Great movie, very sacrilegious

No, I haven't. Perhaps I should. I'm sure it's a lot better than the pseudo-snuff film that is The Passion of the Christ.

#20 Edited by Infinite_Access (2482 posts) -

It was directed by an atheist. It probably has more things in the bible than you realize.. just no one ever actually cares to read or they "skip over"

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117182/darren-aronofsky-noah-review

Here's a reviewer that justifies the liberties taken in the movie.

#21 Posted by wis3boi (31717 posts) -

The noah story never happened to begin with, so the director could do whatever he wanted I spose

#22 Posted by Master_Live (15300 posts) -

When I first heard the movie was been directed by Aronofsky I was excited, then I learned about the source material, then the trailer. Not excited anymore, looks like junk.

#23 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (7858 posts) -

Well the first red flag should have been white people playing the roles of ancient Mesopotamians.

#24 Edited by foxhound_fox (89875 posts) -

http://youtu.be/M03fZaSzll8?t=2m59s

#25 Edited by chaoscougar1 (36904 posts) -

@AmazonTreeBoa said:

@LexLas said:

So my church had a special event last night, they rented out the entire theater, and we watched what we thought was going to be a biblical story about Noah. Little to our knowledge, the story was made up by the director in a way that took the biblical portion right into a Michael Bay type movie. It was disappointing, and improper. Mel Gibson did not do that with The passion of the Christ. It should say under the title of the movie, not based on the actual bible, lol .. I was like why are transformers building the ARC, lol .. And the story has so much added to it. I should have known that it was going to be something way different then a bible based movie. I don't know why i expected it to be a actual story from the bible. I don't know why any of us thought it was, lol ..

Thanks for the report. I was interested in seeing it until I read your post. I lost all interest in it now. Sucks too because I was really wanting to watch it.

lol

#26 Edited by lamprey263 (24704 posts) -

the Mesopotamian great flood story has quite a few variants, maybe he borrowed something from other versions

#27 Edited by Storm_Marine (11806 posts) -

@LexLas said:
rock monsters destroying humans,..

Are you serious? That's actually in the movie? O_o

#28 Edited by ReadingRainbow4 (14737 posts) -

We so need a Gilgamesh movie.

#29 Posted by Storm_Marine (11806 posts) -
@ReadingRainbow4 said:

We so need a Gilgamesh movie.

no we don't

#30 Posted by Storm_Marine (11806 posts) -

@Infinite_Access said:

It probably has more things in the bible than you realize.. just no one ever actually cares to read or they "skip over"

Like what?

#31 Posted by Some-Mist (5630 posts) -

@Infinite_Access: reminds me of some of the reviews of the brick bible lol

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1616084219?pc_redir=1395857394&robot_redir=1

#32 Posted by Storm_Marine (11806 posts) -

Will Noah's nakedness be uncovered? That is the real question I have. <_<

#33 Posted by Storm_Marine (11806 posts) -

@Some-Mist said:

@Infinite_Access: reminds me of some of the reviews of the brick bible lol

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1616084219?pc_redir=1395857394&robot_redir=1

I have that. It's censored compared to what's on the authors website though. He needs to release a "complete" edition.

#34 Edited by darkmark91 (2892 posts) -

Can anyone provide a pic of these rock monsters? This just sounds hilarious! :P

#35 Posted by Minishdriveby (10229 posts) -

It's Aronofsky. he wasn't trying to make it accurate to the bible; he was trying to make it personal and what he envisioned since his childhood. You should probably know who's directing the film before going to see it. This is the same guy who did Requiem for a Dream, Pi, The Wrestler, and Black Swan.

#36 Posted by The-Apostle (12193 posts) -

Question: Is the movie about sin against GOD or sin against NATURE? Because I haven't seen it since I heard the latter.

#37 Posted by Qixote (10760 posts) -

The bible story of Noah is very short. You try making a movie over 2 hours about it.

Interesting thread title. . ."bible facts". The bible exists, that is a fact. But all the things that are told in the bible have never been proven as fact. The whole concept of organized religion being faith based., not fact based.

Thousands of years ago a scroll was found in a cave with a children's story about a man and his ark, and gets interpreted as nonfictional documentary. Makes its way into the bible. And now here we are.

#38 Edited by Riverwolf007 (24018 posts) -

christians are pissed that they took all the dong out.

what's the noah story with no dong?

nothing, that's what.

PUT THE DONG BACK IN!!!!!!

#39 Posted by El_Zo1212o (6032 posts) -

Lemme see if I've got this right: the Nephilim- offspring of the angels who abandoned heaven to get jiggy with human babes; giants, bullies and overall troublemakers- are recast as stone giants who protect the ark? Protect it from who? I mean, the whole point o the flood was to kill all the wicked people- if any of the wicked were able to escape the flood, it would kind of defeat the purpose of having a flood of divine retribution in the first place, no?

O, and that article where the dude tried to justify the artistic license made a couple of good points, but he missed one big point: Noah wasn't faced with standing by and watching all of humanity die out- as he was building the ark, he was charged with warning people that the flood was coming and inviting everyone to come on board with him and his family. Everyone was all, "there's the crazy preacherman with the boat," until the rain started coming down, but by then it was too late.

#40 Posted by Storm_Marine (11806 posts) -

@Qixote said:

The bible story of Noah is very short. You try making a movie over 2 hours about it.

Less rock monsters, more nakedness being uncovered.

#41 Posted by TheFlush (5591 posts) -

@Minishdriveby said:

It's Aronofsky. he wasn't trying to make it accurate to the bible; he was trying to make it personal and what he envisioned since his childhood. You should probably know who's directing the film before going to see it. This is the same guy who did Requiem for a Dream, Pi, The Wrestler, and Black Swan.

I wasn't interested in the movie, but now I am. I love ALL of those films!

#42 Posted by SaintLeonidas (26628 posts) -

Got back from seeing it, solid B. Really is nothing like it has been advertised to be. Much darker and a whole lot of fantasy elements. If you are going to make films about stories in the bible, you might as well take the approach Aronofsky did. They are parables/fables that are already pretty ridiculous, so you might as well make them exciting by smashing them together with The Lord of the Rings. I was glad it wasn't preachy, they never use the word 'God' once. More spiritual than religious and definitely pushes an environmentalist agenda. Not that I cared.

#43 Posted by Master_Live (15300 posts) -

I prefer my religious movie to be like The Ten Commandments or The Passion of the Christ.

#44 Posted by speedfreak48t5p (8830 posts) -

It's a fictional movie based on a fictional book. Of course it's not going to realistic.

#45 Posted by Aljosa23 (25643 posts) -

@Master_Live said:

I prefer my religious movie to be like The Ten Commandments or The Passion of the Christ.

You prefer them to be awful?

Ben-Hur is the only religious film one needs to see.

#46 Posted by Nengo_Flow (10101 posts) -

bible facts?

#47 Posted by The-Apostle (12193 posts) -
@Aljosa23 said:

@Master_Live said:

I prefer my religious movie to be like The Ten Commandments or The Passion of the Christ.

You prefer them to be awful?

Ben-Hur is the only religious film one needs to see.

No, we prefer them to be good. As in closer to the scriptures that inspired them.

#48 Edited by SaintLeonidas (26628 posts) -

@The-Apostle said:
@Aljosa23 said:

@Master_Live said:

I prefer my religious movie to be like The Ten Commandments or The Passion of the Christ.

You prefer them to be awful?

Ben-Hur is the only religious film one needs to see.

No, we prefer them to be good. As in closer to the scriptures that inspired them.

#49 Posted by foxhound_fox (89875 posts) -

@The-Apostle said:
@Aljosa23 said:

@Master_Live said:

I prefer my religious movie to be like The Ten Commandments or The Passion of the Christ.

You prefer them to be awful?

Ben-Hur is the only religious film one needs to see.

No, we prefer them to be good. As in closer to the scriptures that inspired them.

Which translation of scripture? Or are you talking about the originals?

#50 Posted by The-Apostle (12193 posts) -

@foxhound_fox said:

@The-Apostle said:
@Aljosa23 said:

@Master_Live said:

I prefer my religious movie to be like The Ten Commandments or The Passion of the Christ.

You prefer them to be awful?

Ben-Hur is the only religious film one needs to see.

No, we prefer them to be good. As in closer to the scriptures that inspired them.

Which translation of scripture? Or are you talking about the originals?

You know what I mean...