Who Let This Happen? · 3:30am Jul 13th, 2014
Normally, I try to keep my opinions out of my blog, and off this website in general. This ain't LiveJournal or some shit, where I can just yammer about my thoughts and feelings. FimFiction is about having fun writing silly stories about silly ponies.
So when I post anything -- whether it's on this blog or a post or what-have-you -- I really try to avoid things like religion and politics. Injecting them into any conversation on this website is asking for a horrid retribution; just ask Reality Check. I want to wake up to comments and replies and PMs about how I'm doing, or my projects, or how well I'm doing on my projects. Politically- or religiously-rooted vitriol is not something I need.
That brings me to tonight's blog.
Noah.
Fucking. Noah.
I have never seen a movie so far removed from its source material, and since that source material is the Bible. this one careened from insulting to more than a little childishly blasphemous. Instead of taking one part of the Bible and writing an "extension" of its canon (which, come to think of it, would make it fan fiction), they just took the original story of Noah's ark and took a Hollywood-sized dump all over it.
Admittedly, I only got to around the half-hour mark before I finally went
And if you're gonna tell me I should have stuck around to see the end of the movie, may I ask you this question: how many bites out of a turd sandwich do I have to take before I tell the cook to stay the hell away from the kitchen? Discuss.
The story careens around and can't seem to make up its mind where it wants to go: the name suggests its a Bible story, yet it rockets through Lord of the Rings and straight the fuck into Battlefield Earth and Fern Gully. It lost my interest the moment Methuselah was portrayed pretty much as being a sorcerer. They took what was already an epic story and tried too hard to make it MOAR EPICK!!!!
I like to think it suffers from Lords of Shadow Syndrome: it is a product that borrows from what's popular, has next to nothing to do with the source material, and inexplicably everyone loves it. It opened with positive critical reviews and of course, earned lots of what they were really shooting for in the first place.
Which of course means they're going to take more "artistic liberty" on more stories from the Bible in the future. Joy. I can see it now: the story of David and Goliath will more closely resemble Shadow of the Colossus, Jesus will be portrayed as a hippie, and let's see, maybe Revelations can be yet another preposterous disaster movie.
I miss the days of Dreamworks' impressive Bible movies. At least those took what was already there and just expanded on the details instead of throwing so much crap it became a completely different story. (That and the animation is just gorgeous.)
Oh well. Let me end this thing with one of the reasons I really love the Bible. It's a Grade A source of NIGHTMARE FUEL.
The ONE religious movie I found to my liking was The Passion of the Christ, which, to me, felt to be the most accurate description of the incredible pain and suffering which Jesus was supposed to have gone through.
I'm sorry you're so upset.
Agnostic as I am, I still respect people's religions and really don't appreciate it when people treat other peoples' beliefs as a joke. If I was going to make anything concerning religion, I'd create an original one which doesn't poke fun of or disgrace any one particular belief, rather it takes the basic components every religion shares and meshes them all together in a way which suits my personal beliefs.
Anyway, I agree that DreamWorks got it right, and I hope that Hollywood doesn't get the (not very bright, but it's not like that's ever stopped them in the past) idea to make Noah the beginning of a new, shitty trend.
Also,
I assume there was supposed to be more to this sentence?
I'm one of those people who can tell a movie will suck ass just from looking at the trailer*. The minute I saw theme call a beefy white guy 'Noah', I knew it was going to be a steaming pile of holy shit.
How do you cast a white guy as, to what is my understanding, an Israeli man?
This is why I almost never watch movies about mythology and religion. THEY ALWAYS GET IT WRONG.
I loved Prince of Egypt. My only gripe with it is that the reptile Moses' staff turned into was a Nile Crocodile, not a cobra, like was shown in the movie.
*Unless the trailer says absolutely nothing about the movie in question, like Man of Steel did.
So they Jajabramesed it.
Yep. That 's usually the result. Shame, I was actually interested in this :( Will likely still Redbook it or something.
2279124
Watch it only if you wanna riff it. That's the only entertainment my parents got out of it.
Yeeeeah, I could tell from the ads that this was one to skip. I mean, I'm not somebody who thinks every adaptation ever should be 100 percent faithful. I can take liberties here and there (as long as they aren't too jarringly wrong), as long as it stays true and respectful to the general story and feel of the source material.
But this looked like another damn "Oh man we want LOTR money so bad we can almost taste it!" flick from the start. With added "AND we can exploit the Bible for CONTROVERSY MONEY!"
Gag me.
(Remember that Noah's Ark TV movie that came out in 1999? My mom tried to watch it, and even as a stupid kid I could tell it was a turkey. I seem to remember a scene where the ark is attacked by pirates.
)
This is a Thing? This is an actual thing?
*skullpalm*
Hollywood... I don't... You really have just given up completely, haven't you?
I mean, aside from the religious issues... What exactly about Noah's Ark screamed Hollywood Blockbuster to you? Really? Surely there were some better options that haven't been explored/aprodied/done to death, for that matter? (Samson maybe? Which would lend itself sort of to that sort of thing, or were you just afraid it would shuld too much like Hercules...?)
*sigh*
Thank frag Pacific Rim is getting a sequel... Because for all that's it's a derivative genera, at least it was something that wasn't a movieisation of something that already existed in another format, showing that there is at least a jot of innovation left....
As a christian brony, I was actually willing to overlook the... Rock golem/fallen angel/watchers/whatever the heck they are excuses to use CGI, but as the movie went on, it got a li'l to "Hollywood" for me, and they took way to many liberties with it, changed to many things, or just never really read the original story in the first place.
(Pretty much what TVTropes would call a "They just didn't care" trope.)
I got to agree, the movie is really messed-up, even when trying to look at it from a secular, or atheistic stand-point. (Even they would find it silly. Heck, worst of all, people unfamiliar with the original story are going to think this stuff is what actually happens in it...)
My Dad's an expert theologian, and BOY was he pissed-off at this movie. I had more entertainment listening to him complain, and criticize it, then I did watching it honestly. (I also like how he facetiously called that CGI creature in the beginning a "dog-adillo.") Admittedly I had to stop watching it to around sometime during the flood, it just got to "Hollywood."
Only good thing really was some of the special effects were good... (or at least with the animals heading to the arc, and the ocean/water effects) The effects for Noah telling the story of creation was kinda neat to I'll admit...
However the rock dudes, and such they were just stupid...
And I agree Dreamworks' "Prince of Egypt" was a way better movie. No huge rock dudes in it backing Moses up. Just his staff.
Let me also add, here's further proof the people making the movie just didn't care...
Yet, somehow Crowe still didn't think Noah considering killing his own grandkid at one point in the movie was "going to overboard?" Hoo-boy...
2338599
Dude, Noah was chosen because he was one of the only men on Earth who was still faithful to God. He was only following orders. That's how faith works -- you follow what you're sure God is telling you to do. For Noah, that meant building an ark for when the flood came, for when he had to save God's creatures. And might I add, he might have let every human being die by God's hand, but he also let every animal die, beside fish and two of every creature. It takes faith to really understand God is doing what He feels is in the best interest of His people. Sometimes, He's tough and we don't really understand why He does what He does, but we need to realize He knows what He's doing.
Sorry for the bizarre spiel, I might have had too much to drink tonight. But my point still stands, this movie is horrible, and it's horrible because Russel Crowe and everyone else involved with this movie has no respect for either Christianity or the original Bible story.
2339269 It's ok, I understand your frustration with the movie. (And I got to say I lost alot of respect for Russel Crowe after reading that quote.)
Not just no respect for Christianity, but just flat out no respect for the original source material, or story at all. Even looking at it from a secular stand-point, they crapped all over the story. I was expecting a few changes, and such and was willing to accept them, (like you said the changes in "Prince of Egypt" were fine, and didn't ruin the movie) but this "Noah" movie literally changed almost everything... (Pretty sure those CGI rock dude "Watchers" weren't in the Bible either. Somebody actually asked if those were in the Bible...)
Also, get this the screenwriter of the movie said this after people were criticizing the movie on casting all white people for the cast, instead of more semetic-looking people, or a "neutral" race perhaps, at least for some of the characters. (Seeing as how all races descended from Noah, and his family depending on what you believe.)
...Hoo boy, kinda shot himself in the foot with that remark, eh? This is how incompetent the movie's makers are.
Geeze, I think the 1993 "Super Mario Bros." movie was more faithful to the Mario games/cartoons then this movie was to Noah, or the Bible...