It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum
Topics => Entertainment => Topic started by: Libertas on March 24, 2014, 07:58:04 AM
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/film-news/10717724/Noah-epic-awash-in-flood-of-criticism-for-green-agenda-and-taking-liberties-with-Bible.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/film-news/10717724/Noah-epic-awash-in-flood-of-criticism-for-green-agenda-and-taking-liberties-with-Bible.html)
Directed by an atheist, enviro-whacko greenie BS, the name "God" making no appearance in the film, and a caveat added to inform potential viewers that "the film is 'inspired by the story of Noah... artistic licence has been taken.' "
Yes, and I will take issue with this production being called a "biblical film"!
Just more leftist BS twisting of Christian beliefs into pro-progressive agenda talking points...and no doubt many idiots in the populace and apostates in apostate churches will applaud this production like a simple chimp given a banana!
Not me! I say boycott this stupid movie!
-
Yeah, I had high hopes when I first saw the trailer a few months ago. Now I'm not going to see it. I mean, WTF? Noah as an enviro-wacko misanthrope? Not a chance in hell I'll waste my time or money.
-
Glenn Beck did a big segment on it this morning. I guess he went to see it in a preview or something. His account of the movie makes it sound as horrible as I thought it would be. Maybe even worse than I thought it would be.
He said that the only sin shown on screen was that of Noah's family having sex outside of marriage...that the "bad" guys were behaving badly because they were starving and that their "sin" was eating meat or something so you have the PETA angle in there as well. Plus there are "rock people" or something...creatures made up out of whole cloth...fallen angels who help Noah or something. His comments are here. (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/03/24/beck-saw-noah-over-the-weekend-and-hes-calling-it-the-babylonian-chainsaw-massacre/) The audio/video clip of the full segment is at the link. Worth listening to.
“The review made it sound like this was a godless climate change movie,” Beck said. “I believe that it is not a godless climate change movie. It’s more like ‘Sinbad the Sailor’ meets ‘The Shining’ and ‘Friday the 13th,’ with a sprinkle of ‘Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome.’”
“It treats a prophet of God like a lunatic,” Beck said simply. “There’s no redeeming value in Noah, none. He hates people. I’m sorry. No prophet of God hates people … He tries to kill his own family. To me, a prophet receives direct communication from God, and Noah is wrong about everything.”
After listening to the entire, nearly 18 minute, segment again it made me think of the L. Ron Hubbard cinema disaster, "Battlefield Earth." The people who made that monster actually thought that they had made a very good, thoughtful and provocative movie, too. It was supposed to be a science fiction (and scientology) epic and it was utter dreck. I saw it when it showed up on cable and I was stunned that anyone could make such a horrid movie let alone convince themselves that it was truly great. Noah is apparently going to be like that.
-
You know if you (we - all of us) don't go see this tripe the left will spin it that "the world no longer cares about religion (AKA Christianity).
Personally IDC - I'm not responsible for the foolish notions that folks get into their heads.
::devil::
-
Well, I don't need to (nor will I) shell out good money to have my intelligence insulted. If half of what I heard Beck say about this movie is true (and he actually had a good deal more to say than was in that clip) then the movie is a complete and total waste of time. Should be interesting to see what professional movie reviewers have to say about it. I mean, as a pro, you just can't shill for something that is truly awful because your credibility is at stake. It would be one thing if it were merely say, blasphemous, as in "The Last Temptation of Christ" but to make a movie called "Noah" and for it to have in common with Scripture the name Noah, a flood and an ark and nothing else...that would seem to me to be a bridge to far for most people.
So...I will probably see it at some point but I will not pay to see it. I will wait (and perhaps not very long) for it to go to the cable movie channels and that is where I will see it.
-
No..ugh!
-
You know if you (we - all of us) don't go see this tripe the left will spin it that "the world no longer cares about religion (AKA Christianity).
Personally IDC - I'm not responsible for the foolish notions that folks get into their heads.
::devil::
I thought of that too, a built in fail-safe to beat over people's heads and a hammer to use on any promoter of any such nonesense who dares approach Hollywood with a biblical idea...they win either way...classic progressive scheme. But it only works if people take their charge sitting down. We don't have to see their stupid movie and we don't have to let them get away with spinning their false meme should it bomb.
-
It would be one thing if it were merely say, blasphemous, as in "The Last Temptation of Christ"
I thought that was a pretty good movie, myself. Sure it took a few liberties, but not that big of liberties, IMHO.
I don't think it's that much of a stretch to think that Jesus dreamed about girls. He was human. What would you rather have, Jesus dreaming about men?!
I don't think it's that much of a stretch to think that Jesus gave the go ahead to Judas, to turn Jesus in, to get the crucifixion ball rolling.
I think there's a big difference between taking a few liberties with the given narrative, and all this modern drek dishing up disrespect and snark.
But I do remember, being a theater employee, a lot of people had huge problems with this film.
-
It would be one thing if it were merely say, blasphemous, as in "The Last Temptation of Christ"
I thought that was a pretty good movie, myself. Sure it took a few liberties, but not that big of liberties, IMHO.
I don't think it's that much of a stretch to think that Jesus dreamed about girls. He was human. What would you rather have, Jesus dreaming about men?!
I don't think it's that much of a stretch to think that Jesus gave the go ahead to Judas, to turn Jesus in, to get the crucifixion ball rolling.
I think there's a big difference between taking a few liberties with the given narrative, and all this modern drek dishing up disrespect and snark.
But I do remember, being a theater employee, a lot of people had huge problems with this film.
You are agreeing with me. TLTOC took liberties with the source material and, being a biblical based story, that, by definition, makes it blasphemous and gives adherents to Scripture a reason to dislike it. So, other than that, though, it appeared to be a well crafted piece of cinema.
Noah does not appear to have the same "art" pedigree. It seems, based on what we have been told, to be a mishmash of genres that does not deviate slightly from Scripture but rather hugely by imagining things that are preposterous (from a biblical point of view).
-Noah hating humanity
-Implying that God tells Noah to kill his family
-Noah being sort of indifferent to God
-The rock people nonsense
-Noah as a vegan
-Noah as an environmental nut
-Noah's family as sex maniacs (sex outside marriage, etc.)
Certainly, as a screenplay writer, one can extrapolate something from the few bible verses that make up the account of the flood story. I can conceive of a decent story that could be made without going to the extremes that this clod did. Seriously, the only things missing from this already bizarre Noah are space aliens and zombies and, honestly, I don't know why they were left out.
-
I think I do agree with you. I was just trying to say that from the descriptions of Noah, and from what I remember from watching Last Temptation, they're not even in the same boat.
I didn't even see Last Temptation as blasphemous. Then again, maybe my definition is just a little looser. Jesus was human. Just because the bible didn't state such, that doesn't mean it's not normal for human men to dream of women, and if Jesus is human...
I'll defend Last Temptation as good art, and in the end, certainly not disrespectful of the source material. One can argue if it respects it totally, or not. It's obvious, Noah doesn't respect the source material at all, from what I've read.
-
Willem Dafoe was excellent in LTOC, as was Barbara Hershey. I never saw it when it was popular and controversial. It wasn't until years later, after Harvey Keitel had been in a smattering of mobster movies that sort of defined him for me. So I didn't really dig Keitel as Judas.
Otherwise, I found the film well-made, and thought provoking. I certainly can see the blasphemy angle, and don't disagree at all. On the other hand, I am always open to bouncing my faith off other points of view. LTOC changed nothing for me or my perspective on faith. But I found it interesting.
-
This Noah movie seems about as historically accurate as "Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter", only without the obviously campy premise up-front.
Now, if they had entitled it something like, "Noah: Environmental Wacko Misanthrope vs. Sir Anthony Hopkins", then maybe the film could occupy the same area of the "based on" spectrum as ALVH. But early on, the trailers released for this film were purposefully designed to give the impression of a biblical story with a few embellishments.
-
This thing may actually make money (rather than being technically a flop) because enough people go to laugh at it. But that would have to be a lot of people and speaking for myself I don't need a laugh so badly that I need to pay for it with an overpriced theater ticket and 2.5 hours of my life.
-
Overnight reaction as depicted on rottentomatoes.com is about what you would expect...Critics are 76% whereas audiences are at 55% Box office in another week should tell the tale.
As you might expect, though, the polar opposite reaction to "God's Not Dead" with critics bombing it at 22% and audiences at 86%
I'm guessing that one of these movies will turn a profit and the other may not.