Sign in to follow this  
RMeingast

"Noah" (2014)

24 posts in this topic

New film "Noah" opening at end of March...

Apparently director Darren Aronofsky made Russell Crowe (Noah) build the ark for the film. The idea being to save some money on construction costs AND build up Crowe's muscles at the same time.

 

Featurette (with look at Crowe's creation) about new film "Noah" here:

 

http://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/movie-news/noah-featurette-build-ark-224236993.html

 

Other films about or featuring Noah's Ark here:

 

"Noah's Ark" (1928):

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah%27s_Ark_%281928_film%29

 

"The Bible: In the Beginning" (1966):

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible:_In_the_Beginning

 

More films out this year (2014) are:

 

"Exodus" (2014) with Christian Bale as Moses:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exodus_%282014_film%29

 

"Mary" (2014 or 2015):

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0949757/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intriguing, very intriguing. I had heard nothing about any of these new movies before. I would hope they have actual valid well done story lines and aren't just computerized characterless action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw the trailer for *Noah* on Saturday when I saw *Son of God* which was far better than I expected. There is also a film, *God is Not Dead,* with a college setting on the way. I'm surprised that there are this many films with a religious bent out but delighted as they all were or looked good. I've got my ticket money waiting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Noah" does look spectacular. Hollywood studios have re-discovered that there is a large audience for religious theme films. "Noah" obviously needs to reach a wider audience- that's what they seem to be selling as an epic story of survival.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seem like Hollywood has hit on a new formula. Combining Old Testament stories with high tech special effects films. I sense a new genre evolving...(LOL)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This new formula could be hard to market so we will have to see how well the movie does at the box office.

 

Note that TV mini-series marketed to the Christian community have done very well, but marketing a movie to a wider auidence is different and more difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, we shall see. I'm sure it will open well. I've already seen this in The Bible, so I'm not really interested in revisiting it..........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With regards to "I've already seen this in The Bible";

 

Well if people, especially Christians and Jews, feel the way you do the film will bomb. Why? Because the vast majority of people in the target audience know the story. They know how it all turns out.

 

So if 'seeing it before' causes people to stay home, no one from the target auidence needs to go! (yea, I'm overstating this to make a point).

 

For this type of movie to do well at the box office the target audience must be willing to experience the telling of a story they are very well aware of. i.e. Revisiting 'it' is a main market driver being 'it' has a tie to one's personal life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Review of the latest flick by Richard Crouse:

 

http://metronews.ca/voices/in-focus/983234/thought-noah-was-the-first-movie-about-well-noah-think-again/

 

Another review by Crouse and Mark Breslin: "Not Your Father's Biblical Epic":

 

http://metronews.ca/voices/reel-guys/985975/noah-review-not-your-fathers-biblical-epic/

 

And there has been criticism of the film from people upset at changes made in Aronofsky's version of the story (the criticism caused Paramount Pictures "to add a disclaimer to its marketing material saying 'artistic license has been taken' in telling the story"):

 

http://metronews.ca/scene/985604/russell-crowe-calls-noah-criticism-irrational/

 

Rotten Tomatoes rating here: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/noah_2014/

 

Edited by: RMeingast on Mar 30, 2014 12:39 PM

Minor edit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope I'm not offending anyone but I'm getting a big kick out of the that disclaimer; "artistic license has been taken' in telling the story".

 

Some, like me would say that this same disclaimer applies to the original source material as well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The need for a disclaimer still strikes me as strange. 99.9% of movies based on actual historical events take artistic license.

Making changes to add entertainment value doesn't mean that one is disputing if the historical events laid out in historical documents weren't true.

 

e.g. when the gunfight at O.K. corral is shown as a 10 minute battle instead of an under one minute one, that doesn't mean the director or screenwriter is saying they believe the battle wasn't under one minute as defined in historical documents.

 

OK, I get the marketing angle behind the disclaimer, but will that really influence the decision to see the movie or not by true believers? I fail to see how , but then again, I?m not a member of the target audience for the disclaimer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>OK, I get the marketing angle behind the disclaimer, but will that really influence the decision to see the movie or not by true believers?

 

Hmmmm...well. all I can say here is that I can't remember if Stanley Kramer stuck a disclaimer on his "Inherit the Wind" movie(and which of course is another film that is a fictionalized account of events) but that's certainly never stopped ME from enjoying that movie, anyway! LOL

 

(...btw James, LOVED your post down there about "original source material"!!!) ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't heard good things about the film from friends who have seen it. Nevertheless it sounds intriguing, and I will probably see it. If it's a success, perhaps they'll make a film about Utnapishtim, the Babylonian Noah.

 

utnapishtim-250r.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just happy Aronofsky chose to use computer generated animals.  Real animals in films, even today, can suffer injuries, or worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well now. After that review I am positive this film will receive 7 or 8 Oscar nominations - if Academy Award history has taught us anything.

 

That was a bit tongue-in-cheek, but not much.

 

I am not really interested in this type of updated story so I, too, will pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well now. After that review I am positive this film will receive 7 or 8 Oscar nominations - if Academy Award history has taught us anything.

 

That was a bit tongue-in-cheek, but not much.

 

I am not really interested in this type of updated story so I, too, will pass.

 

One has to really question the judgement of the producers that funded this project.    Who did they think their target audience was?

 

Movies based on books associated with a religion need to be fairly faithful to the origional story if they wish to target the audience of said religion.  

 

People like me not interested in the orignal source material are not likely to purchase a ticket.    So what audience is left for such a movie? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One has to really question the judgement of the producers that funded this project.    Who did they think their target audience was?

 

Movies based on books associated with a religion need to be fairly faithful to the origional story if they wish to target the audience of said religion.  

 

People like me not interested in the orignal source material are not likely to purchase a ticket.    So what audience is left for such a movie? 

I believe, these days, nothing is sacred.. and I do not mean that in a strictly religious sense, but both - social and religious. Anything seems to be fair game for the cross-hairs in "movieland". I'm not saying this is bad, just that it is this way.

 

I am interested in the original source material of such a film, but mostly from a historical perspective and would prefer it follow the Bible or other religious source with very few liberties taken. A semi-biographical presentation to the extent which can be derived from such a source or sources.

 

This isn't to say I couldn't handle a wildly different version, but this would have to be presented as such along some logical path(s), not as a religious story but a well written sci-fi tale built on a solid foundation of one or more of the current religions - a la Star Wars.

 

I rarely communicate in this fashion. What's the matter with me? Open the po...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One has to really question the judgement of the producers that funded this project. Who did they think their target audience was?

 

Movies based on books associated with a religion need to be fairly faithful to the origional story if they wish to target the audience of said religion.

 

People like me not interested in the orignal source material are not likely to purchase a ticket. So what audience is left for such a movie?

by original source material you mean of course the bible. there are many people who do not study it who are nonetheless interested in its contents, though they may find it too difficult a book to study without guidance on a steady basis or may not choose to attend a church where its study is central. i believe these are among the potential audience for films like this.

 

anyone in fact who wishes to be well-read or thoroughly educated should seek to have a firm foundation in biblical study. from it they will gain a better understanding of the literature, history and moral underpinnings of western culture.

 

and one need not be particularly religious or even a believer to find value in it. christopher hitchens, the late polemicist, critic and very confident atheist said something like this himself not long before his death:

 

"Though I am sometimes reluctant to admit it, there really is something timeless' in the Tyndale/King James synthesis. ... For generations, it provided a common stock of references and allusions, rivaled only by Shakespeare in this respect. ... It resounded in the minds and memories of literate people, as well as of those who acquired it only by listening."

 

that from the man who said "give jerry falwell an **** and you could bury him in a matchbox."

 

the bible still sells, and biblical films can and do make money. im surprised for this reason there arent more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

by original source material you mean of course the bible. there are many people who do not study it who are nonetheless interested in its contents, though they may find it too difficult a book to study without guidance on a steady basis or may not choose to attend a church where its study is central. i believe these are among the potential audience for films like this.

 

anyone in fact who wishes to be well-read or thoroughly educated should seek to have a firm foundation in biblical study. from it they will gain a better understanding of the literature, history and moral underpinnings of western culture.

 

and one need not be particularly religious or even a believer to find value in it. christopher hitchens, the late polemicist, critic and very confident atheist said something like this himself not long before his death:

 

"Though I am sometimes reluctant to admit it, there really is something timeless' in the Tyndale/King James synthesis. ... For generations, it provided a common stock of references and allusions, rivaled only by Shakespeare in this respect. ... It resounded in the minds and memories of literate people, as well as of those who acquired it only by listening."

 

that from the man who said "give jerry falwell an **** and you could bury him in a matchbox."

 

the bible still sells, and biblical films can and do make money. im surprised for this reason there arent more.

 

Yes,  bibical films can and do make money and we are seeing more recent release (some made for TV movies are doing very well).   But Noah wasn't a bibical film in my view since it wasn't even close to be faithful to the original storyline.   That was my point.   A sci-fi type film very loosely based on a bibical story isn't going to do well at the box office. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us