Wednesday, August 13, 2014

Noah- movie review, repost from my other blog

Originally posted on my A Southern Belle With Northern Roots blog.

Noah- the least biblical film ever made.
That is what Aronofsky himself said about his film Noah, a self proclaimed atheist who wanted to do a new take on the old story. I ask this, Why bother?
If you hate God, don't believe in his word and feel the need to make a movie about it, why not call it Sam.
Aronofsky chose to Call it Noah, chose to keep the sons Shem, Ham, and Japheth, he chose to have the ark, the animals, a creator, angels, and the story of the literal 6 day creation, albeit shot in a manner that would appease any evolutionist. He wanted to do the story of Noah, and in my opinion, try to tear down God by creating his own "creator".

After deciding not to see it in theaters and hearing all the complaints of rock people, environmental agendas and biblical inaccuracy, as well as the flip side on the case for poetic license, creativity, and "at least they will go home and read their bible" I went ahead and rented it. If I were not a Christian, would I have gone home and looked up the story of Noah? I really doubt it. Would I have had any hope in a "creator" that could or would save me? probably not. Would I have enjoyed the movie? NO, it just isn't a good movie.

From the Christian perspective

Right of the bat....those rocks. Watchers keeping an eye on Cain in a land that is no longer Gods. (note, I am using God, and the movie does not, only creator is used)  Land that is no longer Gods....our first taste of what sets up a Diestic view at best.
Walking and talking rock people, think of a poor rip off of the Lord of the Rings Ents.  I could go for poetic license here, but no, Aronofsky once again chose to go the extra mile and make them fallen angels. Fallen angels from the early rebellion cast down and abandoned by their father, yet, at least one receives mercy and forgiveness and goes on to heaven, never mind the true biblical fate of those fallen angels, those demons we often choose to ignore the existence of.

Noah and Family
We know Noah to be an imperfect man, but we see a new Noah here; A calloused, mission driven, mad man, often ruthless and illogical that becomes the sole decision maker in who lives and dies.  Surrounded by doe eyed, nearly mute children, who defer to him as though he himself were god, and a wife that is capable of only smiles and tears, they stand by as he rules with an iron fist.
Of course Noah's drunken naked state after the flood is accurately portrayed, no doubt because it is unfavorable.

Hooray! At least this one is right! The wickedness of man, self driven, self seeking and grandiose, total depravity at its best. Think Road Warrior
That pesky doctrine of man kind, that wicked heart beyond cure portrayed so well, yet the one doctrine that quickly upsets man. To say we are wicked? To say we are capable of such atrocities that we need a savior, that we need grace and cannot save dare you.
I mean the movie, as well as man kind, goes as far as it can to say man has both evil and good within him, as though we can be good enough to save ourselves. Who needs a god to change a heart that is capable of good, right?

The Ark

Taking the time to establish Noah and the ark full of animals, it could have at least been accurate as to who was  on the ark as well as who was not. If the movie maker wants to discredit the actual story by allowing only one wife of the sons on board, why bother having her give birth to twin girls, keeping the procreation element alive, why not find a girl out on a boat? or one hiding in the ark with the crazed lunatic on board.


My conclusion is this, the value of this movie lies in a message not sent by Aronofsky directly but indirectly.
You see, he, a self proclaimed athiest best illustrates man's desire to create a creator, we want a higher power when the deluge comes that can save us, but we don't want him to tell us what to do or how to live. We want to pick the parts of scripture we like, and do away with the others. Mankind wants to fashion this god of saving grace, abundant mercy that we can cry out to when things are unfair, scary, and unsafe. Yet, we wish to be Diests making sure that god is far away when we don't need him, or Materialists living in a world that created and sustains itself, void of any power with control over our lives.

I used to be so troubled by the passage Genesis 6:5
"The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thought of his heart was only evil continually"
NIV puts it this way-"
 The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth,and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time.

only evil all of the time.
What does that mean?
Man kind is capable of evil, all of the time, every one of us. Do not be fooled, it is the common grace of God that keeps us from completely destroying ourselves. The good we do is the grace of God, not the goodness of man, for the heart is decietful and beyond cure. Jer 17:9 and man is given over to depravity Romans 1.
We need a savior that we ourselves do NOT create but one that created us, sustains us, and is capable of saving us.....from ourselves.