Login
So, yeah... Noah.
No winning streaks last forever, not even Darren Aronofsky's. It was pretty much exactly what I feared it would be but with some angelic rock monster fantasy creatures thrown in to help the plot along.
Observations:
1. The great irony is that the rock creatures were there to make the movie's plot feasible (building the arc and defending it would have been impossible without them) but by adding them, it just made an already ridiculous piece of religious mythology even more ridiculous.
2. The most disappointing thing about this movie wasn't the story (amazingly) but that it is, by far, Aronofsky's least interesting film, visually. The only interesting visual pieces were the apocalyptic parts, so they were relying solely on sound and fury.
3. I spent the entire movie wondering where the fuck 125 million dollars went?!? (Shitty CG I guess!)
4. While juxtaposing meat eaters vs non meat eaters was a neat idea, it never quite worked out and in the end they went completely overboard making the meat eaters all seem like murderous psychopaths. Basically, it was the first big budget pro-vegan movie ever.
5. Since they insisted on using the term "the creator" for most of the film instead of "god", I thought that maybe this was going to create a cool duality where "the creator" could simply refer to the planet itself instead of a magical sky daddy... but before long they started referring to "he" and that pretty much shattered any interesting ambiguity it might have had.
6. Even after destroying the rest of the world, Gawd's "plan" still came down to two burly guys duking it out on the ark... lulz
7. As the film was wrapping up, I began to wonder if Noah himself wasn't meant to be a proxy for god, and if it wasn't him all along deciding the fate of humanity and working out all his latent sky daddy issues. Then I realized I was giving the film WAY too much credit. Yup... I really wanted this not to suck.
8. That was a crazy amount of acting talent given absolutely nothing to do.
4/10
