No, uh, I Didn’t Like It (But I Can’t Get Upset About It, Either)

Last night my family and I finally got around to seeing the much-touted film Noah, both because we’ve been looking forward to it since we first saw its trailers months ago, and second,  to see what all the fuss was about. Bottom line: There’s lots to fuss about. It veers from being somewhat then wildly un-Biblical, to at times offering glimpses of sound doctrine. I give it a B+ for production value;  a D for accuracy; and a resounding A for chutzpah in offering some of the weirdest ideas I’ve ever heard linked to the story of the great flood.

It’s worth noting the film’s mixed reviews from Christian leaders, especially since it got thumbs up from some of our more conservative ones, and thumbs down from some known more for a moderate stand. I’m glad to say no one defended it as Biblically solid; the question dividing us seems to be whether it’s errors outweigh its benefits, and whether we should support a film portraying a Bible story but messing some or even much of it up in the process. Jim Daly of Focus on the Family says we should ; ditto for one of my favorite conservative columnists Cal Thomas. Dr. Jerry Johnson, President of the NRB, begs to differ and offers valid objections to the film; and Rick Warren, having heard enough details about Noah,  rejects the idea of even viewing it.

That’s America, God bless her. In some Muslim countries the film is banned, so you’re spared the task of making your own decision.

And me? I didn’t like it. But it didn’t enrage me like the Last Temptation of Christ did, with its lascivious take on the Lord’s relationship with Mary Magdalene and its generally blasphemous slant on the Gospel. (I read the quotes and saw the excerpts, but passed on the film itself, which I’m unwilling to spend a dime on.) So I don’t fit into the Love Noah or Hate Noah camps. Instead, I’d say it was a strange, artistically strong but Biblically fuzzy interpretation. And yes, for myself, I think it was worth seeing.

The Good: The film stresses Noah’s rigid commitment to obedience above all else, consequences or popularity be damned.  He fully accepts the enormity of his task and the public ridicule it will expose him to, and his relationship with God trumps all else in his decision making process. (Well, generally) We could use more of that attitude in today’s church, so I found myself applauding when he dismissed human approval in lieu of  “Atta-Boy’s” from the Almighty. His retelling of the Creation account to his children is pretty good, though the graphics involved strongly suggest evolution over creation. He steels himself against emotions when the task at hand calls for it, and he doesn’t shy away from admitting humanity’s wickedness, nor does he exempt himself from it. Pretty good stuff, I’d say, for a Hollywood epic, and I’ve never seen a better depiction of the flood itself.

The Bad: This guy’s nuts. He broods, raves, and entertains the oddest ideas about God’s will. I was especially disappointed in this interpretation of such a beloved character because Russell Crowe, who plays him, is my favorite living actor. I’ve loved everything I’ve seen him in until now, but here I found my man sleepwalking his way through a bizarre script, muttering, glaring and brooding less like a man of God and more like an ancient Sweeney Todd surveying his next victims. (Midway through the story I honestly thought that when Noah finally got drunk it might be an improvement.)

And things go from bad to worse with each reel. It becomes unclear, especially after the rains come, whether Noah’s obedience is really to God or to some twisted concept of Him. His take on the purpose of the ark is ludicrous, elevating the preservation of animals over that of man, who he deems unfit to inherit the new earth. So he demands his family be the last humans to trouble the planet; when they die, humanity dies, and the world’s a better place. This distorted thinking reaches unbearable levels when he decides his newborn grandchildren need to be killed, a plot twist so revolting I nearly left the theater, disgusted and quite hot under the collar, but it all panned out OK.

Still, I was left asking myself how Noah, who heard from God so clearly that he could determine exactly what cubit lengths the ark should be, was unable to also accurately hear Him when it came to something as enormous as the murder of his own family. That didn’t work for me at all.

Nor did the rock creatures, and whoever told the screenwriter that fallen angels who’ve morphed into granite robots might enhance the story really should consider another line of work. Contrary to scripture, these guys are nice fallen angels who work for mankind’s betterment, assisting in the building of the ark like compliant Transformers who then, when wounded in battle, are given a last minute reprieve by God and received back into glory. Here Noah takes guidance less from the Old Testament and more from Marvel Comics, and the result was unbridled laughter in the movie house. It wasn’t just wrong: it was downright silly.

And yet, if a film moves people to read the Bible, that’s no small plus. And according to YouVersion and Bible Gateway, visits to the online Genesis account of the flood increased between 223-300% upon the movie’s release. So what can we say to that, other than “Praise God!”

I don’t expect sound doctrine from secular films, and I sure didn’t get it this time around. But at the end of the day, yes, I would rather see imperfect films about the Bible released, films we can then discern, critique, commend or reject. At least they’re being made, raising topics worth discussing, and exposing more people to the Word. For that, while not crazy about the film itself, I am truly grateful.

Those are my thoughts, anyway. Yours are certainly welcome here. Hope you have a great weekend. God bless.