|
 I completely reject the notion that the tagline to this film is "The End of the World is Just the Beginning" because that's way to loving funny to be true Directed by Darren Aronofsky (Black Swan, the Wrestler etc) the film follows Noah (Russell Crowe) as he builds a big rear end titties boat to save every animal and his family from a big flood. So far it has had mostly positive, if not glowing reviews. There are a few interseting points about this film: * How does Aronofsky (who made his last films two films on a combined budget of 20 million dollars) manage to spend the huge amounts of cabbage he's got for this film. (Spoiler: probably special effects). Technically speaking, he is an intimate director that gets great performances out of his actors, demanding endless takes until he reaches exactly what he wants. But this is a film that isn't about a small cast of talented actors telling a troubling story, it's a giant hundred million dollar behomoth of a production staring Russell Crowe that is one part biblical story, one part disaster flick. What kind of film will this be? * The reason this film was made is to tap in to the lucrative audience of "People who saw Passion of the Christ", which grossed over 600 million dollars. Turns out that those people don't like this film. And there was a shitfight over which cut to use, which Aronofsky won after the studio's "Christian Friendly" cut bombed even harder than his. People apparently got upset about Noah gettin' drunk and cussin' out the world.  Will this film be a passion like success? (Aronofsky has sworn off big budget films after this.)* This film is a bout a goddamn giant storm and a guy who builds an ark. I dunno, that sounds kinda fun. * Finally, it's a multi-million dollar bible-disater film (Is there any other mirite?). Is it gonna be any good? The film also has Ray Winstone, Anthony Hopkins and Nick Nolte. In case you needed any more "Gruff tough guys" in this film.  And Emma Watson (most known for her role in The Bling Ring) and Jennifer Connolly (Requiem for a Dream, Dark City, A Beautiful Mind).On a final, more serious note, the Wrestler was one of the best films I have ever seen in my life so I am aside from general bullshitting around, actually really interested in seeing this film. Noah begins general world wide release over the course of the next week, so check your local cinemas it might be out now, or soon. Unless you are in the Italian speaking region of Switzerland in that case you are poo poo outta luck.
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 03:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 00:08 |
|
|
I'm really looking forward to this. Aronofsky has been on my "must see" list since Requiem for a Dream, and I have loved everything he's released. The Fountain and Black Swan are firmly seated in my list of favorite films, and the idea of this man making a biblical epic is nothing but thrilling to me. I only hope my huge expectations don't dampen the experience at all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
I really want to know if this movie has that loving weird ending I heard about.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 06:48
|
|
|
I saw this last week and liked it a lot. It's visually dazzling and has one of the most gorgeous visual effects sequences I've seen in years in the last act. It's also pretty drat grimm. That isn't really surprising to those of us who know Aronofsky or can imagine what the story of Noah taken to its logical conclusion would look like, but it will certainly surprise audiences who go in based on the trailers. It's pretty amazing that such normal looking and "inspiring" trailers were crafted from this strange, dark film.Skeezy posted:I really want to know if this movie has that loving weird ending I heard about. Minor spoilers: The ending itself isn't really weird at all, it's one of the few parts that adheres closely to the biblical tale, but there's plenty of crazy poo poo in the first two acts. It's certainly not what anyone would typically expect from a film based on a bible story.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 07:54
|
|
|
I curious to see if it tries to make any explanation about the animals on different continents getting to the ark.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 04:05
|
|
|
hehateme posted:I curious to see if it tries to make any explanation about the animals on different continents getting to the ark. The world is basically Pangea and it takes Noah 10 years to build the ark, so they have enough time to get there from the farthest reaches of the world
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 04:08
|
|
|
Problem solved. Must have been hell dealing with millions of insects in such a confined space.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 04:15
|
|
|
hehateme posted:Problem solved. Must have been hell dealing with millions of insects in such a confined space. They somewhat address that as well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 04:25
|
|
|
There's a sort of fantasy explanation for that too. Noah's wife does some alchemy with some magic mineral things that exist in the movie's world and everything on the arc is in a magical sort of hibernation the entire time. Basically the fantasy equivalent of suspended animation on a starship. Also, it's worth noting that the movie doesn't in any way try to sell itself as a historical account. It's pretty clearly a somewhat surreal fantasy/sci-fi narrative.
Bugblatter fucked around with this message at 05:23 on Mar 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 04:28
|
|
|
After reading what you guys have said and currently going through posts by someone that saw a really early, rough cut I'm sold. I'll definitely be checking this out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 04:41
|
|
|
It's batshit loony at times and absolutely gorgeous to watch. I think most people that post in CD will at least appreciate it on a visual level. Also, Aronofsky's God's-eye view of the world consumed in a global storm is loving awesome.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
Paul Allen posted:It's batshit loony at times and absolutely gorgeous to watch. I think most people that post in CD will at least appreciate it on a visual level. Yeah, especially since it's presented in the context of (big spoilers) a Watcher effectively being a suicide bomber and being literally accepted into heaven for the action. Loaded imagery there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 05:22
|
|
|
Just saw this film today so I'm still digesting it somewhat, but I certainly enjoyed it from start to finish. It's an absolutely gorgeous film, and the brief 1-2 minute 'evolution' scene that Noah narrates whilst they're on the ark, showing a shot-from-the-back perspective of hundreds of different animals as they trek across the planet was probably the most spectacular thing I've seen in a long while. My favourite thing, though, was the loving phenomenal score by Clint Mansell and the Kronos Quartet.. it's a worthy follow-up to their collaboration on The Fountain (easily one of my favourites), and is something that I've been wishing would happen for years now. The music as the water reaches the ark and causes it to finally rise up off the ground rivals Death is the Road to Awe as one of those absolutely goosebump-giving moments.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 06:18
|
|
|
Just got home from seeing it, and I honestly can't remember the last time I was so bored during a movie. It wasn't bad, it wasn't good, it was just plodding and uninteresting. There were some nice visuals on occasion and the production was well done (except for the animal CGI which inexplicably looking like some Discovery Channel documentary stuff) but I never once gave a poo poo about any of the characters or what was happening to them. Also if you are stoked for the movie because of reading spoilers from the dude who claims to have seen an early cut, he was either lying, heavily exaggerating, or saw an extremely different cut of the movie. The final theatrical cut is as controversial and potentially offensive as a Hallmark greeting card.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 07:17
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:Also if you are stoked for the movie because of reading spoilers from the dude who claims to have seen an early cut, he was either lying, heavily exaggerating, or saw an extremely different cut of the movie. The final theatrical cut is as controversial and potentially offensive as a Hallmark greeting card. Well that's a shame. That's what I was basing my idea of the movie from. If it's nothing like that then 
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 07:20
|
|
|
Skeezy posted:Well that's a shame. That's what I was basing my idea of the movie from. If it's nothing like that then So we're talking about the rumors that Noah murders everyone in the end right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 07:51
|
|
|
ApexAftermath posted:So we're talking about the rumors that Noah murders everyone in the end right? Yes. And I would not be at all surprised to learn that there was heavy studio meddling because there are definitely scenes in the first two acts where that could be the logical outcome of the third act. It feels like it was building to more than what actually happens. The ending we got is boring and drawn out and probably one of the safest most Hollywood endings I've ever seen. mr. mephistopheles fucked around with this message at 07:59 on Mar 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 07:57
|
|
|
ApexAftermath posted:So we're talking about the rumors that Noah murders everyone in the end right? Yeah, I was so set on that being a real thing ahaha.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 07:57
|
|
|
And I'm not trying to talk anybody out of seeing it if you like Aronofsky or the story of Noah, but do not see it because you are expecting something bold or compelling. It is a very by-the-numbers retelling of a story that everybody knows the basic elements of and nothing surprising or unconventional happens at any point in the movie. There aren't even crazy hosed up looking Biblical angels. The closest thing is rock monsters that were cursed for trying to help Adam and Eve, but they are uncursed when they help Noah defend the ark and they look like spectral golden traditional modern humanoid angels and are totally lame. mr. mephistopheles fucked around with this message at 08:03 on Mar 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 08:01
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:The ending we got is boring and drawn out and probably one of the safest most Hollywood endings I've ever seen. Go crazy. Tell me how it ends. I have a friend in denial. He is saying no one ever said he killed his family, it was said there are other humans besides his family on the ark and he kills them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 08:05
|
|
|
ApexAftermath posted:Go crazy. Tell me how it ends. I have a friend in denial. He is saying no one ever said he killed his family, it was said there are other humans besides his family on the ark and he kills them. 'Kay, spoilers for the ending/third act: The third act has Noah believing that humanity is meant to die after saving the animals, including his family, who he intends to all die of old age without any descendants. He threatens infanticide to ensure that this extinction happens. For this and other reasons, one of his sons hides and aids a descendant of Cain who got on the boat. The last act is the typical Aronofsky style obsession/insanity deal with Noah believing that mankind must die but is tortured that he must be the one to make it happen. Anyway, after a bunch of stuff happens, the descendant of Cain is killed, but Noah decides the Old Testament view of "justice" is totally hosed and lets his newborn grandchildren live. As for the end itself, it's the straight Bible event with the rainbow and all. An ending where Noah does kill his grandchildren would be completely contrary to the film's moral compass, which is very critical of the traditional story of mass genocide, and would just be dumb. I've got to say I completely disagree that this film was in any way boring. Also, this movie will be controversial as hell. Bugblatter fucked around with this message at 08:29 on Mar 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 08:27
|
|
|
So I take it the Passion of Christ crowd is gonna be iffy
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 08:30
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:Just got home from seeing it, and I honestly can't remember the last time I was so bored during a movie. It wasn't bad, it wasn't good, it was just plodding and uninteresting. There were some nice visuals on occasion and the production was well done (except for the animal CGI which inexplicably looking like some Discovery Channel documentary stuff) but I never once gave a poo poo about any of the characters or what was happening to them. I agree. I really wanted to like this movie but it didn't do it for me. It could be that I was expecting a different movie than what I got, but it felt like some amazing scenes followed by tedium for long stretches. The opening was atrocious, a classic example of telling when it should be showing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 08:37
|
|
|
Haha, I love the opening. And it's all iconic images aside from like four lines of text, which are great because they start as bible excerpts then go off the rails. Expectations are probably a good thing to mention though. It sounds like some people are expecting an epic with an out of place ending. Best to go with either no expectations or realistic expectations: It's an Aronofsky movie. Meaning it's a movie about self destructive obsession with operatic emotions and dazzling images that lie on the border between surreal and fantastical. It's not a history, it's not an epic. Out of his previous films, Noah is stylistically it's closest to The Fountain. Which I suppose is his most divisive movie, so we may see a similar polarized reaction to this film (On top of complaints from religious circles). Bugblatter fucked around with this message at 09:01 on Mar 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 08:54
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:Yes. God doesn't bet on the wrong dude.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 09:11
|
|
|
Oh goddamnit, so it doesn't go all Sunshine near the end? I was so excited for that to actually happen and hear people's reactions to it  Still, this is a Darren Aronofsky joint and I will be seeing it sometime within the next couple days. I've seen all his other movies and loved most of them, so I've gotta see this one too even if it's not his best.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 09:12
|
|
|
Thank god it doesn't. That would just he edgy for the sake of being edgy. As is, it actually makes some statements (and is still plenty grim).
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 09:17
|
|
|
Bugblatter posted:Haha, I love the opening. And it's all iconic images aside from like four lines of text, which are great because they start as bible excerpts then go off the rails. Funny, I wanted more of The Fountain from this movie. I wanted full blown Aronofsky surrealism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 09:19
|
|
|
Really? Between the Watchers, Genesis sequence, Seed of Eden, Enoch, History of War, and the post-apocalyptic wasteland of an industrial society with Mad Max style survivors you didn't feel like you got that? I was pretty satisfied on the visually dazzling weirdness with all of that. I guess such sequences might be more spaced out than in the very compact The Fountain, but the visual envelope was pushed just as far.
Bugblatter fucked around with this message at 09:41 on Mar 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 09:34
|
|
|
Saw it and enjoyed it. It was uneven. Because it dragged a bit in the first act, the third act then feels tedious. If the first act was tidied up maybe it'd be a better fit overall. There are some seriously dark parts to this film that were among its best. Noah sitting there with the sound of all the screaming people and then it cuts to a shot of the ark floating while all these people are clinging to a mountain was so great. If you think you'll like it, you'll probably like it. Really enjoyable despite its flaws and it is a bit sad that we may not get another big budget Aronofsky film, at least for a while.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 12:50
|
|
|
Bugblatter posted:Also, this movie will be controversial as hell. To Christian fundamentalists who are already offended by its very existence. Normal people and non-fundamentalist Christians will find nothing controversial here. Some right winger will cry about how Cain's descendant can be construed as a criticism of modern American conservative ideology, and it does work for that, but I don't think he's trying to criticize a particular belief system so much as general hubris which is a universal and safe moral trope. The main problem I had is that the film attempts to be this character study of Noah while at the same time stuck in the trappings of an epic. I agree that it is not an epic, but I think that's less because it's not trying to be one and more because it fails. There are many many shots that make it feel like Aronofsky is trying to make this grandiose movie, while also keeping it grounded in a very personal and intimate exploration of one character and the elements do not mesh and even worse tend to undermine each other. The movie may have been quite good with either considerable scaling back or pushing much farther as an epic but it does neither and we ended up with a middling movie that I found more disappointing than anything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 17:54
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:Some right winger will cry about how Cain's descendant can be construed as a criticism of modern American conservative ideology, and it does work for that, but I don't think he's trying to criticize a particular belief system so much as general hubris which is a universal and safe moral trope. Cain's descendant doesn't just speak in ways that might be related to conservative ideology, his dialogue is literally comprised of words scripture ascribes to God. The villain gets all of God's lines. And you don't think it's a criticism? quote:The main problem I had is that the film attempts to be this character study of Noah while at the same time stuck in the trappings of an epic. I agree that it is not an epic, but I think that's less because it's not trying to be one and more because it fails. There are many many shots that make it feel like Aronofsky is trying to make this grandiose movie, while also keeping it grounded in a very personal and intimate exploration of one character and the elements do not mesh and even worse tend to undermine each other. Eh, it's as "stuck in epic trappings" as The Fountain is with its a Conquistador fighting the Inquisition and journeying to the New World to find the Tree of Life, Tom's journey into distant nebulas, and the like. Which is to say it's a drama with epic events at the periphery serving as metaphors for what the central family is dealing with. I didn't get the sense that it was trying to be anything else.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 01:40
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:There aren't even crazy hosed up looking Biblical angels. The closest thing is rock monsters that were cursed for trying to help Adam and Eve, but they are uncursed when they help Noah defend the ark and they look like spectral golden traditional modern humanoid angels and are totally lame. Most disappointing thing I've read about this movie so far, I'll wait til it's on Netflix.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
The movie was pretty boring honestly, but if what people have been saying is true, the director's cut will be incredible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
Bugblatter posted:Cain's descendant doesn't just speak in ways that might be related to conservative ideology, his dialogue is literally comprised of words scripture ascribes to God. The villain gets all of God's lines. And you don't think it's a criticism? I mean if you didn't feel that way then I guess that's up to personal opinion, but I felt like he was purposely trying to make an epic. And I didn't know that about those lines (and that makes it quite a bit more interesting), but I wasn't saying it's not a criticism, I was just saying I don't think it's the specifically American political criticism that it will inevitably be decried as by some rightwing pundit nutjob. I do think it was a genuine criticism of that mindset. I do not think it was a criticism of that mindset within the context of American conservatism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 01:49
|
|
|
The Watchers completely ruined this movie for me. The look like something out of Lord of the Rings or the Clash of the Titan's remake. They have big goofy cartoony faces like ents and it made it impossible for me to take the drama seriously when they were on screen. Them becoming suicide bombers had interesting implications, but that's cancelled out by the fact that they apparently did all the heavy lifting in building the Ark. I really wanted to like this movie, and I liked parts of it, but as a whole I just didn't like it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
madeupfred posted:The movie was pretty boring honestly, but if what people have been saying is true, the director's cut will be incredible. Aronofky said that he got the final cut on the movie. It's possible that he's stepping around saying that there was studio interference somehow, but it's more likely that he made the movie he wanted to make and it wasn't what we were hoping for, exactly. Either way, I wouldn't expect a radically different cut on DVD.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
Rochallor posted:Aronofky said that he got the final cut on the movie. It's possible that he's stepping around saying that there was studio interference somehow, but it's more likely that he made the movie he wanted to make and it wasn't what we were hoping for, exactly. Either way, I wouldn't expect a radically different cut on DVD.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 02:53
|
|
|
In my dreams Guillermo Del Toro did the watcher designs and Aronofsky does the rest.
Red Mundus fucked around with this message at 06:01 on Mar 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 02:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 00:08 |
|
|
Snak posted:The Watchers completely ruined this movie for me. The look like something out of Lord of the Rings or the Clash of the Titan's remake. They have big goofy cartoony faces like ents and it made it impossible for me to take the drama seriously when they were on screen. Them becoming suicide bombers had interesting implications, but that's cancelled out by the fact that they apparently did all the heavy lifting in building the Ark. So what actually are they. ................... Angels? .............
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 03:48
|
|
