Review: “Noah” (Spoilers)
Aronofsky’s “Noah” is the most polarizing film I’ve seen in a long time. People who have seen it have completely opposite views of what it is and what it is about. Trust me: every opinion I mention below was voiced in all seriousness on Facebook by people I know. My conclusion is that they are all wrong.
“It is completely faithful to the biblical text–it fills the biblical story out but does not contradict it.” WRONG! Have you people actually read the Bible’s account? All three of Noah’s sons are adults with wives when the ark sails. He understands from the beginning that he is in a covenant with God that includes saving his family as well as the animals. “Not contradict.” You keep using that phrase. I don’t think it means what you think it means.
“God is not even mentioned.” WRONG! Do you really not know who “The Creator” is? Give me a break!
“The story is a profound treatment of the grace of God. The conclusion is that Man is worth saving.” WRONG! The Noah of the film believes he is disobeying God when he spares the twins. And “worth saving”? In the movie Man is worth saving because there is goodness and innocence in some of us (mainly Ila). In the Bible we are not saved because we are good, but because God is good. “Grace.” You keep using that word . . .
“The story is a Luciferian tract.” (I.e., Satan is really the good guy in the biblical narrative.) WRONG! There are indeed parts of it that could be interpreted that way, but that interpretation does not cause the work to hang together as a whole. In the end, God’s goodness is confirmed, even if the writers do not really understand the biblical concept of grace. And the Watchers are forgiven and redeemed–apparently by God, which is completely inconsistent with a Luciferian reading. Oh, the Watchers . . . More on them later.
“This is the best portrait of God in a movie that I’ve ever seen.” WRONG! Demons are more compassionate than the Creator? I can see where the Luciferian interpretation is coming from–even though the film is not consistent in developing it. Oh, the Watchers . . .
The Watchers, the rock demons, are a completely idiotic device. Demons that are in rebellion against God because they love mankind more than He does? Demons who are redeemed because they continue doing what they were exiled from Heaven for, helping Man? These creatures make no sense biblically or cinematically. They are there only because Aronofsky thinks they look cool and he wanted to throw them in.
My conclusion: this film is a mashup of the Bible, the Apocrypha, chic 21st century environmentalism, gnosticism, Luciferianism, badly understood orthodox Christian theology, and who knows what else. That is why people so easily find what they are looking for in it: It’s all there. They’re all right–and consequently, they are all wrong. It’s got good visuals and is fun to watch (if you pretend it’s a videogame that has nothing to do with the Bible), but it is not a great work of art. It’s a mishmash. Stay tuned for the sequel: “Abraham: The Search for More Money!”
For more analysis by Dr. Williams, see his books in the Lantern Hollow Estore!