so ok. this whole “noah” brouhaha. alright. full disclosure. i am a christian baptist. raised that way. i dont go to church now, kinda dont believe in it anymore. i was part of a megachurch. and it megasucked. the hypocrisy that is. and the and blind devotion to “off-ness” and hyperbole. anyway, i digress.
i do, however, believe in a higher power. now some may argue the whole “show me proof, show me there isnt proof” thing and we just chase our tail and wag the dog. i’ve kinda always questioned the bible too (heresy) because when i was young, i was like, its written by men. men lie. they have their own agenda and slant and angle right. so, whatever. i dig some of the basic tenets of the good book, but its highly questionable sometimes to a rationale mind. you gotta be able to see both sides of the coin. that being said…….
F U, darren aronofsky!
and this is coming from a dude who loved PI (didnt even understand what i watching but i was enthralled, REQUIEM (just balls out awesome and indelible), FOUNTAIN (imma sucker for anything time travel related), WRESTLER (more earth bound and much more diff from what i expected from you, but i got thru it) BLACK SWAN (back to bringin the metaphysical crazy, awesome). and the 1-2 combo on your frequent collaborators, composer clint mansell and DP matthew libatique make your films rattle around in the old brain pan. moody and atmospheric, your films visuals and music just take it to the next level.
which is why to hear you advocate and chest thump boastfully that this iteration of noah is the least historically or biblically accurate ever, like its a medal to be worn proudly on ones chest, just stank of hubris and assholism.
i mean, ok, to me it seems weird to have an atheist direct a film about the bible. seems like his through line and endgame is gonna be a little skewed. and as a studio, you gotta think a movie like this could really get money right off the bat by appealing to the churchgoers. but to throw it in their face that this movie was made by a person who doesnt give a flippity flop about the source material, seems a little self destructive. on an obviously expensive movie, natch.
so it will controversial, but not quite profitable. not a good business model for an epic, biblical tentpole. they dont always work. PASSION OF THE CHRISTS 300 mil+ hasnt been duplicated since then so its a slippery slope. and yes, i know its not cool to censor the artists rendering and retelling and artistic license and all that, but DAMN! it just seems to me yer shooting yourself in the foot as far as the targeted demographic you want to reach and open up their wallets and purses. with a 130 mil budget and a “C” cinemascore, even a 50 mil opening weekend doesnt bode well for the film.
and to all those who get mad that christians are up in arms for something that non-believers deem isnt “real” to them, you do civil dissent and oppositional discourse and viewpoints a disservice. they say we’re making a mountain out of a mole hill for fictional storytelling not based in reality. ok. i’ll see ya that and raise you comic book movies. fanboys do the same thing for that medium and everybody seems to get along without calling names (well, almost. the whole michael b. jordan, black guy as the human torch FANTASTIC 4 reboot debacle has sure ruffled feathers) but you dont have to get nasty and attack one another’s beliefs. we can agree to disagree, call bygones and move on.
i mean, how else would explain the fact that i’m not gonna point out the fact that all this magical supernatural-ness occurred over there in the middle east. where the sun is beating down on you full force. all day. and you’d be real dark from constant exposure. you’d be real dusky, nee tan, nee brown. hey, maybe i’m just overthinking this whole science angle of direct, prolonged sunlight and its effects on human skin.
idk, just seems like there should be more hue in the these pale, monochromatic proceedings.