I’ve been meaning to watch this movie for quite a while and what with self-isolation being the current to-do, and stress-related insomnia getting the better of me, I decided one sleepless night to give it a watch. Here are my thoughts…!
The Tl;Dr Version
Noah is an interesting film with some new ideas and absolutely no corroborating biblical evidence whatsoever. Visually it is stunning: 8/10. Story-wise it’s as you would expect with added rock-angels: 6/10. Acting is great though, and I really enjoyed Ray Winston’s portrayal of the main villain Tubal-Cain: 8/10. The corniness factor, though, is really high and I really struggled to take it as seriously as I think you are meant to: so overall I would give it a 7/10.
The Detailed Version
Noah is one of those films that has been on my radar for a long time. I’ve been meaning to watch it for a while, but just couldn’t quite get the motivation to press play. Part of that is, I guess, because it’s not really Helen’s type of film so we wouldn’t really watch it together. But more than that I think I’d just heard such mixed things that I didn’t know if it was worth investing any time in. So when it appeared on IPlayer as a movie option one sleepless night at 1am, I figured that now was as good a time as any…. I promptly fell asleep (at last!) within the first 15 minutes!!!
However, on waking up the next day I decided to see it out and I am kinda glad that I did. I enjoyed watching it, for the most part, and while a very large amount of it was silly (I think anything ‘biblical’ will struggle not to be corny as hell) it was entertaining and drew me in.
I think of the things that really got me invested, it was the stunning cinematography. From beginning to rainbow-filled end (yes, really!) you can really see the effort that went in to building this beautiful pre-apocalyptic landscape. At the beginning there is a blend of low-fantasy, Conan the Barbarian meets Mad Max vibes as you meet Noah as a child and see his early life as a reclusive and ‘peaceful’ father. The descendants of Cain are barbarous and violent, killing animals for food and murdering with impunity, while Noah and his family try to live off the land as much as possible. Then the miracles and visions start to happen and it all gets a bit trippy.
Being so obviously linked to biblical allegory and metaphor, the film really plays on that sense of divine mystery, whilst also telling a lot of the story through visual cues more than exposition. Miracles are depicted through fast-paced CGI sequences and you get a real sense of divine majesty happening over an indefinite period of time. A notable example is when the debauchery and horror of mankind’s treatment of each other and the world around them is shown in a stunning sweep of violence, death (particularly of women and children, namely ‘innocents’) and fire at the hands of Tubal-Cain’s male soldiers. The downside is that there were quite a few sequences that leave you feeling a little cross-eyed as the sweeping camera and flashing colour and images leave your brain feeling a little scrambled.
These sequences, however, do not change the fact that the story feels somewhat disjointed and surreal. You might say this is unsurprising from a story from the bible, but the fact of the matter is that much of the film is not actually linked to the bible at all. You can find out more about what is actually biblical and what isn’t here. Most notable of the surreal and odd choices is the inclusion of the ‘Watchers’. Reminding me very much of the Ents in Lord of the Rings, these are stone giants that seem to be fallen lesser-angels who help Noah to build and defend the ark. These are kinda-sorta mentioned in the bible, in so far as there were apparently giants who lived at this time, but they certainly don’t have the role that they adopt in the film.
Another problem, really is the role of women as portrayed in the film. I think there are a total of three named female characters, one of whom is introduced and then killed within about 15 minutes. Otherwise you are primarily watching men do men things. Noah’s wife Naamah, portrayed by the ever beautiful Jennifer Connelly, is an ‘equal’ to Noah in so far as she has opinions – that the then promptly ignores. She is mainly a caregiver and looks after the kids and ‘household’. Meanwhile Ila, played by Emma Watson, is victim of a few tropes that are all too common in movies. She is unable to conceive children because she was ‘made barren’ by an injury, this makes her ‘not a real woman’ and therefore she perceives herself as undeserving of love or salvation. Unsurprisingly, she is saved from childlessness by, you guessed it, a man. She then goes on to have two daughters whom Noah wishes to murder because ‘they can bare children’… he eventually spares them. Because love. For a film that is so focused on the evil of men and that tries valiantly to add women into the all-male narrative, it just doesn’t quite do it. Unfortunately, this is not unusual in movies, and while it can be argued that women in the bible don’t exactly get a good run of it, I was still disappointed with the relative weakness of the female characters.
However, that is not to say that Connelly and Watson aren’t amazing as their respective characters. You end up loving and rooting for both women throughout the film and in many ways it is them that you care about – not the men. Connelly is stoic and hard-working, while Watson’s vulnerability provides an interesting counterpoint (even if it is mostly about babies). Meanwhile Ray Winston is a very satisfying villain in the form of Tubal-Cain, using his trademark hard-man persona to good effect. Anthony Hopkins drops in as the half-senile Methuselah and provides something of a little comic relief. Russell Crowe, meanwhile, just Russell Crowes as he does: slightly overacting in his stern seriousness, but yet still making you believe in and care about his character. If it wasn’t for this ensemble, though, the film really would fall flat. Noah’s sons are barely worth mentioning and there aren’t really any other characters to speak of other than the stone not-angels.
Overall, then, a very mixed film with positives, negatives and a fair amount of ‘meh’. But it is enjoyable, if you like disaster movies and biblical allegories. The portrayal of women is not the best, but you can maybe forgive this because of the source material (?), and the angelic golems of randomness are rather silly. Emma Watson is stunning as ever and Jennifer Connelly is ageless – the same can’t really be said for Russell Crowe!!!
AHF Writes 