Monday, March 31, 2014

Noah

My screening of Darren Aronofsky’s latest film, Noah, will forever remain one of the most memorable movie going experiences of my life. At some point, with years of time to obscure my memory, my experience of watching the film will become synonymous with the film itself. Watching Noah is something I’ll never forget, and I’d like to tell you why.

Toward the end of the film, as it slowly reached its most climatic moment, something happened. (I don’t want to spoil the movie, so I’ll only say that this moment involved a very large knife held very close to a human face.) And it was right then that I felt something. My body began to tremble, and an immediate unease set in. Suddenly, the ground started shaking and I realized that Los Angeles was, at that precise moment, experiencing a massive earthquake. The seats shook, people screamed out loud, others rushed out of the theater. But Noah kept going. Its climax peaked, then came down, and myself and about 400 other theater attendees sat dazed and confused, wondering what (if any) significance an “act of God” had on us during the emotional peak of a religious movie.

Art is all about what we bring to it. How we feel about any artistic creation is nothing more than a reflection of who we are. And although many film critics will skillfully avoid discussing their personal religious beliefs in their reviews for the film, everyone who watches Noah will bring their own bias to it. Doesn’t matter what you do or do not believe in, Noah’s subject material lends itself to harsh, personal scrutiny.
So, perhaps it’s important to note that I’m not religious at all. The closest thing I have to a God is the cinematic vision of Ingmar Bergman, with the gentle synths of M83 running a close second. But in the traditional sense, religion isn’t part of my life. Never has been. I entered Noah with a clean slate; unclouded by decades of denominational bias and opinions. I’m only here to judge the movie as just that, a movie. No comparisons, no inflamed rhetoric of inaccuracies – just the film.

With all that in mind, I can’t think of one thing I didn’t like about Noah. Saw it three days ago, and it’s sat rather well. It’s far from the best film Darren Aronofsky has made, but I found it to be completely worthy of my time. Its pace never faltered or grew dull, its visuals (achieved much through extensive computer effects) were universally stunning, the acting was consistently on point, and the execution of the story was surprisingly dark. Honestly, the one thought that dominated my mind throughout Noah was how the hell it managed to earn a PG-13 rating. Graphic violence, sex, cannibalism, substance abuse, implied rape – this is genuinely one of the most grisly PG-13 films I’ve ever seen. Not a compliant, just a curious observation.

We all know the story of Noah and his fantastical ark – a man who receives a message from God (thankfully, in this film, a message that is not delivered via a loud voice booming from beyond the clouds) and goes about executing God’s will implicitly. By any means necessary, Noah (Russell Crowe, steady and fearless throughout) will build his ark, thereby saving the world’s animal population, while God kills all of Earth’s human inhabitants as punishment for them ruining the world he created.
To fulfill his duty, Noah is helped by his wife, Naamah (Jennifer Connelly, her best work in years), his adopted daughter, Ila (Emma Watson, not a false note to be found), his grandfather, Methuselah (Anthony Hopkins), and his two sons, loyal Shem (Douglas Booth) and rebellious Ham (Logan Lerman). They routinely face obstacles, namely from Tubal-cain (Ray Winstone) an angry leader of angry men who all want to hitch a ride on Noah’s ark.

As mentioned, I can’t recall a single, egregious fault of the film. Noah has been Darren Aronofsky’s passion project for decades – it’s the movie he’s always wanted to make, and his earnest intentions shine through nearly every frame of the film. I was so pleased that Noah didn’t bog itself down with tireless religious exposition (something nearly all religious-themed films are guilty of) and instead elected to move its story along swiftly. Russell Crowe is an actor I often have trouble with, but there was a nobility (matched with his fiery intensity) that he brought to Noah that I found utterly compelling. Noah isn’t the kind of film I’ll revisit often, but it’s one I’ll remember for years to come. Even if a ferocious act of nature is the main reason why. B+

43 comments:

  1. Wow... a fucking earthquake during a screening for Noah and no one died... cool. I felt it had some flaws but I still enjoyed it. I liked the cast and Aronofsky wanted to say as I hope more people see it for themselves and not be fucking judgmental. Fucking right-wing Christian dick-wads. Oh, and here's an updated list of Darren's films that I've seen with links to the reviews in the notes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think people are going to have a hard time seeing this one without being judgmental, but yeah, I completely agree with you - see the movie for the movie.

      Love your list. The Wrestler would top for me as well.

      Delete
  2. I really like Aronofsky but I think I am leaning toward not liking this movie. I think.

    I want to watch "Noah" for a second time before writing my own reaction. However, I can think of three things that I immediately didn't like.

    First, "Noah" struck me as lacking in drama (particularly once the characters were inhabiting the boat). I don't have a problem with the turmoil taking place within Noah --- apparently Midrashic literature, in places, has Noah in a similar state of mind --- but was there ever really any doubt as to how he would settle that turmoil? Second, the romance struck me as a wee bit much. Maybe it's just me but the hearty kiss between Noah and his wife struck me as, perhaps, a little bit anachronistic and the scene where they were both running their hands through the dirt in that garden ... did anyone not see that their hands would eventually touch? Ugh! Third, while the landscape of the world about to be destroyed was rather ugly, that world and those within it did not leave me with the sense that, say, those in "The Road" did. I don't know that I experienced the world of Noah as bleak as it needed to be in order for it to be completely wiped out.

    These are just a few random musings of mine. I hope they make some sense.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh yeah, they all make sense. I totally get where you're coming from. It's funny, because it's such a big, seemingly personal story, but this was easily Aronofsky's least personal film yet. I thought the romance was a bit heavy at times too, but I was able to look past it. Yeah, that dirt scene was really damn obvious, but I thought it looked gorgeous.

      I'll be eager to read your full review. Let me know when you post it.

      Delete
    2. Okay, I will. Thanks for your interest.

      BTW, I'm not just cynical about the lovey stuff. I thought the romance of "The Fountain" was really beautiful.

      Delete
    3. Oh no, I didn't think you were being cynical at all. Just wasn't for you in THIS film. I dig.

      Delete
    4. Hi Alex,

      You said to let you know when I post my reaction to Noah. I was able to put something together to post:

      http://mymusingsonfilm.wordpress.com/2014/04/05/noah/

      My basic premise is that the story of Noah, in the Bible, is itself a creative retelling of previous flood narratives which exist in Mesopotamian literature. This, in my view, means that those critiquing Aronofsky's retelling might consider chilling out.

      Delete
    5. Great man, can't wait to give it a read. Will give it a look today! Thanks for letting me know.

      Delete
  3. Fantastic review, as usual! I'm VERY excited to see this film, though I doubt that it will top Black Swan as my favourite Darren Aronofsky film :P However, I'm curious as to how you think Noah will do come awards season. Keep up the great work!! :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks! I really appreciate that. I doubt this will top Black Swan for you as well. It's a solid flick, but Black Swan is AMAZING.

      Awards of Noah... I honestly doubt it'll get any nominations. Maybe something for visual effects and/or sound editing/mixing, but I doubt it stays on the brain until January '15. But hell, who knows?

      Delete
    2. I agree with you in terms of Noah's awards chances, but Crowe seems very promising from the trailers, so I think that he has a slight chance. I guess I'll just have to wait until it comes out where I live :) I also just wanted to thank you for Earrings. That opening scene was just tremendous, and Catherine Warner was also amazing. What camera did you use for it? Because it looked so fucking gorgeous, it really reminded me of a Sofia Coppola film. And how is Wait going? I am really looking forward to it :) Sorry for bothering you with my questions :P

      Delete
    3. Oh wow, thank you so much for those kind words. That truly means the world to me! To be compared to a Sofia Coppola film is, just, wow. That’s so nice of you.

      Earrings was shot on a Canon 7D with 50mm and 24mm prime lenses. Groovy, affordable camera that is really easy to use with a little practice. I’m so pleased to hear that you liked the film. I’ll pass your kind words onto Catherine, I know she’ll appreciate them.

      Wait is going really well. I put myself through too much mental and physical exhaustion when I was editing Earrings. I had an urgency to release it as soon as humanly possible, and my health suffered as a result. So I’m taking my time with Wait. But post production is going very, very well. Finished a rough cut yesterday, actually, so now it’s on to sound mixing, which, for me, is easily the most difficult and time consuming part of the entire filmmaking process. Please don’t apologize for asking questions like those – I really appreciate you asking! I’d love to know who you are, if you’re comfortable with that. Be great to stay in touch via Twitter/email/whatever. Thanks again!

      Delete
    4. No problem :) I'm sorry you had to go through that while editing Earrings, I hope that's not the case for Wait. The info about Canon 7D is also cool, do you know of any other movies which used that camera? And just one last question, what is your favourite part of the filmmaking process? Yeah sure, my name is Aditya. We already follow each other on Twitter :P

      Delete
    5. I love these questions!

      A lot of "bigger" films use the Canon 7D to supplement their more professional-looking footage. A great example are the subway scenes in Black Swan, which were shot with the 7D. 127 Hours and even The Avengers have utilized the camera as well. But arguably the 7D's biggest claim to fame was Like Crazy, a fantastic little romantic drama that was shot entirely with the camera. I really love that movie. Lena Dunham's Tiny Furniture was shot entirely with the 7D as well.

      My favorite part of the filmmaking process... well there are two, but they're actually kind of the same thing. The first is finishing the first draft of the script. I know no grander sense of accomplishment than typing "Cut to Black. The end." and just sitting back and smiling. The second part is editing the rough cut of the film. That's when you assemble your narrative and the order of your scenes, without worrying about sound editing and color correction (yet). That first rough cut is basically your final version of the script, which is why I feel like they are kind of the same thing. Those are the best parts of the process, unfortunately, there are many, many difficult parts as well.

      Thanks for asking, and thanks for that tweet a few weeks ago!

      Delete
    6. Hehe no problem ;) I knew that Black Swan used 7D, but The Avengers? I never would have guessed. I wasn't the biggest fan of Like Crazy, but Felicity Jones was spectacular, and I think she should have gotten a LOT more awards attention than she eventually got. Do you have any other films/performances that you think were snubbed? However, I really enjoyed Tiny Furniture, and Girls is one of my favourite shows. What TV shows do you watch? Thanks for your answers about the filmmaking process, I want to learn as much about it as I can :)

      Delete
    7. I think my love for Like Crazy is rooted in Jones' performance. I fully agree with you, she was so sadly overlooked there. Deserved MUCH more attention.

      I don't watch much TV. The only ones I'm dedicated to right now are Girls (love it), Mad Men, True Detective (when it was on), Veep, and... yeah, I guess that's it. I watch an occasional reality show, because they are a Where's Waldo-type exercise for me. Every single reality show on television is a fabrication, to varying degrees, so I have a great amount of fun watching those shows and figuring out all of the ways in which they cheated to make it look real. But I don't watch them a lot or anything, mostly just cooking competition shows (which, again, are bullshit). It's hilarious.

      I could go on and on and on about snubbed performances. If you trace through my In Character section on this site, those posts are full of snubbed performances. I adore character actors, and their work is so consistently overlooked, it’s really a shame. But the most overlooked performance of recent memory is Michael Fassbender’s performance in Shame. That should’ve earned the next 5 Oscars for Best Actor. It’s unparalleled work. Ah, I just love it.

      Delete
    8. I try my hardest not to watch any reality shows, but with all of the gossip about relating to the Kardashians and all the others, it is pretty hard to avoid them, unfortunately :/ I do, however, adore Game of Thrones. Girls, True Detective and Veep are all great shows too :)

      Yes, I was just looking through your In Character section, very well detailed and researched! I love discovering new films and actors :) I just finished your post on Parker Posey, and I think, if you get the time, you should do more posts on Christopher Guest's regulars!

      I think Shame in general was terribly overlooked. It is strange though, how the Academy overlooks so many brilliant films and performances, yet manages to nominate ones that are well, less than great, in the nicest terms. I mean, honestly, some of the choices are baffling. The one decision that has leaves me scratching my head is Julia Roberts for Erin Brockovich, especially considering how Ellen Burstyn, Joan Allen and Laura Linney were all so much better. Even Juliette Binoche was good, even though I was pretty indifferent towards Chocolat.

      Another performance apart from Fassbender that comes to mind is Catherine O'Hara in For Your Consideration. It's definitely not Guest's best film, but I thought O'Hara was simply sublime. Another question (sorry if I've gotten on your nerves with my questions :/) but what is your most anticipated movie of 2014? Mine are Boyhood, Inherent Vice and Into the Woods.

      Delete
    9. Not to mention Rosemarie DeWitt in Rachel Getting Married. What a heartbreaking and fearless performance.

      Delete
    10. Oh don’t get me wrong, reality shows are a complete waste of time, but if you come across one, it’s actually fun to try and find all the “tricks” within it. Thanks for checking out the In Character posts! I LOVE Guest’s troupe of actors. They are all so very brilliant.

      I love Soderbergh, so I dig aspects of Erin Brockovich, but yeah, Roberts would’ve been 4th or 5th in line for me that year.

      And Rosemarie DeWitt, my god, I fell in love with her in that film. Such a beautiful of touching performance. Just perfect.

      Movies in 2014… definitely Boyhood and Inherent Vice. Also Gone Girl, Interstellar, Knight of Cups (hopefully it’s released!), Foxcatcher, and Birdman. Really excited for all of those.

      Delete
    11. I love Guest, he is really underrated. Roberts wouldn't even be in my top 5 :P Soderbergh is a tricky director for me. I adore some of his films (Traffic, sex, lies and videotape, The Informant, Out of Sight) and then there are those that I just cannot get into (King of the Hill, Erin Brockovich, and Equilibrium).

      In my opinion, of all the directors whose entire filmography I have seen, the only ones who have never made a film I haven't at least liked are Malick, Tarantino, Sofia Coppola, Haneke and Kubrick. But, I still need to watch a lot more movies ;)

      What are your thoughts about Sofia Coppola potentially directing The Little Mermaid? I am all for it, personally, since she is one of my favourite directors. She is such a visual storyteller, I think that The Little Mermaid is the perfect fit for her. I also came across an interesting on YouTube: Sofia Coppola making her own version of Lolita, starring Elle Fanning and Michael C. Hall. I personally am all for it, but since it's just a fan idea, I doubt it'll actually happen, but one can hope ;) What do you think of it?

      Delete
    12. One last thing, I recommend you check out this blog: http://bplusmovieblog.com. It is a really fantastic blog, the guy who made it has watched every single movie nominated for Best Picture, Director and all the acting categories, and he gives his personal view on each category, as well as his rankings. A truly awesome blog!

      Delete
    13. I don't love all of Soderbergh's films either, but he's definitely one of my Top 10 directors ever. I really appreciate his philosophy and command of craft. What's interesting about your list is that those directors have rather slim filmographies. Haneke has 11, which is solid, and Kubrick has 12, but the rest are pretty slim. I love 'em all too, but yeah, when you're as prolific as Soderbergh, you're bound to have some missteps.

      If Sofia Coppola directed a movie about a phone book, I would see it. So I'm pumped for her take on The Little Mermaid. I think (...hope) she'll cut threw the gloss and get down to the essence of the story, which could in fact be portrayed as quite dark.

      That blog is really cool. I'll give it a closer look a bit later. Thanks for sending it my way!

      Delete
  4. I liked it, but didn't love it. http://dellonmovies.blogspot.com/2014/03/noah.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Same. I liked it a tad more than you but it seems we're pretty much in line on this one.

      Delete
  5. Yeah, that's just about the craziest moviegoing experience ever. I don't know that I'm a religious person, per se, but I'm definitely spiritual, in my own way, and I'm pretty sure if this had happened to me, I'd be convinced it was an act of God. Which admittedly isn't fair to the movie, but I'm not sure I could help it.

    Haven't seen Noah yet, but I'm glad you enjoyed it. And I'm glad you're okay!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks man! It was very, very bizarre. Honestly, the best part of the whole thing was watching how other people reacted. I'm fascinated by human nature, and it was so compelling to see how different people handle the same event. Like I said, some people screamed, some people ran, some openly talked about the "coincidence" of the situation, others shushed the talkers so they could continue to watch the movie. Crazy.

      Delete
  6. I'm probably gonna give it a shot on DVD because Aronofsky is the closest I have to favorite director, but I did hear about the whole anti-meat message of the movie and I just hate when movies shame people because of the things they choose to do. While I don't think eating animals is the most honorable thing for human race to do I'm sure as hell not going to feel embarrassed for it while watching a big budget Hollywood movie. Seems like Aronofsky overdid the propaganda here, at least from the reviews I read.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, that's all a matter of perception, I suppose. I've been a vegetarian for 8 years and didn't get a pro-vegetarian vibe from the movie at all. I got a pro-vegetarian vibe from Noah, as a character, but not from Aronofsky. Like I said in my review, I know nothing about the Bible, so I don't know if Noah was depicted as a vegetarian in The Good Book or not. Honestly, I think the film's biggest animal statement is the fact that they used all CGI animals. That's saying something in and of itself.

      Delete
  7. This is definitely a convincing viewpoint for me to go see this despite having no desire to. You make good points, and it IS Aronofsky who I always have faith in. Maybe the advertising is what turned me off...coming off looking like a typical blockbuster? Not sure. If you're a fan of Ingmar Bergman, you should check out the doc Liv and Ingmar...I reviewed it a week back :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dude that's so creepy. I JUST posted a comment on your review! Awesome.

      I actually haven't seen a trailer for Noah, so if it is being marketed as some massive blockbuster, then that's a shame. I mean, I know why the studio would do that, but that's not the vibe I got from the movie at all. Like I said, far from Aronofsky's best, but fans of his films will see his signature style all over it.

      Delete
  8. The best moment for me in the movie was when Noah narrates the story , the visuals that aid the story were stunning. One complain I have with the movie is that it was not able to manage the empty spaces well(like we see in a Coen's movie).
    Great review though, wish my viewing experience was enhanced by something too .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for reading, I really appreciate it. I too loved the images that accompanied Noah's narration. I thought that was Aronofsky at his best.

      Delete
  9. What a way to see that film for the first time! I can't disagree with you on the film, but I'm surprised you only went with a B+. Right now, I'm in the weak A territory, though I want to see it again soon. Still, it's a powerful film from a visionary director. I can't complain.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Isn't that nuts? I guess I went with the B+ because I'm not sure this one will last for me. I mean, I wonder if I'll still be singing its praises come December, you know?

      Delete
  10. Probably will check this out as I really like the fantasy genre.

    I don't ever remember experiencing an earth quake, the one's we get in oxford barely rattle a few dinner plates (which is a good thing...obviously).

    Anyway, likely to be checking this (and The Double) out this weekend.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't know I put an apostrophe in ones...

      Delete
    2. Ha, it's all good, I put apostrophes in weird places too. I'll be curious to hear what you think about this one. Also, the agnostic in me got the biggest kick out of you referring to the film as "fantasy." That's awesome.

      Delete
  11. Very cool man, looks like we're on the same page more or less. I think Aronofsky really did something special with this and it turned out better, darker, and stranger than it probably had any right to be (considering it's a Biblical epic and a studio movie). Considering the trailers are just selling it as the typical style of movie, I found myself shocked pretty consistently throughout the film - in a good way. Though The Watchers reminded me of something I'd see in Lord of The Rings and the kid who played Shem was a bit planky (imo) I think everyone else was actually really good. Even Russell Crowe - who in my opinion probably delivered his best work since The Insider all those years ago. That scene on the boat with the sound of waves and people crying for help - that's a shot that has stayed with me since I first saw the film a couple of days ago. Just so haunting (while the actual chaos reminded me of something I'd see in a Bosch painting - which I found both fitting and rather odd lol). Anyway, I'm glad you dug it as well! Great review as always man!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks buddy! The crying scene you mentioned was the scene of the movie for me. Fucking terrifying. Really showed how far he was willing to go. I thought it was a stroke of haunting genius that I didn’t see coming (because, as you said, of the trailers, material, and distributors). I also thought it was Crowe’s best since The Insider, so I loved hearing you say that. Really, the whole thing was much better than I assumed it would be.

      Delete
  12. Man, it definitely sounds like quite an experience! And in a film like "Noah"!!! I mean... wow. Really, really wow. Anyway, I'm happy that you saw the film and liked it. I saw it recently and also liked it a lot. I especially liked that Aronofsky's approach to the story was impressively mature and thoughtful. What could have been your typical Christian film ends up actually being a serious-minded exploration of the human condition. It's a bold decision on Arronofsky's behalf. "Noah" may have its flaws, but it's a terrific film on the whole, extremely powerful and notably insightful. The one thing that struck me the most in your post was this: "How we feel about any artistic creation is nothing more than a reflection of who we are." So true. But also so important to appreciate any artistic creation (such as a film) for what it is, regardless of our own personal beliefs. I know it's hard but it's worth it. Art broadens our critical understanding of the world. I wish people could have that in mind and stop being so judgmental.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh man, I couldn't agree more with you. I think your last few sentences perfectly defined what criticism should be. Seems that is, unfortunately, a fleeting notion.

      Also loved what you said about how instead of this being a typical (i.e., not good) Christian film, it was mature, impressively made character study. No, not perfect. But commendable, certainly. Glad you liked the film, and yeah, I still can't believe I saw this under the circumstances that I did. Insane.

      Delete
  13. Awesome review! There's something really fishy about this film, man. It's been scorching here for the past few weeks and as soon as I came out of the theatre having watched it, it started to rain. Wtf? Your story is better though :P

    I really liked it. I weirdly didn't find it biblical so much as pure epic. And it's been so long to watch an "epic" epic movie and not just those with superheroes or whatever. Sure there were some crazy aspects (the rock transformer things), and I didn't really like the way it ended, but for most part, I was riveted. The film looked stunning. The women were fantastic. I properly cried due to Watson's scene at the climax. And Russell Crowe didn't make me want to throw up. Woo hoo!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Nik! "And Russell Crowe didn't make me want to throw up." HA! Yeah, I'd be lying if I didn't admit I've had close to that same reaction from some of his more recent performances. But still, he was great here.

      Really glad you liked it. I didn't find it biblical either, which, for me, was nice. Seems like you emotionally connect with Watson's big moment,which is great. Just imagine that happening and then BAM, a fuckin' quake. Crazy.

      Delete