Noah

A movie review by Father Scott Archer
March 30, 2014


Noah, with Russell Crowe in the title role, is an exciting, imaginative, and often moving portrayal of the story of Noah from the Old Testament. For the most part, this Darren Aronofsky directed film stays true to the Biblical story, while giving us a movie that is immensely pleasing to watch. Russell Crowe plays a very believable, human Noah, who struggles with understanding the details of what God wills for him to do. Jennifer Connelly is a very passionate and strong Naameh, Noah’s wife. It is a movie I would recommend to anyone who wants to see a Biblical film on a grand scale. Among the evangelical crowd, however, this movie seems to have caused quite a negative stir, and much of this is based on their view that it does not follow the Biblical story closely enough, it is ideologically driven, and they object to the artistic license Aronofsky has taken with the story. It might be helpful to address some of these concerns and objections.

First, it seems as though some people have forgotten that directors have to use artistic license to drive the story along, much in the same way Cecil B. DeMille did with his 1956 The Ten Commandments. Where were the people objecting to the love triangle between Moses, Nefretiri, and Rameses? There is no power struggle with Moses as next in line to be Pharaoh in the book of Exodus, yet DeMille uses it as a plot device to create more tension. Need I even mention Edward G. Robinson as Dathan, or Moses hurling the tablets at the golden calf, followed by fireworks and an earthquake? The latter was a dramatic and memorable scene; however, it never actually happened in the Bible. Noah is a very twenty-first century telling of a Biblical story, meant to speak to a twenty-first century audience, much in the same way The Ten Commandments was intended for a mid-twentieth century one.

Another objection I heard was that Noah never mentions the name God. Remember that the story of Noah (Noe) starts in chapter 6 of Genesis; that is, the first few pages of the entire Old Testament. It records that God speaks to him and Noah obeys, but Noah does not speak to God. It simply states, "And Noe did all things which God commanded him." By the end of chapter 9, he is dead. Even when you look at Exodus, when God reveals Himself to Moses, he asks, "If they should say to me: What is his name? what shall I say to them? God said to Moses: I AM WHO AM. He said: Thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel: HE WHO IS, hath sent me to you." Rest assured, every time Noah utters the words “the Creator” in this movie, you know he is referring to the Almighty.

The decision to make the “sons of God,” who appear in chapter 6 of Genesis, into Tolkien-like rock giants, who are in reality angels, was an artistic choice one may or may not appreciate; however, I suspect this was to give us a sense of an ancient time when giants roamed the earth. There is even an exotic dog-like creature that is killed in the movie, a creature obviously now extinct, and this also gives us that sense of being in a world not far removed from the beginning of man. As an aside, these “sons of God” in traditional Catholic commentary are not angels; rather, they are the descendants of Seth and Enos.

As for Noah being a "drunkard," another objection I heard, it occurs exactly how and in the same place as it does in Scripture. "And Noe, a husbandman, began to till the ground, and planted a vineyard, and drinking of the wine was made drunk..." Also, much is made of the fact that he does not eat meat. I am not certain how this is supposed to contradict Scripture, given the fact that he was a husbandman. It does have a Tolkien-like condemnation of industrial society, and I believe this is why some see this Noah as an environmentalist, but it is made perfectly clear that God (the Creator) destroys His creation because of the wickedness of mankind. In this movie, Noah is a flawed man whose only objective is to be obedient to the will of God. He does not always understand perfectly what that will is, but he does end up understanding and carrying out His will to completion.

The acting by all the stars in this movie is superb, and Iceland provides the perfect backdrop to the end of all things, which is also the renewal of all things. The audience views in wonder at how, “all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the flood gates of heaven were opened.” The gorgeous, sweeping score of composer Clint Mansell adds to the splendor that is Noah. There are so many moving, beautiful, and dramatic scenes in this movie, especially the miraculous gathering of the animals to the ark, which may cause even those without faith to go and read the account of Noah’s story in the book of Genesis.

The New Evangelization through Merciful Restoration

There's a great and tragic irony which exists in the Church today and which this homily by Archbishop Sample addresses, if only indirectly.


It was Pope Bl. John Paul II who noted that a "silent apostasy" had gripped the Church. He coined a strategic phrase that was intended to prescribe a strategy for combating this "silent apostasy": The New Evangelization. According to the reasoning behind this "new evangelization," too many who called themselves "Catholics" lived their lives in apostasy, some out of ignorance, some out of a blatant denial of Church teaching. Many needed to be re-evangelized, thus the "new evangelization.


From the beginning of Blessed John Paul II's crusade, if I may refer to his call to arms in that way, a central theme developed which was strongly promoted in the writings of Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger/Pope Benedict XVI. That theme is the renewal of liturgical understanding, an understanding which had been watered down and, in some cases, completely subverted by the liturgical reforms carried out way back in the '60's and '70's in the name of the "Spirit of Vatican II."


The reasoning on which this call for renewal stands is that, after the post-conciliar reforms, the law of prayer, as evidenced by the manner in which we offer the Mass in most parishes, constitutes a rupture with the law of prayer as it had been inherited by the Second Vatican Council, the First Vatican Council, the Council of Trent...pretty much all the way back to at least Gregory the Great. An impressive pedigree, to say the least. Pope Emeritus, writing as Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger in _The Spirit of the Liturgy_ was clear about the path to renewal: restoration of continuity in the law of prayer.


This clear-cut approach to the New Evangelization has recently been obscured by claims of new groups leading the charge with "new" ardor, "new" methods, "new" language..."new", "new", "new" everything. Ironically, this approach would seem to have much more in common with the "spirit" of the 1970's reformers than with the original intentions applied to the "New Evangelization."


What Archbishop Sample is suggesting in this video is a clear-cut means of implementing the wishes of Blessed John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI through liturgical restoration.


The key to proper restoration of the liturgy, and a subsequent renewal of liturgical understanding, is mercy. Restoration with mercy is done in opposition to the merciless tyranny of the reformers of the '60's and '70's in so completely discarding the mercy inherent in the Tridentine Mass in favor of their own vanities.