Perhaps because of its religious territory, Darren Aronofsky's Noah sure is an upsetting movie for the purist. Much like an adaptation of a comic book or beloved novel, the director's vision is faithful in broad strokes, but he picks and chooses elements of his own devising to allow his cinematic vision to take on a life of its own. This is what directors and screenwriters should do when handed this kind of material, and while not every addition to the story of Noah in "Genesis" works as intended, the whole is nonetheless a fascinating "updating" of a timeless tale. There is much in Noah for the average viewer to admire and even enjoy, those two chief things being Aronofsky's spectacular visuals and a multi-dimensional portrayal of the lead character.
Noah begins with a brief recap of Adam and Eve's demise in the Garden of Eden, setting the stage for the corrupt and wicked world of where the main characters currently stand. Noah (Russell Crowe) has apocalyptic visions and seeks council from his grandfather, Methuselah (Anthony Hopkins). During the course of this meeting, Noah quickly deduces that since his visions involve water, not fire, "The Creator" (the term "God" is never used in this movie) is planning to wipe the world's slate clean with epic floods. He's convinced that he and his family must build a massive ark to survive and that only animals are allowed to survive the world's transition. Other than his immediate family (which also includes an adopted daughter), humanity is not intended to receive a second chance. Of course, not only must Noah deal with friction within his own family, but that of a rival clan headed by the king of the land, Tubal-Cain (Ray Winstone).
Noah's most outlandish addition to an old tale involves giant rock creatures called The Watchers, who help Noah build the ark after initially distrusting him, then aid him in a LOTR-style battle against Tubel-Cain's army. No, I'm not making this up. One can be forgiven for wondering "what the hell is this shitty special effect?" when first laying eyes on these creatures, but the movie provides a decent enough explanation for them (originally light-beings, The Creator punished them for intervening in Man's affairs by transforming them into awkwardly-built rock-beings). You either accept it in the context of what Aronofsky is trying to do or you keep laughing. The creatures' presence grew on me over time, so I went with the former approach.
Other than these, however, no one will quibble about the film's visual style, which is often breathtaking. Every vista is gorgeously photographed, the sudden growth of a giant forest around a previous barren land is eye-popping, and the various CGI animals are seamlessly integrated. The film's single most awe-inspring moment comes when Noah relates a story to his family about the creation of life, and a stunning time lapse showcases various creatures coming into being over the course of hundreds of split-second shots. If there's a reason to see Noah in a theater, where the spectacle looms large, rather than waiting for home video, it's moments like these.
Even with the epic element, the film's other chief strength lies in Russell Crowe's portrayal of the title character. This is some of the best acting from Crowe we've seen in years; Noah is a hard-nosed, cynical warrior who loves his family but believes humanity is largely disgusting and has earned its comeuppance. The movie's most stirring conflict isn't that of clashing armies, but Noah's war of philosophy with his wife (Jennifer Connelly), his sons, and his adopted daughter Eila (Emma Watson). Even though Eila is of child-bearing age, she is sterile, and Noah firmly believes The Creator intends for humanity's reign to end with his family, not start over. Only the animals are allowed to repopulate. This allows Aronofsky, a confirmed atheist, to openly question Noah's faith and the supposed message. Noah was 100% correct about a flood coming to purge the Earth, but is he truly acting as a responsible messenger, or are his feelings just delusions of an addled mind? Noah pushes more than a few buttons in support of this theme.
Noah, at 138 minutes, contains a scope not fully revealed in the trailers. The movie has plenty of territory to cover after the rains start, and this segment of the film contains the most compelling human drama as well as a few unfortunate screenwriting lapses. Without going into too much detail, I can say that when the movie takes a turn which requires events to hurtle forward several months later, there's an elephant in the room that I can't believe no one stumbles upon until the plot requires the characters to. No, not a literal elephant in the room (in spite of so many animals, which are conveniently put to sleep via a primitive sleeping gas), but you'll see what I mean.
Biblical epics were once all the rage in Hollywood, but perhaps because of the thorny, controversial subject matter, they're largely considered "niche" pictures with a limited audience in today's ultra-PC climate. Aronofsky is on record stating Noah isn't intended to be a Bliblical film in the truest sense of the term, and I welcome that. It uses the Genesis tale as a jumping-off point for a vision that, while far from flawless, is unique and fearless enough to hold most viewers' interest. You get out of Noah what you're willing to put into it.
Rating: *** (out of ****)
No comments:
Post a Comment