I am not a terribly religious person and do not know the ins and outs of doctrine. Therefore, I will not comment too much about the "historical" accuracy of "Noah". However, I do think if you're going to make a movie about something from history, a story many people know, there should be some attempt to accurately reflect that history.
Darren Aronofsky has taken on quite a task Directing the life of Noah, what lead him to build an arc, the inner conflict of serving God and watching the world drown, at odds with his wife and kids, and the actual construction of said arc. He has made some very interesting movies and had fertile ground for another. His movies tend to be character studies, focusing on the human condition. I wasn't a huge fan of "Requiem for a Dream" but was absolutely blown away by "The Wrestler" and "Black Swan". None of those films were what you'd call "effects" movies but did evoke strong feelings and reactions.
I had high hopes for "Noah", given the cast and Director, but was disappointed at every turn. The look of the movie was dark and at times cluttered. Earth had a "Mad Max" feel to it, with marauding gangs destroying whatever lay in their path. Tubal-cain, the primary villain, looked like he'd have been more then comfortable in the Thunder Dome. Horribly overacted and poorly written Ray Winstone plays Tubal-cain. His primary purpose, in addition to being a general menace, is to keep reminding us that "man makes the rules and controls his own destiny". He appears to be calling Noah a sissy for not not "manning up" enough.
I'm not sure what's going on with Russell Crowe either. After amazing performances, early in his career, he seemed bored in this role. What happened to the actor who brought to life "Gladiator", "A Beautiful Mind", "Cinderella Man", "L.A. Confidential", and the overlooked but most amazing performance in "The Insider"? Now he's the worst part of "Les Miserables", and going through the motions in "Broken City" and "Man of Steel". There was no passion in his performance, no spell binding speeches, or deeply felt monologues. There was so much potential for strong scenes. I mean for a man carrying out the will of God, and in conflict with his own family, you'd think he'd have something to say. Instead, he seemed to be brooding, scowling, and moping a good bit of the time. This probably has as much to do with the writing as with the acting. When great actors give poor performances you have to look to the script and to the Director.
Sadly none of the other actors came to his aide. Jennifer Connelly who is typically breathtakingly beautiful as well as talented, was suitably bleak, matching her surroundings. Emma Watson and the other "kids" were forgettable at best. I can't think of one scene that was memorable or believable. Even Anthony Hopkins looked lost.
Finally, Aronofsky created "Watchers" who were light-based, angle like beings, originally tasked to protect the garden of Eden. When the apple was eaten, having failed, they were punished with a rocky exterior, binding them to earth. They come to Noah's aide, serving as his protector and work crew. I have no idea who designed these creatures. To me they looked like arthritic, gimpy, broken down rock Transformers. They seemed to lunge and wobble awkwardly with every stride and movement.
So in a nutshell, "Noah" seems to be a fictional historical film, poorly written, thin on plot, flatly acted, dark to watch, and long....... Enjoy.
No comments:
Post a Comment