Hollywood is apparently turning Noah into a rabid, mankind-hating environmentalist

The Flood

The last time I saw a first-run movie was in England, when we watched the final Harry Potter film.  What this means is that I pay very little attention to news about upcoming movies.  Since I’m not going to watch them, why pay attention?

I was vaguely aware, though, that Hollywood was producing a Biblical epic about Noah, of Ark fame.  Since it’s not a movie by a true believer — unlike The Passion of the Christ– I didn’t have high hopes for it, but I have to say that it apparently has succeeded in sinking below anybody’s lowest expectations.

To understand fully exactly what Hollywood has done to the Noah story, let’s take a minute to revisit that narrative.  It’s a long story, running three chapters in the King James version. I’ll try for a briefer retelling:

Humans multiplied on the earth, but so did the evil (also called “violence”) they committed, presumably against each other, causing God to regret his creation. God therefore vowed to destroy all life on earth. Before acting on that promise, however, God realized that Noah was a good man or, more poetically, “Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.” God therefore warned Noah of the imminent destruction, but offered Noah a covenant: build an ark, fill it with two of every living thing (male and female), and God would allow a new generation of life on earth. Noah, without cavil, did as asked.

God then sent forty days and forty nights of rain, inundating the earth with water. The result was that “all that was in the dry land [i.e., that land not meant to be under water], died.” After 150 days, the flood waters began to abate. Noah then used birds to ascertain that there was land. When the ark could finally make a safe landing, God issued Noah a very explicit instruction: “Go forth of the ark, thou, and thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons’ wives with thee. Bring forth with thee every living thing that is with thee, of all flesh, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth; that they may breed abundantly in the earth, and be fruitful, and multiply upon the earth.” God also encourages man to eat meat.

So, to summarize: mankind was violent; Noah was good; Noah immediately accepted God’s covenant, building the ark and taking on two of everything; and when the flood water’s subsided, God instructed Noah to procreate, procreate, procreate; and dine in style on animal flesh.

You’d never know all that, though, if you learned your Bible from Hollywood. Brian Godawa managed to obtain the version of the script that was apparently used in the movie, and it tells quite a different tale. You have to read Godawa’s whole post to realize quite how far afield Darren Aronofsky went, but a few passages will make it clear that, unbeknownst to God, Noah, or the Bible, God and Noah’s genuine concern back in the day was anthropogenic climate change. No, really:

Noah paints the primeval world of Genesis 6 as scorched arid desert, dry cracked earth, and a gray gloomy sky that gives no rain – and all this, caused by man’s “disrespect” for the environment. In short, an anachronistic doomsday scenario of ancient global warming. How Neolithic man was able to cause such anthropogenic catastrophic climate change without the “evil” carbon emissions of modern industrial revolution is not explained. Nevertheless, humanity wanders the land in nomadic warrior tribes killing animals for food or wasteful trophies.

In this oppressive world, Noah and his family seek to avoid the crowds and live off the land. Noah is a kind of rural shaman, and vegan hippy-like gatherer of herbs. Noah explains that his family “studies the world,” “healing it as best we can,” like a kind of environmentalist scientist. But he also mysteriously has the fighting skills of an ancient Near Eastern Ninja (Hey, it’s a movie, give it a break).

Noah maintains an animal hospital to take care of wounded animals or those who survive the evil “poachers,” of the land. Just whose animal rights laws they are violating, I am not sure, since there are only fiefdoms of warlords and tribes. Be that as it may, Noah is the Mother Teresa of animals.

I don’t know about you, but I’m getting the feeling here that Noah is a vegetarian, something that surely would have shocked God.  The script goes on from there, only it gets sillier and sillier, including Noah’s desire after the flood to kill all the humans God charged him with saving.  I’d be tempted to think that Godawa was hoaxed (surely this can’t be the real script), except that preview audiences have hated the movie so much that it makes one believe that Godawa did get his hands on the real deal.

Just FYI, here are some pertinent parts of Darren Aronofsky’s bio (hyperlinks omitted):

Aronofsky was born in Brooklyn, New York, in 1969, the son of public school teachers Charlotte and Abraham Aronofsky, who are Conservative Jews.[5][6] He grew up in the borough’s Manhattan Beach neighborhood, where “I was raised culturally Jewish, but there was very little spiritual attendance in temple. It was a cultural thing – celebrating the holidays, knowing where you came from, knowing your history, having respect for what your people have been through.”[5] He graduated from Edward R. Murrow High School.[7] He has one sister, Patti, who attended a professional ballet school through high school.[8] His parents would often take him to Broadway theater performances, which sparked his keen interest in show business.[9]

During his youth, he trained as a field biologist with The School for Field Studies in Kenya in 1985 and Alaska in 1986.[10] He attended school in Kenya to pursue an interest in learning about ungulates.[10] He later said, “[T]he School for Field Studies changed the way I perceived the world”.[10] Aronofsky’s interest in the outdoors led him to backpack his way through Europe and the Middle East.[11] In 1987 he entered Harvard University, where he majored in social anthropology and studied filmmaking; he graduated in 1991.[12]

In other words, New York Jewish, but no real sense of what Judaism is about (and keep in mind that Noah is an Old Testament story, so it’s one that should theoretically resonate with him); environmental background; and Harvard degree in Leftist “social anthropology.”

Aronofsky sounds like an extremely bright, mathematically adept young man who spent his life steeped in cultural Leftism.  Knowing that, maybe the movie isn’t a surprise at all.

Hat tip:  Ace of Spades

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. Robert Arvanitis says

    The asymmetry arises because in general, conservatives have values, self-restraint, kindness, while the left lacks those virtues.
    So an assault on Noah, or a crucifix in urine — “Freedom of speech!”
    But distrust of jihadis — “Islamophobe!”
    Clinton exploits a young girl — “Puritan!”
    But a long past infidelity of a former speaker  — “Resign!”
    It only works because we allow it.

  2. Libby says

    I wish someone would compile a list of global warming and/or environmentalist-themed movies have been made over the last decade or so. I would guess that close to half of all children’s movies include some sort of environmentalist theme, with even Pixar getting in on it with Wall-E. This is not virgin territory, story-wise.
    Hollywood seems to understand that there is money to be made in Biblical and Christian-themed stories, especially after successes like “Fireproof” the History Channels “The Bible” series. However, this industry that revels in being transgressive just can’t stomach actual Christian themes. And so they hollow out the meaning behind biblical/Christian stories and replace it with the few areas they allow themselves to pass judgement: man’s abuse of the environment and evil capitalism.
     

  3. jj says

    I always thought Noah was kind of a putz anyway, but I love the description that he and his were trying to “live off the land.”  What, at that time, was the rest of humanity doing, clocking in for their shift at Boeing every day and browsing the produce aisle at Gelson’s after work?  

    • Ellen says

      Good one!  And as Book says, how in the world could a small – very small  - bunch of hunter/gatherers cause the dreaded Global Warming?  I predict this movie will bomb spectacularly.

  4. says

    Oh dear.
     
    It’s a long story, running three chapters in the King James version.
     
    Um, it’s the same length in every version.
    But it’s not three chapters: Noah shows early in Genesis chapter 6, and dies at the end of chapter 9.  That’s four chapters.  (You don’t subtract, since 9 is inclusive: 6, 7, 8, 9.)
     
    I don’t know about you, but I’m getting the feeling here that Noah is a vegetarian, something that surely would have shocked God.
     
    But Noah was a vegetarian (before the flood) — and God was not shocked about this: it was his idea. 
    Lo, behold:
    > [God, to Adam:] Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food.” (Gen 1:29)
    > [God, to Noah:] “Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.” (Gen 9:3)
     

    • barbtheevilgenius says

      Adam was a vegetarian before the Fall, but do we know that he was after the Fall? Abel’s offering to God was fat from some of his flock of sheep, and there were also herds of cattle.

  5. says

    The Left likes to steal other people’s ideas, institutions, and myths, corrupt them, and then say afterwards (while making boat loads of profit) “it was our idea all along, it has never not been our idea”.
     
     

  6. Mike Devx says

    Thank you, Libby, for pointing out the steaming pile of excrement that was ‘Wall-E’!  My God, did I loathe that movie for its ridiculous extreme hatred of mankind and its vapid, connect-the-dots version of idiotic environmentalism.
     
    In the face of this weekend’s large ice storm, we are getting warnings that due to ‘climate change’, there will be monster winter storms for the next twenty years.  Climate change!  Climate change!  Climate change!
     
    Yeah, good luck with that, you scheming asshole motherf#&#ck#ers.  After twenty years of beating us all about the head with a tsunami of ‘global WARMING, global WARMING, global WARMING’ chants, your ludicrous attempts at re-programming us like climate sheep is simply not going to work.
     
    But of course they’re going to try, since it is becoming established fact that the downturn in global temperatures – an entirely natural event – must somehow be linked to man-made CLIMATE CHANGE.
     
    And now we get Darren Orfanofosokanivasky’s Noah epic.  In which God told Noah to build an ark to save mankind from the effects of mankind’s… CLIMATE CHANGE.  Or is it not climate change, but rather… GLOBAL WARMING?  Who the frick can tell?  I think there may have been, what, about 300,000 human beings alive at that time, and they managed to change the climate across the entire Earth!  Those were some industrious people!
     
    I guess Atlantis sank beneath the waves because all the factories they built on the East Coast of Atlantis caused the island to tip over.  (Or something.)  So said one of the Atlantis Democrat Comgressman, but Atlantis representative Debbie Wasserman Papadopoulos claimed he was on medication.  She also claimed that Atlantis-Care, despite all of its enrollment troubles and non-functioning web-site, was performing very well and should be considered a great and awesome success.

  7. Charles Martel says

    I agree that this movie is going to be a dud. There is nothing more boring, and ultimately more laughable, than an unsubtle man trying to make a point.
     
    In a way, Aronofsky reminds me of Michael Jackson. Jackson built Neverland, a material expression of what he imagined to be the locale of a perfect childhood. Of course Jackson was so clunked up mentally that he couldn’t see that building a representation of a fantasy doesn’t make it any more plausible or real.
     
    Just as everybody knew that Jackson was mightily off kilter, almost everybody is going to regard Aronofsky the same way.

  8. says

    Most of Hollywood’s profits come from oversea theaters in Europe and even the Middle East.
     
    It doesn’t matter if Americans like it or not, since their wallet isn’t impacted much.
     
    This is what I call the Left’s evil capitalist network world wide. It functions as an ideological, brainwashing, mind control wave. A self perpetuating machine of evil.

  9. Mike Devx says

    Ymar makes a good point that I keep forgetting.  The (non-US) world-wide market for movies is bigger these days than the US market.  That’s why we get abominations like a recent Superman movie in which they changed his famous quote to become, “Truth, Justice, and…. all that other stuff.”  And why G.I. Joe fights for the U.N. instead of for America.
     
    Many of us view this as insulting and we choose to refuse to see – and pay money for –  such a dishonoring of American tradition.  But not enough of us to affect the bottom line.
     

    • says

      If Hollywood likes taxes so much, let’s see how they like being FORCED to pay a 50% “Value Added Tax” on foreign imports and exports of movie production and filming.
       
      The Left’s power base needs to be broken, like a man’s spine as it crashes on the pavement. Broken. People lack the resolve and intent to do what is necessary, that is all. They must suffer still even more, to obtain that resolve, that right of victory.

  10. says

    It is a mistake to think you can make a movie about any biblical subject anyway.  It is the least cinematic of all books anyway. Who is a dead ringer for Abraham? No way to know. His physical characteristics are utterly unimportant. The same is true for all biblical personages including Pharaoh. It is the ideas and values they represent that is important and movies are simply not a vehicle for showing that. Only a nonbeliever would want to see such a movie or make such a movie.

    • says

      raymondjelli:  You’ve hit upon a wonderful point, which is that we have no idea what they looked like.  I always find it funny when people claim to have seen Jesus’s face in a tortilla or a shadow, when what they’re actually seeing is a pale imitation of a medieval artist’s concept of what Jesus looked like — a white, Northern European male.

      • says

        Hollywood is a den of illusions and disinformation. Even if they could figure out who looked like “whom”, they would intentionally sabotage the visuals in favor of the Left’s esthetics.
         
        Remember the kind of art the Left considers beautiful?

      • says

        I wish that was my own observation but this is not. The first thing in understanding these so called stories is that they are not stories and every word and every letter is fraught with meaning. What is included has depth what is excluded may have meaning but actual physical descriptions have none at all. The Jews are the Chosen People or nation but there is no physical description of the Jew (The anti-Semites always have to painstakingly create one). There is absolutely no accident to that. There may be physical characteristics inherited from Abraham but they are incidental to what Abraham stood for. You could be Abraham’s identical twin but it would be meaningless if you were not the person Abraham was. You can be of the children of Israel (meaning Jacob actually) but that is sharing Jacob’s ideals and teachings. A film by its nature can not give that point. It must be informed by the visual and the visual is the least meaningful thing there is (even blindness is meant as spiritual or moral blindness).

  11. says

    Au contraire, raymondjelli….EVERYONE knows that Pharaoh looked just like Yul Brynner!!
     
    And, in the spirit of Tim (Random Observations), assuming you can stand a bit more…..Genesis 7:2.3 indicate that of the ritually clean animals/birds there were SEVEN pairs to be taken into the Ark….which makes a lot more sense of 8:20 where Noah offers burnt offerings of every clean animal leaving the Ark.  Would have been problematic if he’d only taken in a pair.  I’ve heard it said that he sacrificed from the offspring born during the year at sea, but the actual story makes a bit more sense.

  12. says

    barbtheevilgenius: Good points; I’d noticed that too.  But in Gen 9:3 God speaks as though he’s instituting a change: “Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.” That phrasing implies that God had not previously given permission to eat animals.
    So I see three possibilities: (1) Abel wasn’t eating his flock-animals (but that makes no sense of the “fat” reference, as far as I can tell), (2) Abel was eating his flocks, wrongly, or (3) something’s missing, contradictory, or unclear in translation.
    Nonetheless, it’s not absurd to believe Noah was a vegetarian.  (He’s even called “a man of the soil” in Genesis 9:20.)  Nor would God have been “shocked” by such, having previously given an injunction against meat eating.
     

  13. erisguy says

    Why shouldn’t the modern socialist remake the patriarchs and prophets of God into images of his own perfection?
     
    The West, and what was once called Judeo-Christian civilization is dead. The future is another country.

Trackbacks

Leave a Reply