• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Noah: a movie review.


Bob Watson

Paranormal Adept
Rikki and I saw Noah today. and I must say it is a waste of your time and money. I don't believe in the biblical story of Noah's ark. the whole is a fairy tale. But this movie goes to great lenths to insult every myth of a global flood. the film opens with a young Noah receving..(.I hope you are sitting down)...the skin of the snake from the garden of eden. So here is the soon to be savior of humanity receving a symol of EVIL???? Later Noah receves (Again I hope you are sitting down..) A SEED FROM THE GARDEN OF EDEN.. that springs into a forest... And I won't touch the whole "watchers" sub plot that must be seen to be beleved.(But I highly recommend you don't see it or the whole movie.)And Noah uses the forest to build the ark...the subplot inoving the king named..(again I hope you are sitting down.)Tubal cain. I kid you not. is flat out stupid!there are so many silly and pointless subplots and silly side stories that I lost track of the main story.oh yes the animals.. they are cramed into the ark and Noah uses a MAGIG INCENSE to put them all to sleep...so much for feeding and caring for them...and oh yes the reason the creator (God is not named EVER) is drowning the world is man has despoiled the planet. that's right God destroys the earth because man destroys the earth.
Folks do your self a favor save your money this flick is NOT worth it.
final rating
1.5/10
 
Folks do your self a favor save your money this flick is NOT worth it.

What I've been reflecting on lately about that movie ( Noah ) is that it's a movie that sensationalizes Judeo Christian mythology, and I wonder: If it had sensationalized some other mythology instead, or perhaps done it in another way, would we be having the same reaction? Are we so programmed to reject it because we are so fed-up with the Bible thumpers that we can no longer suspend our disbelief and enjoy it as entertainment? Most of us who are old enough, I would hazard a guess, didn't have the same problem with Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark. Was that back before we became so cynical? Personally I think that the persistence of the Bible thumpers has definitely had this effect on me. I find myself thinking things like, "Oh great. Just what we need; another big screen dramatization of Biblical hero mythology to whip up the damned religious zealots." On principle alone I already want to boycott it. But is that really fair from a purely cinematic and entertainment perspective? It's an interesting dilemma :confused:.
 
the problem with Noah is that the film just has way to many stupid moment. Raiders told a solid story. "ten comandments" was a spectacle. it is possible to have a good movie based on a religion. the main issue was not the source materal it was the execution.
 
I had a concept for Noah-type movie. A civilization escaping an imminent transition to red giant status (star) on a 90 light year migration journey to planet earth ;)

The title of the movie: The resurrection of Gamma Crucis lol

Gamma Crucis, often called Gacrux, is the nearest red giant star to the Sun. The distance to Gacrux has been determined using parallax measurements made during the Hipparcos mission, which yielded a value of 88.6 light-years away from Earth. Wikipedia

What is cool about this is that the red giant is part of the Southern Cross constellation which is no longer visible in the northern hemisphere since about the time of Jesus Christ.

At least this would have been informative and thought provoking.
images
 
Tell me there is at least one explosion.

I read one review that complained they had sullied Noah and not portrayed him as the godly man of the Biblical story. Strangely enough, the Biblical account has Noah becoming a mean drunk after the flood. Go figure. I wonder if that would have made it in the final cut?
 
Well you cant make a silk purse from a pigs ear

The original story was crap to start with

You can put a ribbon and bow on a turd, it still smells bad

lipstick-on-a-palin-pig1.png
 
Well you cant make a silk purse from a pigs ear

The original story was crap to start with

You can put a ribbon and bow on a turd, it still smells bad

lipstick-on-a-palin-pig1.png


Yeah could not have said it better myself.

The Gilgamesh story would have made more sense.
 
Last edited:
they won't get mentioned, only in xmen films.

Spoilers... with a side of thread derailment

The thing is nameless, I went to see Captain America The Winter Soldier this weekend and it did "introduce" us to both these characters, not by name but the inference was clear. It is my understanding that both characters will have substantial roles in next months X-Men Days of Future Past. Also I think they will be played by different actors than the apparent Avengers version.

p.s. If any of you guys watch Agents of Sheild on tv there IS a tie in between the main plot of Cap Amer. TWS and the recent events on AOS. It's pretty cool synchronization. The antagonist of Cap Amer 2, the aforementioned Winter Soldier is just a figurehead of sorts to the main plot he is just an element of the bigger picture which is about the emergence of a police state that deems itself necessary to protect us from ourselves, o.k. terrorists, but one can see through the subtext. SHEID isn't exactly innocent either and exists for the same reason( at least initially) albeit in a more benign way making for one very disenfranchised Cap Am. The inclusion of the Winter Soldier (from what I gathered) is is in fact another introduction which will be made clearer, probably in Avengers 2. People more famiar with the comic book story line/canonization....I am not one of them, but I am getting caught up...are already clued in as to what will likely happen.

I was clued in by an excited 11 year old bearing a Captain America shield at the screening.
 
Last edited:
Spoilers... with a side of thread derailment

The thing is nameless, I went to see Captain America The Winter Soldier this weekend and it did "introduce" us to both these characters, not by name but the inference was clear. It is my understanding that both characters will have substantial roles in next months X-Men Days of Future Past. Also I think they will be played by different actors than the apparent Avengers version.

p.s. If any of you guys watch Agents of Sheild on tv there IS a tie in between the main plot of Cap Amer. TWS and the recent events on AOS. It's pretty cool synchronization. The antagonist of Cap Amer 2, the aforementioned Winter Soldier is just a figurehead of sorts to the main plot he is just an element of the bigger picture which is about the emergence of a police state that deems itself necessary to protect us from ourselves, o.k. terrorists, but one can see through the subtext. SHEID isn't exactly innocent either and exists for the same reason( at least initially) albeit in a more benign way making for one very disenfranchised Cap Am. The inclusion of the Winter Soldier (from what I gathered) is is in fact another introduction which will be made clearer, probably in Avengers 2. People more famiar with the comic book story line/canonization....I am not one of them, but I am getting caught up...are already clued in as to what will likely happen.

I was clued in by an excited 11 year old bearing a Captain America shield at the screening.
yeah I saw it too. Maybe theres a time release on the Fox thing??

"Mutants just can't get any respect.

Or, in reality, Marvel just can't get their rights back from Fox, meaning that any character first and foremost identified as an X-Man or X-villain won't be appearing on "Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D." anytime soon, as explicitly stated by show-runners Maurissa Tancharoen andJed Whedon in a new interview with The Hollywood Reporter.

"We can't ever say 'mutant,'" revealed Tancharoen. We've known this would be the case ever since Marvel started building their Cinematic Universe while Fox simultaneously began repairing their X-Franchise a few years ago, but the inclusion of mutant Avengers Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch in the upcoming "Avengers: Age of Ultron" might have given fans an ounce of hope that a certain clawed Canadian and his super-powered buds could pop up on the show. But that's not going to happen, and Jed Whedon revealed the creators behind "S.H.I.E.L.D." have a very specific list of characters they're allowed to use.


"There's a database that's tailored to our show with the properties we can use as well as the properties that are owned by other studios and things that are flagged for major franchises," revealed Whedon. "There are certain areas we can't go because we don't want to step on the toes of the movies." As a fan of both Marvel Comics and databases, this particular spreadsheet sounds like my Holy Grail. I am fascinated by it, and I want to see it.

This also reminds me of a memo that Marvel historian Sean Howe found; the memo ranked pretty much every Marvel Comics character in rotation back in 1972 in order of importance, with—surprise, surprise—Quicksilver voted as one of the least important characters.
MarvelMemo020813.jpg


Don't feel bad for Quicksilver, though, because dude's going to be in two movies. One can only imagine what information the "S.H.I.E.L.D." database contains..."

The interview also touched upon a recent rumor that Joss Whedon had been brought on todo rewrites on "S.H.I.E.L.D." at the last minute.

"That is not true," said Tancharoen. "If he has been doing it," continued Jed Whedon, "then he's changed the lines to what they were before."
 
Its funny you post this in that as I was walking to work this morning it occured to me that in the comics both QS and the SW are Magneto's children. The organization HYDRA has it's genesis in Nazi Germany and in the Xmen saga Erik/Max spent some time in concentration camps. being that there is a bit of a connection i thought there would be a meeting of the two somewhere and hence a possible appearance by Magneto on AOS despite the fact that there are different franchises and studios involved. Wishful Thinking.
 
Given the choice tonight to watch either Noah or Attack of the Killer Tomatoes...

I went with Attack of the Killer Tomatoes! because at least I know tomatoes actually exist and the plot seems more plausible.
 
Given the choice tonight to watch either Noah or Attack of the Killer Tomatoes...

I went with Attack of the Killer Tomatoes! because at least I know tomatoes actually exist and the plot seems more plausible.

I take that back after trying to watch killer tomatoes I then watched Noah.

Both are just as unwatchable.
 
Back
Top