एकेडमी पुरस्कार विजेता रसल क्रो साहस, बलिदान और आशा की कालातीत कहानी से प्रेरित इस फिल्म में नोहा की भूमिका में है. एमा वॉटसन और एकेडमी पुरस्कार विजेता एंथनी हॉकिंस और जेनिफर कॉनोली द्वारा भ... सभी पढ़ेंएकेडमी पुरस्कार विजेता रसल क्रो साहस, बलिदान और आशा की कालातीत कहानी से प्रेरित इस फिल्म में नोहा की भूमिका में है. एमा वॉटसन और एकेडमी पुरस्कार विजेता एंथनी हॉकिंस और जेनिफर कॉनोली द्वारा भी अभिनीत, यह दृष्टिगत रूप से शानदार, एक्शन से भरपूर साहसिक फिल्म प्रशंसित दूरदर्शी फिल्म न... सभी पढ़ेंएकेडमी पुरस्कार विजेता रसल क्रो साहस, बलिदान और आशा की कालातीत कहानी से प्रेरित इस फिल्म में नोहा की भूमिका में है. एमा वॉटसन और एकेडमी पुरस्कार विजेता एंथनी हॉकिंस और जेनिफर कॉनोली द्वारा भी अभिनीत, यह दृष्टिगत रूप से शानदार, एक्शन से भरपूर साहसिक फिल्म प्रशंसित दूरदर्शी फिल्म निर्माता डैरेन एरनोफ्स्की (ब्लैक स्वान) द्वारा निर्देशित है.
- निर्देशक
- लेखक
- स्टार
- पुरस्कार
- 1 जीत और कुल 19 नामांकन
- Samyaza
- (वॉइस)
- Magog
- (वॉइस)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
Some of the scenery and shots featuring animals were really cool, I found myself wishing for more (that is, more time spent on animals...and a closer look at different species as imagined by the creators of this film).
Ray Winstone is a distinguished actor but I found his portrayal at times creepy, at times laughable, overall weak (how much of this was due to direction and/or other factors...not sure, when it comes to this film I didn't get a sense either way). Emma Watson and Jennifer Connelly impressed me, I got a sense of quiet strength from their characters.
Russell Crowe, also one of my favorite actors (I thought his Robin Hood was masterful, a fresh new take), disappointed. Without giving anything away, there were some parts of this film that called for a more dramatic narrative...his timing and (at times) rushed speech took away from the grandeur of what was meant to be an epic film. You find yourself wishing he would deliver certain lines a bit more theatrically, like David Wenham in 300 or one of the greats of classic film (Charlton Heston, perhaps).
I didn't realize when I started watching that Anthony Hopkins was also in the film. When he popped up on screen I laughed and thought: 'Of course...can't make an epic film without Anthony Hopkins!' Probably just me but it seemed a bit tired as far as casting goes.
I might have enjoyed it more on the big screen but don't regret watching at home on my TV. Bottom line, entertaining enough to watch...just a bit of a let-down.
Russell Crowe makes a fine Noah. He is relentless in his quest to fulfill The Creator's request ... and he flashes his "Gladiator" glare on a few occasions. Rather than an uplifting childhood bedtime story, this Noah carries the burden of God, his own family and the survival of all beings ... his days are filled with moral dilemmas much larger than what you and I go through.
With all the miscommunication afforded by email and text these days, imagine if God conversed with you through images in your dreams. Maybe that process creates some areas of gray? Not if you are Noah. I guess he only dreams when God wants to show him something, so his decision making and mission is pretty focused. He is to build a giant floating warehouse to save two of every creature. Yes, that means a lot of death for those not invited. See, God is using Noah and his family to help cleanse the earth of mankind ... God is ready for a re-boot. He is really not happy with how mean and nasty man has become ever since that whole apple debacle and the murder of Abel by Cain.
Some of the visual effects are spectacular. I especially enjoyed the high-speed montage showing the creation of life ... you know that first week. Also, the beginning of the flood is quite a spectacle, but the ark itself is actually quite stunning ... constructed per the size noted in the Bible. The animals are all digitally created and we actually see little of them, though the on-boarding process goes remarkably smooth - considering this happens before the herbal sleep concoction is disbursed.
Most of the discussion will probably be on The Watchers ... the fallen angels who once tried to help mankind, and for their efforts, God turned them into giant stone creatures. I will add that The Watchers need a new nickname since they did the bulk of the manual labor in constructing the arc and then protecting it ... not much watching going on for these poor guys (voiced by Nick Nolte and Frank Langella, among others).
Noah's wife is played by Jennifer Connelly and their sons are played by Logan Lerman, Douglas Booth and Leo McHugh Carroll. They welcome Emma Watson into their family in what turns into a very odd plot twist, and the villain, Tubal-Cain is payed by Ray Winstone. Methuselah, Noah's grandfather, is played to the hilt by Anthony Hopkins. All of these characters are pretty one dimensional, but this is Noah's story. The burden he carries is quite heavy and his decisions aren't always popular.
If you are looking for the well documented story of Noah, it's no mystery what book you should be reading. If you are after a pretty impressive visual interpretation, you could certainly do worse than Aronofsky's take. And the best news ... no Morgan Freeman voice-over!
The bad news is that we've got Peter Jackson meets Peter Watkins meets Professor James Lovelock . NOAH is a heavily religious film as you might expect but not in the way you're expecting . From the outset we're told that the tribe of Cain have built " industrial cities " and it's this that has brought " the wrath of the creator " . It's not the religion of the Abrahamic cult but the cult of environmentalism and Gaia theory . The subtext is so obvious that it doesn't qualify as subtext because it's far too blatant . Noah and his family are all vegetarians who don't eat meat while the villain Tubal-Cain does because .... well he's the bad guy . Actually this is the major failing of the film . There's no one to root for because the screenplay is an absolute mess . Tubal Cain shows signs of Darwinian practicalities by eating animals in order to survive but there's no real in depth psychological analysis to the character . He wants the Ark because the story needs a villain and is so overdone you're surprised why the other characters can't see through him . . Noah isn't any better because he's an animal loving psychotic misanthrope . Can you think of any obvious society full of nature loving animal loving psychotic misanthropes ? I'll give you a clue . It was a Central European country built on Neo-Pagan ideals that used an ancient Sanskrit symbol and lasted from 1933 to 1945 . People should stop to consider who they should adopt as role models and when people treat environmentalism as a religion bad things will surely happen but we're ordered to take the side of environmentalism and not to question it
In the hands of a lesser director NOAH would have sunk at the box office but thankfully we are talking about Aronofsky . And the good news he's reigned in some the excesses that made me hate THE FOUNTAIN . Yes it owes a lot to Peter Jackson but Aronofsky recognises the strengths of Jackson when he made the LOTR trilogy . We see beautiful locations that captures the bleak brutal beauty of nature throughout the film and some of the cinematography is genuinely stunning . The cast are rather uneven which is hardly surprising considering the screenplay and an audience will find their performances divisive , none more so in Crowe . Connelly is rather bland , Winstone is rather one note and is ...well Ray Winstone .love him or loathe him . By far the best performance is by ,Emma Watson as Ila who might have been a mere cypher or plot device and yet manages to flesh out her role without being showy in any way .
In summary NOAH might just fall in to a" flawed masterpiece /interesting failure " camp . It's an extraordinarily beautiful looking film that I'll buy on DVD and one hopes it'll be up for Best Director , cinematography and score when the Oscars come around but since it's been released in the Spring the studio don't seem to have much ( Pardon the pun ) faith in it and it'll be quickly forgotten . While the visuals deliver it does have a very sententious , sombre confusing screenplay that feels the need to both shout at and talk down to the audience . Whatever the flaws of this film it still showcases the talents of Aronofsky and here's to the future and whatever it brings
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाAccording to writer, producer, and director Darren Aronofsky, the animals seen in this movie are "slightly tweaked designs of real existing animals." No real animals were used in the production at all.
- गूफ़All the animals are sedated and are all seen lying down. An elephant normally only sleeps for about four hours a day. If an elephant were to lie on its side for more than a day (for example) the weight of its internal organs would cause them to rupture and fail.
- भाव
Tubal-cain: I have men at my back, and you stand alone and defy me?
Noah: I'm not alone.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटBesides the title of the movie, there are no opening credits
- कनेक्शनEdited into Doom and Salvation (2022)
टॉप पसंद
विवरण
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $12,50,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $10,12,00,044
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $4,37,20,472
- 30 मार्च 2014
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $35,92,00,044
- चलने की अवधि2 घंटे 18 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.85 : 1