Gênesis

An interesting attempt at a visual representation (set to Paul Scoffield's narration) of the book of Genesis. For the most part, the opening creation is a montage of unrelated images. Then the film moves to a somewhat abstract portrayal of Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, Tubal Cain, then Noah and his family. Throughout are some quotes from the Psalms, Song of Songs, Isaiah, and I what I am certain are extra-biblical references. One sequence I found very interesting was the use of modern images of war and frenetic city life intertwined with portrayals of ungodly lifestyles in Noah's day to communicate that we are on the verge of God's coming judgment, just as his culture was. Very well done, I thought.

Overall, I give this film a 5/10- I wanted to give it a lot more, but it moves along at too slow a pace, with much of the film work seeming like filler material. This film is a lot less than I expected and I'm not sure I'd have been so quick to buy it ($5 at a garage sale) if I knew what it actually was.

This is a magnificent movie. It clearly achieves the effect that the filmmakers intended.

It's a gorgeous meditation on the biblical story and the religious awe that inspired the book. It's an unusual film—a good thing, because it doesn't really follow any sort of formula. Instead, it builds up interest through the rather straightforward telling of the dawn of man, and it summons that spiritual part of us that can look at the flight of birds, hear the sound of rain, and listen to music, whereby we are transported to a higher realm than the one in which we live.

Many natural phenomena are used in this audio/video symphony. The look of wisdom and dignity on an old man's face and the words he speaks with such controlled mastery blend together and augment the constituent parts of the world as described by him, and causes us not to consider the science behind what's happening, but its grandeur. The scientist Richard Dawkins is a nice man. I like him. But it is at times like this, when I'm immersed in the spiritual rather than the scientific, that I genuinely feel sorry for him. It's wonderful to be able to appreciate the "science and reason" portion of our nature without discarding the spiritual part of it.

We humans are complex animals, and our thoughts and appetites run the gamut from the basest carnality to the most supremely ethereal. The two types of impulses are inherent to most of us—we are born with them: they are what make us fully human. Completely stifling either one seems just as unnatural as letting either run rampant.

That is the remarkable achievement contained within this film: the incredible control and dexterity, the decisions of the director over what to place in the film and what to leave out of it. There is the aspect of a symphony going on here. The images of primitive human conditions that combine in the mind and allows us to make that leap from the ordinary to the extraordinary—the same state of mind that allows us to hear a Beethoven composition and hear the sublimity without considering the natural world particulars of what frequency the notes are played at and the laws of physics behind tonality.

There really isn't a false step in the film. There are no sour notes, and nothing is out of key. Whoever had the ultimate decision-making power of what went into and what didn't make the cut in this film was someone cut from the same cloth as our ancestor who conceived of "In the beginning, the earth was without. . ." If anyone can identify with God it really shouldn't be doctors; instead it's really writers and especially filmmakers, the people who build worlds. Those who let light impose an image on celluloid and out of the darkness of the darkroom come forth a new world, limited only by their imagination and finesse. The Bible does say that we are made in the image of God, and as far as that goes, the director of this movie did a pretty good job of living up to that standard.

The film follows a nomadic family – a very nice one – at the dawn of man. Everyone should have a grandfather who is as good a storyteller as this man. The conditions are primitive but life is good for them, for this is a happy (and believable) family. There isn't much dialog between the characters, a good thing, because the intention of the filmmakers is to make a visual and aural experience; one in which they succeeded at beautifully.

Well, watch the movie yourself. If you understand where the people who made the movie are coming from you can judge the movie's merits based entirely upon that criteria. That's what I've done, and that's why I've given it ten out of ten stars.

For the purposes of enjoying this movie, don't worry about whether or not it's the God's honest truth. It doesn't have to be true. All you need in order to enjoy the film is to do what you do in any movie you watch—suspend your disbelief for the duration of the film. Kick back and enjoy a wonderfully uplifting experience.

A paraphrase of the earliest parts of the Bible from the Creation to the Flood. Filmed in Morocco in 1994 and narrated in a very subtle fashion by the distinguished Paul Scofield (who does not appear on camera), the movie reminded me of a relaxing water fountain in which the sound of bubbling water captivates. It's simple in tone.

I only wish I knew what the woman was singing in the background throughout many of its scenes. The film ends on a note implying God holds mankind accountable for human life.

Hard to fault a film with that message!

The Bible stories of modern times (pretty much since 1970) have tended to be extreme one way or the other.

The trouble is that one extreme tries to make the Bible a depressing bit of racist Nazi propaganda, while the other extreme makes it "Mickey Mouse".

This goes into the Mickey Mouse extreme, but it isn't pretentious about it. It's quite obviously made for kids, and there is no attempt to make it otherwise. That's a bit of a saving grace.

It would have been nice to see a little more accuracy. There were only 8 people in Noah's ark, including Noah, his wife, their sons and their wives. (See 1 Peter 3:20). I did like the authenticity of the landscape and culture, but it was somewhat boring without much emotion from the actors.