Noah Movie - Movie Review
My Movie Review of Noah 2014
Following is my updated Noah movie review, originally posted in 2014
Like many of you, for as long as I have been watching biblically based movies with a sharp eye for historical detail, verses accepted dogmas or Hollywood fiction. I have personally not yet found one of these movies to hover even slightly close to what I know our Hebrew culture and language to be on these topics. That is not until I saw the new Noah movie.
Each time I have seen the advertisement of yet another Torah based movie, I have to admit I find myself a little excited and hopeful that maybe, just maybe this time someone got it more correct, only to be totally let down right up front within the first scenes, but not this time! I was shocked, excited and yes, dare I say it, vindicated!
Vindicated by Hollywood? Say-it-ain't-so! Believe me, no one was as shocked as I remain twenty-four hours after watching this movie, even compelled to write my first ever movie review after watching it again to make sure I wasn’t seeing things. This movie is a must see, and you must watch it very closely, paying attention and bearing in mind all that I have written concerning Noah and the Eternal’s 1st law of the Everlasting Agreement which was renewed after the flood with Noah.
For those of you who have not read my first book, "The Land of MEAT & Honey", or understand the details about the Everlasting Agreement, I will hit on the main points of that agreement as they were factually presented in context, and in character within this new movie. I will also say that there are many other related details which can go missed in this movie, and several ideas which I believe come from remnants of more ancient understandings of events woven together which most people won’t identify as original understanding, but should be considered.
The first scenes begin with the young Noah and his father Lemech foraging for edible plant life on a nearly dead and barren landscape. First thing I expected to see out of Hollywood was everyone wearing animal skins for clothing, but I immediately noticed none of that on the young Noah or Lemech, interesting I thought. The second oddity I noticed and didn't expect to see, was when the young Noah began to pick some small flowers, but Lemech stopped him, saying that the flower should remain alive in the ground for good reason and that they never take more than they need…WOW! So, by this I thought, well, it’s depicting that they eat vegetation as all Western bible translations depict to be “part” of their food source, but expected subsequent scenes to show them also harvesting animals for their other dietary needs. I was immediately proven wrong! Another later scene is somewhat like the first where Noah reminds his sons about killing the flowers. Then, a wounded animal runs by them, and Noah makes an immediate chase, I thought for sure this was it, free meat!
Surprised and amazed I was wrong again! Noah, catching up to the animal who could run no longer, laying down to die, Noah kneels before the wounded creature, only to comfort the creature as it died, while his son looks on in disbelief, cannot process why anyone would kill an animal! Subtle, but more proof that this story-line is pulling the weight of original, 1st law truth. No sooner does the animal die than three animal skin-clad men show up laying claim to their kill. Strangely, one man comments on how they haven’t seen any animals for a very long time. To me this said, the masses of Canaanites had nearly decimated all life on the planet by then. I won’t go into additional detail on this opening scene, only to say that so far in this movie I can ascertain that Lemech and Noah’s family kept a Vegan diet as prescribed in early Genesis as the only purely righteous lifestyle for mankind. The movie seemed to go out of its way to depict them having respect for even the smallest life, even the plant life that they were given, and allowed to harvest, and for good reason, as I watched in later scenes. THIS is the basis of the Everlasting Agreement that existed at the beginning, broken, nearly eliminated and surely hidden by the Canaanites through time, and soon thereafter reestablished by the Eternal One through Noah! It is the same Everlasting Agreement almost all men have broken again since, and continue breaking today. "As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be...."
At this point, and so early on in yet another big-dollar Hollywood movie I remain guarded, but getting excited, has someone finally found the truth and somehow got it past all the hurdles of the Hollywood politico in such a big production?
As the movie progresses quickly from Lemech and son Noah to Noah as a grown man with his own young family, as our long forgotten Everlasting Agreement remains evident and more obvious among the Noah family characters. Another great scene which appears to go out of its way to depict these ancient facts of truth is when Noah’s older son and Noah catch up to his wife and younger son. The older son, still visibly bothered by what he saw men doing to the animal, told his younger brother. That younger child was immediately shocked and dismayed at what the brother told him about the men killing animals and he asked Noah why would anyone do that. Noah’s answer was – “Because they believe it makes them stronger.” That whole scene proves to the onlooker that those children both, never even heard of such a thing in their lives to that point, and proved that this family absolutely did not partake in the murder of any sentient being, much less the consumption of flesh. As I said, this scene went out of its way to very aptly depict this, and the child acting was excellent.
In glaring opposition to the Everlasting Agreement being obeyed within the Noah family characters in this movie, we have all the rest of the Canaanite characters who make Mad Max look like Ozzie and Harriet. If you pay close attention as the movie progresses within the Canaanite scenes, you will see that the writers made a point to show the Canaanites tormenting animals, chopping them up while alive and eating them raw, all alongside the myriad of other evil human proclivities taking place among their rancid ranks. Those scene’s which in my opinion should have been more extensive, also clearly depicted those who ate the animals as being demon possessed. Again, the writer-director was deftly depicting the Canaanite lifestyle as being the antithesis of the Creator’s original, 1st law. Although and unfortunately, for the masses who still do not know that this 1st law exists, all of these nuances are lost on them entirely.
Flashback to the garden scenes: Souls-of-Light
Another related and very interesting part of this movie is the flashback scenes to the original Garden within Eden, complete with the ever-present snake representation of course, but more importantly was the most interesting apple representation.
Watch closely because this was Not an apple! It was, however, an outstanding representation of a living, beating heart – a life - and not merely some fruit. I tend to believe that the writer/director, knowing the truth of the garden story and the details of their fall to have been related to the killing and eating of some of the protected animals there, and not merely some dubious tree or fruit thereof, again provided the movie the essence of the original truth, without departing from the accepted dogma on this topic. Which of course would have been a bridge too far for their intended Christian audience.
This, along with the many other more truthful depictions of the oldest and long-hidden biblical truths proves to me that the writer of this movie is well versed in the most ancient truths on these topics.
Using an unauthorized bible version of the story, we have a very interesting part towards the end when the flood comes. I won’t give away details, but it does lend an answer to how the spirit of the original Cain made it to the far side of the flood and lived on to this very day. Suffices to say, and as this movie very clearly wanted us to see, that the son Ham was tainted by the consumption of animal meat just prior to leaving the Ark. This evil fuel of animal flesh was the contamination required to push Ham’s growing sexual lust too far, which later, through an incident with his own mother, caused Ham to be cursed. Although I have taught on that specific topic for over 30 years, few, if any Christian, Jewish or Muslim religionists have a clue as to why Ham was cursed to such a degree. This movie, like all others, of course, was forced to skirt that issue of exactly what occurred with Ham that got him and his descendants cursed.
Unlike the Hebrew texts or English translations of this story, the movie more correctly shows us that Ham did not have a woman of his own. And, as many boys might be in that situation, Ham was adversely affected by the idea and reality of never having the opportunity.
“Ham saw his fathers nakedness”… Which makes no sense to any of you if you don’t understand the ancient culture. In short, this ancient understanding is referring NOT to the man, but to his wife. Seeing Noah’s nakedness means that Ham either attempted or did have sexual relations with his mother. Now THAT is a reason to be cursed and cast out!
Those paying attention to the Biblical narrative of Genesis should have picked up on the fact that the texts clearly show that Cain feared the “people” who were living outside of the Garden. But the religious dogma has taught people that only the Adamic lineage lived on the earth in those days, and no one else. In like fashion, if by the truer narrative evidence as previously explained, and showing that Ham had no wife, this would either mean or prove one of two things; that either Ham died eventually with no Heir, or his lineage did continue through a female or many female survivors of the flood. But one of those has to be the truth, unlike the narratives the world has been provided thus far. Either way, we all know that the world became repopulated. So the question is, did Ham’s seed survive to help populate?
This movie, however, smartly did not venture into this area, sticking with the most basic and tainted narrative of Ham – “Seeing his father’s nakedness”… And leaving it at that. Which was for sure the safer bet given the audience.
Additionally, I liked the way they used the words of Enoch for most of this movie, this again to my knowledge has never been done in such a large cinema production.
I also liked the way they depicted the watchers, as far higher dimension beings who rebelled against the Eternal One out of love and not hate for humanity as later superstition teaches it. Like most of the truths that I identified in this movie which they depicted very subtly, I liked how the singular truth of “Teshuvah = Return” was also depicted in the Watchers as they were conquered one by one while defending the Ark and family. In an earlier scene, they depicted other Watcher’s dying in battle fighting alongside Noah’s Grandfather Methuselah many hundreds of years prior, but who obviously at that time did not yet humble themselves and cry out to the Eternal One with the same contrite heart for their rebellion. They were not depicted as being returned to the Eternal upon their deaths, as these later Watchers were returned to the Eternal One while defending the ark. Evidently, by that time, in their hearts, they had admitted their error and the “Creator” brought them home, and the movie cleverly depicted this; Although I bet few within the masses of religion had a clue what these scenes were showing them, and truthfully for the very first time within the media of film.
I did find it odd and interesting how they depicted Noah’s understanding, or misunderstanding of the Eternal Creator’s flood plan, just as it is easy for any of us to do when trying to discern His still, small voice. Even so, the idea that Noah and his family were not supposed to survive past their own lives after off-loading the animals, and that only the animals were supposed to survive and thrive thereafter, is an interesting point of view. But again, even in this view, you will see the law of the Everlasting Agreement upheld by Noah, as Noah chose “love and life” over death, even though by doing so he believed he was rebelling directly against the Eternal's plan.
As I said on the outset, there are a few areas of the story that diverge from the traditional Western religion storyline, but they are in my opinion worth considering, and they in no way over-fictionalize the story.
This Bible-based movie does, in fact, break away from the accepted mold of man-made biblical history for sure, and amazingly depicts original truths of the Eternal’s most important tenet for all life – The 1st law of the Everlasting Agreement - as it should be depicted truthfully. Unfortunately, the masses of religious folk who gravitate to this type of movie will completely miss these original truths as anything more than Hollywood getting their beloved religious dogma incorrect. I expect the entire Christian world to slam this movie down for alleged biblical inaccuracies, and all Jews to just ignore it completely as always.
I will, however, suggest that everyone watch it twice.
©2014
DISCLAIMER: If you have received a website page link or other transmitted data found on this website in any form, written or recorded in any format; or, if you have consented to be on this website to listen, to read or participate by asking questions concerning the beliefs and opinions expressed herein; UNDERSTAND, nothing herein is a solicitation of investment nor an offer to sell and/or buy anything. The information presented is not in any way considered or intended to be a solicitation of funds, solicitation for a cult, or to provide medical or nutritional advice or direction of any kind, and is intended only as general and common knowledge. Any information or opinions distributed by any means is not meant to harass, hurt or demean anyone's beliefs or ideas on any subject. Upon the hearing, reading, the collection of, or from the receipt of any and all data, beliefs or opinion as expressed herein, electronic or otherwise, you, as the Recipients, hereby acknowledge this warning and disclaimer. If the acknowledgment is not accepted, Participants and or Recipients must leave this website, and or return the electronically received document copies, or other formatted data in their original receipted condition, to Sender via e-mail services immediately.
NOTICE: This website's information, whether it was found here or forwarded to you from another party, (including any emails, documents, files, attachments, etc.), is covered by the Fair Use Laws and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521. In addition, the information contained herein is intended for specific individual (s) who have chosen and consented to be here and therefore is protected from disclosure under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. If the information or opinions on this site have been sent to you, and you are not the original or intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, storing, or distribution of this data or message and/or attachments, or the taking of any action based on it, is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this data or transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply email and delete the original transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner.
COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER:
Disclaimer of liability
Under TITLE 17 U.S Code-512
To the extent not prohibited by law, in no circumstances shall OAT be liable to you or any other third parties for any loss or damage (including, without limitation, damage for loss of business or loss of profits) arising directly or indirectly from your use of or inability to use, this site or any of the material contained in it to include any pictures, renderings or video content. OAT is not responsible for the copyright status of any pictures, renderings or videos used on this website or blog articles and their content writers, etc.
Blogs. Browse our blog articles but be aware that the opinions expressed by the bloggers and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not reflect the opinions of OAT. OAT is not responsible for the accuracy of any of the information supplied by bloggers or in relation to any comments that are posted, pictures, renderings or video content in them. You should bear in mind that circumstances change and that information that may have been accurate at the time of posting will not necessarily remain so. READ FULL DISCLAIMER HERE:
