Check Out The Most Talked-About Scene From Noah

[MovieBob]

Check Out The Most Talked-About Scene From Noah

Controversial feature's highly-praised "creation" sequence can now be viewed online

Darren Aronofsky's controversial Biblical epic Noah polarized audiences and critics almost two months ago with a unique reinterpretation of the Old Testament story that combined apocryphal scripture and high-fantasy elements of the director's own creation. But at least one aspect met with near-universal praise: The "Creation" sequence. Now, Protozoa Pictures (Aronofsky's production company) has made the sequence available online [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwSWRdbSQK0] for anyone who missed the movie (or just wanted to see it again.)

The film stirred controversy from before it was even finished shooting, largely due to the Noah's Ark story being a fixture of the ongoing debates between some religious denominations and scientists over the teaching of Creationism versus Evolution in schools. Along with other more fantastical elements of the film, scenes that would've revealed what version of paleohistory would be shown in Noah were largely absent from trailers; and the scene itself doesn't occur until well into the film when Noah (Russell Crowe), his family and the animals are already inside The Ark.

Running about three and a half minutes, "Creation" unfolds as time-lapse CGI animation sequence that plays out a (mostly) scientifically-accurate version of The Big Bang, the formation of Earth and evolution of life from single-celled organisms to early sea creatures to all variety of Earthly animals as Crowe's Noah recites a version of the Biblical "seven days" creation story - implying that one is metaphor for the other. Adam & Eve, The Serpent and Eden appear only at the end, looking more surreal and alien than almost anything else in the film.

Noah is still playing in some theaters. A DVD/Blu-ray release date has not yet been announced.


Source: Protozoa Pictures [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwSWRdbSQK0]

Permalink

 

[Casual Shinji]

If Noah is telling a story of old, why do we see dudes in riot gear among those silhouettes (or dudes in Spanish armor for that matter)? I know it's supposed to show how we'll aways be at war with one another (duh), but it doesn't make any sense in the context of the story he's telling his family. What, can he look into the future?

Anyway, not bad, apart from the silly glowing Adam and Eve and the cartoony looking snake. The Tree of Life sequence still blows it out of the water though.

 

[Rellik San]

If Noah is telling a story of old, why do we see dudes in riot gear among those silhouettes (or dudes in Spanish armor for that matter)? I know it's supposed to show how we'll aways be at war with one another (duh), but it doesn't make any sense in the context of the story he's telling his family. What, can he look into the future?

Anyway, not bad, apart from the silly glowing Adam and Eve and the cartoony looking snake. The Tree of Life sequence still blows it out of the water though.

Well I'm pretty sure being given prophetic visions is how he had the foresight to build the ark... so in a manner of speaking, yeah, he can look into the future (duh).

As for glowing Adam and Eve, what do you think ageless immortal god children look like? Failing that what a better way to show a fall from grace, than with the "holy" glow fading and becoming human.

 

[Casual Shinji]

As for glowing Adam and Eve, what do you think ageless immortal god children look like? Failing that what a better way to show a fall from grace, than with the "holy" glow fading and becoming human.

It just stuck out like a sore thumb. First we get this grand, realistic depiction of the creation of the universe, the Earth, and the evolution of life and mankind... and suddenly we get cartoony, glowy people. Just didn't mesh very well.

 

[Genocidicles]

If Noah is telling a story of old, why do we see dudes in riot gear among those silhouettes (or dudes in Spanish armor for that matter)? I know it's supposed to show how we'll aways be at war with one another (duh), but it doesn't make any sense in the context of the story he's telling his family. What, can he look into the future?

I think a valid interpretation of this film is that it's set in the future after a human made apocalypse.

Emma Watson said:

I think what Darren?s [Aronofsky] going for is a sense that it could be set in any time. It could be set sort of like a thousand years in the future or a thousand years in the past. [...] You shouldn?t be able to place it too much.

 

[Rellik San]

As for glowing Adam and Eve, what do you think ageless immortal god children look like? Failing that what a better way to show a fall from grace, than with the "holy" glow fading and becoming human.

It just stuck out like a sore thumb. First we get this grand, realistic depiction of the creation of the universe, the Earth, and the evolution of life and mankind... and suddenly we get cartoony, glowy people. Just didn't mesh very well.

Don't get me wrong, I see you're point I'm just curious how else you would show divinity and damnation in a secular manner. Which is what was attempted here.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Don't get me wrong, I see you're point I'm just curious how else you would show divinity and damnation in a secular manner. Which is what was attempted here.

I haven't seen this movie, so maybe it makes sense latter on or in hindsight, but it might've been better had Noah told them as two seperate tales; One a realitic depiction of the course of the universe, and the other a more surreal one about Adam and Eve that's more allegorical.

 

[Rellik San]

Don't get me wrong, I see you're point I'm just curious how else you would show divinity and damnation in a secular manner. Which is what was attempted here.

I haven't seen this movie, so maybe it makes sense latter on or in hindsight, but it might've been better had Noah told them as two seperate tales; One a realitic depiction of the course of the universe, and the other a more surreal one about Adam and Eve that's more allegorical.

But then breaking them up would have missed the point of him effectively surmising genesis, which to be honest in the movie, is about the only overt thing from the bible (other than loose setting and basic story) within the film. As I said I agree it's handled in a slightly goofy fashion, but there isn't really much in the way of a guide in making a secular biblical epic.

Gonna have to concur that this doesn't even touch the sequence in 'Tree of Life.' Say what you will about that film, but that sequence was gorgeous.

You know I've always said of the Tree of Life it was the most beautiful film to ever send me to sleep. Don't get me wrong, I like slow movies, hell Enemy Mine is one of my favourite sci-fi movies, but Tree of Life... well if Enemy Mine is slow, Tree of Life glacial in it's pacing. I guess the problem here is, a lot of people viewed Tree of Life as a shallow experience (myself included) so when a scene is presented better as part of an intrinsic whole (and a fine bookend between the 2 distinct segments) I guess I feel more inclined to defend it. But that is just me and my opinion.

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

Cool sequence.

I like how it takes the relatively serious approach of the Bible, and makes Adam & Eve look like some sort of precursors(a la "Aliens!" guy). Gives it a nice fantastical quality to it.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

As for glowing Adam and Eve, what do you think ageless immortal god children look like? Failing that what a better way to show a fall from grace, than with the "holy" glow fading and becoming human.

It just stuck out like a sore thumb. First we get this grand, realistic depiction of the creation of the universe, the Earth, and the evolution of life and mankind... and suddenly we get cartoony, glowy people. Just didn't mesh very well.

You mentioned realistic.

Have you seen the movie? Because there's giant rock monsters and Anthony Hopkins kills things with a magic flaming broadsword.

OT:
Awesome sequence. Glad it's up. Definitely one of the highlights.

 

[rosac]

Have you seen the movie? Because there's giant rock monsters and Anthony Hopkins kills things with a magic flaming broadsword.

This sounds eerily familiar... Odin were art thou?

 

[Symbio Joe]

Simpsons did it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R795KiMD4zs
The timelapse works pretty well with this track, the garden of Eden not so much. Give it a try .

 

[The Wooster]

I admit, I totally expected him to break out a refreshing pint of Guinness at the end.

<youtube=1t4sdgvy-pk>

 

[pearcinator]

My favourite scene of the movie.

People will be angry at both ends of the 'religion' spectrum (the devout religious and the completely atheist) but I think it does a great job at combining evolution with the creation story of the bible. I think it shows how they can work together in a least-offensive way as possible.

 

[Skeleon]

Even beautiful CGI and a widely metaphorical application of Genesis as well as overlooking the most obvious flaws in the sequence of creation cannot save what might otherwise be inspiring poetry from being anti-human in its core message. Do I appreciate Theistic Evolution over Young Earth Creationism? Of course. Any day of the week. But I'm still not a fan.

 

[josemlopes]

Like Casual Shinji, Adam and Eve come out of nowhere looking rather weird, to me mostly because the first part looked like something out of Cosmos, maybe if it had a sequence in between that merged both themes better it would have looked nicer.

Still looks great and the dudes of the future didnt bother me as he doesnt need to know what the future looks like to know that war will still exist, the riot gear was just a visual representation of the wars going on right now.

 

[Vareoth]

One would think that everyone can understand that if God is real and truly omnipotent then a single day as we know it is nothing but the blink of an eye to him. It would sound a bit more believable then to think the entire planet was created in 168 hours. To say God would be constrained by time goes completely against his supposed omnipotence.

It's a very nice scene nonetheless. Perhaps I should give the movie a try.

 

[Davroth]

This movie was /horrible/. Beyond believe. I very very rarely regret paying to see a movie in theatres. But... I wanted to walk out several times, and only morbid curiosity kept me in my seat.

 

[Something Amyss]

I see why creationists are piiiiiiiissed.

Still, it's a beautiful sequence. I'd love to see it in higher quality.

If Noah is telling a story of old, why do we see dudes in riot gear among those silhouettes (or dudes in Spanish armor for that matter)?

The sequence onscreen doesn't match up with his words to begin with. I'm not sure throwing in revolutionary soldiers (also pictured) is really problematic.

As for glowing Adam and Eve, what do you think ageless immortal god children look like? Failing that what a better way to show a fall from grace, than with the "holy" glow fading and becoming human.

Gotta agree with Shinji. It looked almost comical in the midst of all this other beautiful, wonderful imagery. It'd be like showing the Xenomorph Queen in the middle of Citizen Kane. Maybe the rest of the movie has other fantastic sequences as people are saying, but within the context of this scene? Uggggh. Or, more appropriately, uggggly.

I think a valid interpretation of this film is that it's set in the future after a human made apocalypse.

Emma Watson said:

I think what Darren?s [Aronofsky] going for is a sense that it could be set in any time. It could be set sort of like a thousand years in the future or a thousand years in the past. [...] You shouldn?t be able to place it too much.

I think that would work better if Noah wasn't specifically talking about the ten generations since Adam.

My favourite scene of the movie.

People will be angry at both ends of the 'religion' spectrum (the devout religious and the completely atheist)

Really? I've heard mostly praise for the movie from atheists. I mean, not saying that suddenly they believe in the Ark story, but scoffing at the source material doesn't equal anger. I mean, what would you expect in a Biblical movie but a retelling of Bible stories?

One would think that everyone can understand that if God is real and truly omnipotent then a single day as we know it is nothing but the blink of an eye to him. It would sound a bit more believable then to think the entire planet was created in 168 hours. To say God would be constrained by time goes completely against his supposed omnipotence.

It's a very nice scene nonetheless. Perhaps I should give the movie a try.

How does it follow that God was constrained by time?