Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Hollywood Reporter)   Director of the movie "Noah" and Paramount Pictures disagree over the final cut of the film. Both desperately try to keep movie from ending up under water   (hollywoodreporter.com ) divider line
    More: Followup, Darren Aronofsky, Paramount Pictures, test screening, Rob Moore, Industrial Light & Magic, Chronicles of Narnia, Requiem for a Dream, New Regency  
•       •       •

764 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 18 Oct 2013 at 8:51 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



34 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-10-18 05:40:34 AM  
I can understand it - after all, who did sink that second ark with the dinosaurs on board?
 
2013-10-18 06:11:44 AM  

colinspooky: I can understand it - after all, who did sink that second ark with the dinosaurs on board?


i1189.photobucket.com

/it is actually
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-10-18 08:27:11 AM  

colinspooky: I can understand it - after all, who did sink that second ark with the dinosaurs on board?


It was Obama.  He had a privately owned Canadian company sink them with socialist health care.
 
2013-10-18 08:40:24 AM  
Among his conclusions is that Noah will be "an uninteresting and unbiblical waste of a hundred and fifty million dollars that will ruin for decades the possibility of making a really great and entertaining movie of this Bible hero."

We've managed to survive as a society for this long without one. I'm sure the loss will go unnoticed.
 
2013-10-18 08:45:37 AM  
Well, Evan Almighty didn't sink this one.
 
2013-10-18 08:54:40 AM  
It's not news, it's repeat.com.
 
2013-10-18 08:57:34 AM  

Leader O'Cola: It's not news, it's repeat.com.


Actually more of a follow-up.
 
2013-10-18 09:23:57 AM  
Why in the hell did Aronofsky even take on this project?  The story of the floods is one of the most unrealistic fables in the Bible.  I figured Aronofsky was smarter than that.

But, then again, he made Requiem for a Dream.  Talk about unrealistic endings.
 
2013-10-18 09:26:26 AM  

blue_2501: Why in the hell did Aronofsky even take on this project?  The story of the floods is one of the most unrealistic fables in the Bible.  I figured Aronofsky was smarter than that.

But, then again, he made Requiem for a Dream.  Talk about unrealistic endings.


Part of Paramount's problem is that he's setting the movie in New Orleans on the eve of Hurricane Katrnia. Noah is a dog, who buddies up with a cat and they surf to safety.
 
2013-10-18 09:32:54 AM  
Go with Aronofsky's cut, you farks. He is a master filmmaker while you're just a bunch of suits who understand nothing but money. Your opinion on the work should not even be entertained.
 
2013-10-18 09:33:04 AM  

sprawl15: blue_2501: Why in the hell did Aronofsky even take on this project?  The story of the floods is one of the most unrealistic fables in the Bible.  I figured Aronofsky was smarter than that.

But, then again, he made Requiem for a Dream.  Talk about unrealistic endings.

Part of Paramount's problem is that he's setting the movie in New Orleans on the eve of Hurricane Katrnia. Noah is a dog, who buddies up with a cat and they surf to safety.


Lol'd, would do so again.
 
2013-10-18 09:36:06 AM  

blue_2501: Why in the hell did Aronofsky even take on this project?  The story of the floods is one of the most unrealistic fables in the Bible.  I figured Aronofsky was smarter than that.


Yeah, he had a pretty good thing going and to me it feels like he's wasted years of his career on what is a really silly story. And what were the chances the studio would allow him to put any controversial twist on it when the biggest audience is likely to be church-going types? Plus all CGI animals? That always looks like crap.
 
2013-10-18 09:38:30 AM  
what's a cubit?
 
2013-10-18 09:39:22 AM  

exparrot: what's a cubit?


RIGHT!
 
2013-10-18 09:42:22 AM  
It was full of telephone sanitizers.
 
2013-10-18 09:54:28 AM  

kronicfeld: Among his conclusions is that Noah will be "an uninteresting and unbiblical waste of a hundred and fifty million dollars that will ruin for decades the possibility of making a really great and entertaining movie of this Bible hero."

We've managed to survive as a society for this long without one. I'm sure the loss will go unnoticed.


Actually, using the last poll, about 60% of Americans identify as being Christian in some form. So if you have a good Biblical movie, you can make a ton of money. The Passion made a good portion in the box office after all. But I think Hollywood should of made a movie about King David and all the battles he was in. A Biblical Action movie, how can you go wrong.

And there have been several Biblical stories in many forms of media over the past 20 years. Prince of Egypt was also a success at the theaters. Jesus Christ Super Star and Joseph and the Technicolored Dream Coat were good stage productions. Heck, even The Ten Commandments was well received back when it was made. There is a market but in today's age, you need to tap it on a smart level and not just make a movie for the sake of making it and hope it does well, looking at you all those dumb action movies... Transformers.
 
2013-10-18 10:02:44 AM  

yves0010: kronicfeld: Among his conclusions is that Noah will be "an uninteresting and unbiblical waste of a hundred and fifty million dollars that will ruin for decades the possibility of making a really great and entertaining movie of this Bible hero."

We've managed to survive as a society for this long without one. I'm sure the loss will go unnoticed.

Actually, using the last poll, about 60% of Americans identify as being Christian in some form. So if you have a good Biblical movie, you can make a ton of money. The Passion made a good portion in the box office after all. But I think Hollywood should of made a movie about King David and all the battles he was in. A Biblical Action movie, how can you go wrong.

And there have been several Biblical stories in many forms of media over the past 20 years. Prince of Egypt was also a success at the theaters. Jesus Christ Super Star and Joseph and the Technicolored Dream Coat were good stage productions. Heck, even The Ten Commandments was well received back when it was made. There is a market but in today's age, you need to tap it on a smart level and not just make a movie for the sake of making it and hope it does well, looking at you all those dumb action movies... Transformers.


This. Nobody trusted Mel Gibson to be able to make a good movie about Jesus. Studios also didn't think it would make box office bank and refused to fund it. It thereafter became the highest grossing R-rated movie of all time
 
2013-10-18 10:15:08 AM  
Didn't we just leave this party?

Anyway, the comments on that site are hilarious.
 
2013-10-18 10:20:19 AM  

ArkAngel: yves0010: kronicfeld: Among his conclusions is that Noah will be "an uninteresting and unbiblical waste of a hundred and fifty million dollars that will ruin for decades the possibility of making a really great and entertaining movie of this Bible hero."

We've managed to survive as a society for this long without one. I'm sure the loss will go unnoticed.

Actually, using the last poll, about 60% of Americans identify as being Christian in some form. So if you have a good Biblical movie, you can make a ton of money. The Passion made a good portion in the box office after all. But I think Hollywood should of made a movie about King David and all the battles he was in. A Biblical Action movie, how can you go wrong.

And there have been several Biblical stories in many forms of media over the past 20 years. Prince of Egypt was also a success at the theaters. Jesus Christ Super Star and Joseph and the Technicolored Dream Coat were good stage productions. Heck, even The Ten Commandments was well received back when it was made. There is a market but in today's age, you need to tap it on a smart level and not just make a movie for the sake of making it and hope it does well, looking at you all those dumb action movies... Transformers.

This. Nobody trusted Mel Gibson to be able to make a good movie about Jesus. Studios also didn't think it would make box office bank and refused to fund it. It thereafter became the highest grossing R-rated movie of all time


This is an untapped market but it is also a very tricky market. This is a market that you do not "Hollywood" a biblical movie. You do not add your own message in or make creative changes to it due to how many would view it. Sure, small changes wont hurt but when you change a huge part of the story, this case it is the reason why God floods the Earth, you run the risk of alienating that market you want to see your movie. I can see why Hollywood has not really tapped this market except in small amounts like the aforementioned movies and stage shows.
 
2013-10-18 10:45:55 AM  

blue_2501: Why in the hell did Aronofsky even take on this project?  The story of the floods is one of the most unrealistic fables in the Bible.  I figured Aronofsky was smarter than that.

But, then again, he made Requiem for a Dream.  Talk about unrealistic endings.



FTFA: "The use of visual effects has been so extensive that in some scenes, only an actor's face is in the final image. The film relies on effects to create the flood, of course, but in addition, Noah doesn't feature any real animals. Aronofsky said the creatures in the film are "slightly tweaked" versions of those that exist in nature, and there also are fantastical beings in the mix."

Sounds like realism isn't really an issue with this version.
 
2013-10-18 11:12:39 AM  

ArkAngel: yves0010: kronicfeld: Among his conclusions is that Noah will be "an uninteresting and unbiblical waste of a hundred and fifty million dollars that will ruin for decades the possibility of making a really great and entertaining movie of this Bible hero."

We've managed to survive as a society for this long without one. I'm sure the loss will go unnoticed.

Actually, using the last poll, about 60% of Americans identify as being Christian in some form. So if you have a good Biblical movie, you can make a ton of money. The Passion made a good portion in the box office after all. But I think Hollywood should of made a movie about King David and all the battles he was in. A Biblical Action movie, how can you go wrong.

And there have been several Biblical stories in many forms of media over the past 20 years. Prince of Egypt was also a success at the theaters. Jesus Christ Super Star and Joseph and the Technicolored Dream Coat were good stage productions. Heck, even The Ten Commandments was well received back when it was made. There is a market but in today's age, you need to tap it on a smart level and not just make a movie for the sake of making it and hope it does well, looking at you all those dumb action movies... Transformers.

This. Nobody trusted Mel Gibson to be able to make a good movie about Jesus. Studios also didn't think it would make box office bank and refused to fund it. It thereafter became the highest grossing R-rated movie of all time


Christians do love their torture porn.
 
2013-10-18 11:12:56 AM  

kronicfeld: Among his conclusions is that Noah will be "an uninteresting and unbiblical waste of a hundred and fifty million dollars that will ruin for decades the possibility of making a really great and entertaining movie of this Bible hero."


We can reboot Superman 4 years after screwing it up, but Noah?  NOOOOO it will be DECADES
 
2013-10-18 11:18:06 AM  

Tyrone Slothrop: ArkAngel: yves0010: kronicfeld: Among his conclusions is that Noah will be "an uninteresting and unbiblical waste of a hundred and fifty million dollars that will ruin for decades the possibility of making a really great and entertaining movie of this Bible hero."

We've managed to survive as a society for this long without one. I'm sure the loss will go unnoticed.

Actually, using the last poll, about 60% of Americans identify as being Christian in some form. So if you have a good Biblical movie, you can make a ton of money. The Passion made a good portion in the box office after all. But I think Hollywood should of made a movie about King David and all the battles he was in. A Biblical Action movie, how can you go wrong.

And there have been several Biblical stories in many forms of media over the past 20 years. Prince of Egypt was also a success at the theaters. Jesus Christ Super Star and Joseph and the Technicolored Dream Coat were good stage productions. Heck, even The Ten Commandments was well received back when it was made. There is a market but in today's age, you need to tap it on a smart level and not just make a movie for the sake of making it and hope it does well, looking at you all those dumb action movies... Transformers.

This. Nobody trusted Mel Gibson to be able to make a good movie about Jesus. Studios also didn't think it would make box office bank and refused to fund it. It thereafter became the highest grossing R-rated movie of all time

Christians do love their torture porn.


Everyone seems to love their Informative Murder Porn too

/how do I tame a horse in Minecraft?
 
2013-10-18 11:26:03 AM  

ArkAngel: Nobody trusted Mel Gibson to be able to make a good movie about Jesus.


And they were vindicated.
 
2013-10-18 11:37:15 AM  

kronicfeld: ArkAngel: Nobody trusted Mel Gibson to be able to make a good movie about Jesus.

And they were vindicated.


I didn't like it either. I doesn't matter if it's Joe Blow or Jesus, you can't skip the part of the story that's supposed to make you care about a character before you watch him get his ass kicked for 2 hours.
 
2013-10-18 11:41:50 AM  

exparrot: what's a cubit?


It's about the size of a hogshead.
 
2013-10-18 12:30:17 PM  
I can understand if he was trolling, dropping "secret" messages in the movie, that, upon being found, would send derptastic fundies into all manner of public freakouts, that would, in the end, add to the total entertainment value and enjoyment of the movie's existence.

But if that's not the case, why would anyone take this seriously?  There are much better fantasy writers to adapt than those that wrote ridiculous Bible stories.
 
2013-10-18 12:41:42 PM  

browntimmy: blue_2501: Why in the hell did Aronofsky even take on this project?  The story of the floods is one of the most unrealistic fables in the Bible.  I figured Aronofsky was smarter than that.

Yeah, he had a pretty good thing going and to me it feels like he's wasted years of his career on what is a really silly story. And what were the chances the studio would allow him to put any controversial twist on it when the biggest audience is likely to be church-going types? Plus all CGI animals? That always looks like crap.



I thought Richard Parker was pretty well done.

0.tqn.com

/not saying the animals in Noah will look good, who knows about that.
 
2013-10-18 04:22:41 PM  
I'm all for anything that makes The Fountain look better in retrospect.

/Made the mistake of seeing it twice in the theaters
//You need at least a year or so between repeat viewings
 
2013-10-18 04:42:39 PM  

JudgeItoBox: I'm all for anything that makes The Fountain look better in retrospect.


Say what you want about the script and the underlying ideas, but The Fountain is an amazing-looking film.  It's really beautiful to watch.
 
2013-10-18 04:44:23 PM  

kronicfeld: Among his conclusions is that Noah will be "an uninteresting and unbiblical waste of a hundred and fifty million dollars that will ruin for decades the possibility of making a really great and entertaining movie of this Bible hero."

We've managed to survive as a society for this long without one. I'm sure the loss will go unnoticed.


Been done

1.bp.blogspot.com


upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-10-18 04:49:12 PM  

devilEther: Go with Aronofsky's cut, you farks. He is a master filmmaker while you're just a bunch of suits who understand nothing but money. Your opinion on the work should not even be entertained.


FTFA: The auteur director of films -Fancy way of saying he is a weapons grade douche bag
 
2013-10-18 04:56:43 PM  

hasty ambush: devilEther: Go with Aronofsky's cut, you farks. He is a master filmmaker while you're just a bunch of suits who understand nothing but money. Your opinion on the work should not even be entertained.

FTFA: The auteur director of films -Fancy way of saying he is a weapons grade douche bag


I enjoy his movies nonetheless.
 
2013-10-18 05:27:34 PM  

exparrot: what's a cubit?


Lets see, a cubit...I used to know what a cubit was...Well, don't worry about that....
 
Displayed 34 of 34 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report