Forget 40 days and 40 nights…I couldn’t last 40 minutes

by Brad Nelson   8/28/14

I had intended to watch the new Noah movie in its entirety. But it’s far more stupid than I thought it would be. I was expecting something Avatar-ish — dumb, but entertaining on some level.

But, good god, what clown thought this script would make for a good movie? All I can say is that if you are a conservative, as I am, and like viewing left-of-center trash just for the sheer fun of skewering it, you may want to move onto other choices.

It’s amazing that the producers of this film could draw such talent as Russell Crowe, Anthony Hopkins, and Nick Nolte. They must have done something similar to what Krusty the Clown said to Bart Simpson in response to Bart’s complaints about the inferior quality of “Camp Krusty” which was not in keeping with his usual high clownish standards: They drove a dump truck full of money up to my house! I’m not made of stone!

Actually, I didn’t last even 30 minutes. I think I lasted about twenty. If there is a God in heaven, I’m surprised that some kind of Immaculate Erasure did not occur in regards to the original prints just before this film went into distribution. Or maybe God likes a good laugh.


Have a blog post you want to share? Click here. • (1014 views)

Share
Brad Nelson

About Brad Nelson

I like books, nature, politics, old movies, Ronald Reagan (you get sort of a three-fer with that one), and the founding ideals of this country. We are the Shining City on the Hill — or ought to be. However, our land has been poisoned by Utopian aspirations and feel-good bromides. Both have replaced wisdom and facts.
This entry was posted in Blog Post. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Forget 40 days and 40 nights…I couldn’t last 40 minutes

  1. Pst4usa says:

    You’re tougher than me Brad, I cannot even try to see this one.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Well, Pat, I wasted only about $1.30 at the Red Box dispenser. And I perhaps got that much entertainment out of it…about the price of a pack of gum.

  2. Timothy Lane says:

    The actual Biblical story of Noah is an amalgamation of 2 slightly different stories (for example, this is why in one verse it says that he took a pair of each type of animal, whereas in another he took a pair of each unclean animal and 7 pairs of each clean one). At least one version actually has the Ark at sea (if that’s the right word) for a full year before the waters subsided. Be glad the movie didn’t last that long. Or maybe it would have felt that way if you’d stuck it out.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Indeed.

      And it occurs to me that there is a deeper story here.

      Is beauty mostly innate or is it learned? If it is both (as it likely is to some degree), we can learn to mistake the ugly for the beautiful…but it takes a hell of a lot of effort.

      I think the Christian story is inherently beautiful, sometimes awesome, and often dreadful (that is, full of dread). But the story of sacrifice for love (and not for territorial gain or to spread one’s insane ideology) is a noble story. Humility (Christ, as God incarnate, showing this in a pure degree by dying at the hands of mere man) is a central value, and a value that few cultures have had.

      If the Christian story is inherently beautiful (and more than a little sublime), then it stands to reason that its opposite story – the religion of Leftism, if you will – is going to be ugly. And so it is.

      One has to be almost indoctrinated from birth to mistake the ugly for the beautiful. And there’s no doubt that this happens. Vulgarity is the hallmark of the Left, and it is considered a noble value when they practice it. And much of their art, as Dennis Prager notes (and I doubt that Glenn disagrees), is devoted to cherishing ugliness, meaninglessness, and vulgarity.

      The Christian story (the Judeo-Christian story, in full) repels the ugly soul. And that’s not to say that those who don’t take to Christianity are ugly deep-down. But if the story repels you, then that is a problem. And certainly parts of it have repelled me and still do.

      This is why Noah is ugly. The force behind this story could not have been Christian. They were of the opposite religion. They may have actually meant to do some justice to this story (hell, anything is possible). And if that was the case, they hit it with the only stick they had – an ugly stick, as it were. What I saw was the deepest expression of the secular/atheist/environmental-wacko heart. It’s what I saw in Avatar as well which is why I did not weep when the giant tree fell. I laughed.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        Of course, speaking of ugly, one of the ugly things in the Bible is the story of Noah and the ark. If you think about it, it’s a little bizarre that we might romanticize this tale — even playing with plastic arks and animals as children (anyone remember the Arco ark giveaways?) — when it is about God supposedly drowning all of the world like a rat. It’s the ultimate “reset.”

        And this is why it should be easily apparent that the Bible is full of myths — stories that are mere allegories, at best. I wouldn’t say it’s only myths, but certainly full of myths. Nor do most people familiar with the Bible deny that this is so, for Jesus spoke in parables and was not talking literally all of the time. There are spiritual truths contained in the Bible that often are lost on those who look a bit too hard (as is the case for Islam) for hard, literal truths. Some can go a little loopy trying to do so, such as the Young Earthers.

        • Timothy Lane says:

          Actually, there are several different versions as to where the Noah story came from (which may mean ultimately where the Gilgamesh flood came from). There were floods in the lower Euphrates, the flooding of the Black Sea, and a recent theory (which I would like to get evaluated by a friend who majored in physics in college) that suggests a worldwide flood (albeit not quite all at once) was in fact possible.

        • James Smith says:

          If you reread this article and the foregoing comments enough times you might begin to catch on to what the author and the conservative and true Christians who commented before you really mean. The Bible is not a bunch of myths. It is, in each of it’s books real context, absolutely true.

          • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

            James, I think the moral of this is that one doesn’t have to take every story in the Bible as literal. Neither, from the best of my reading, has literalism always been the way it has been read.

          • Timothy Lane says:

            The Bible certainly has a few errors in it, as can be seen by the passages in 2nd Kings concerning the regnal lengths (and overlaps) of Jeroboam of Israel and Azariah of Judah. They don’t add up unless you come up with an entirely new numerical system just for those passages. This is something I discussed in a previous article here (last year, I think).

        • Mitchell Robinson says:

          Sincerely, I think it is a bit too presumptuous to inveigh against the God of the Universe (and beyond?) for His prerogative for any “reset” He deemed suited to His own purpose. Perhaps you, sir, are in a bit of a quandary that He didn’t consult you first? Oh, right, you weren’t there! If there is one singular lesson that I have had to learn over my infinitesimally short life (a mere 50…okay, 53 years), it is too reject, however begrudgingly, the temptation to lend overmuch gravitas to my own intellect. Your sense of Divine Justice is merely what YOU think it ought to be rather than the real thing which, obviously, WE cannot know. I submit, most respectfully, that you have misplaced your place!

          • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

            He didn’t consult you first?

            Exactly. Still, it seems within reason to have, at the very least, raised eyebrows over a story where God exterminates every last man, woman, child, cat, dog, and frog….and then things don’t improve in the long run anyway.

            I don’t think that’s being picky or putting too much gravitas in my intellect to question the wisdom of that. In fact, we betray ourselves and justice if we just mindlessly accept the extermination of the entire human race and all life on earth (except for a few) as just a cute little bedtime story about Noah and his animal friends.

            If my sense of Divine justice is wrong, how do you know yours is right? Remember, I’m the one asking questions about a God who supposedly exterminated all life (except for a select few) on earth. I’m not excusing it. Which default position, on the face of it, seems more reasonable in terms of searching for justice?

            I don’t believe that God would require us to check our brains at the door when looking at this stuff. After all, it’s the lack of reasonable thinking that sets us above the nut-jobs in the Middle East and elsewhere. I’ll make no apologies for questioning this story.

            • Timothy Lane says:

              Back to Galileo again. God gave us our brains, and our sense of justice (much of it from his own book, after all). Our job is to use them, even if it means asking him, “Why?”

  3. Mitchell Robinson says:

    It is, at least a bit, telling that mankind failed to change his course after such a catastrophic intervention. The problem in every soul regarding this not too palatable account of sin and its inevitable consequence is the question of whether or not we ourselves would have, as Noah, found grace in the eyes of the LORD. The biblical account is woefully lacking in cuteness as a bedtime story, however. It is stark in the telling. Yet, the truth of God’s judgement upon mankind is not a betrayal of justice. It is quite the opposite, actually. It is a sure affirmation of the deal as this mysterious Supreme Being views it. You may like it or not. What you fail to acknowledge or affirm is the undeserved merit that God credited to Noah! That is the avenue you should be investing your precious soul in finding! I think it is not too untoward to attempt to paraphrase the Lord Jesus, “Come to Me, all of you who are burdened by your philosophical predispositions, laden with your useless questions without resolution. I will put them to rest! Come to Me, and learn of Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart. In Me, you will find completely the comfort for which you relentlessly search!” To characterize the appeal of Christ as an appeal to surrender one’s God-given mental acuity is the foremost lie of the enemy of the truth! To ask, “Why?” is not, in and of itself, wrong, I don’t think. To place oneself in contradiction to God’s “Why not?” is too miss the eternal point and will always be a fatal error! [Pardon my comma-infused post. My relationship with grammar has always been one of healthy tension, I suppose. I struggle, as they say! I am an avid reader and admirer of all of you guys, I must say. Glenn Fairman is my favorite, though.)

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Glenn Fairman is my favorite as well, Mitchell. He’s a real arse-kicker when it comes to rhetoric. No “t” is crossed nor any “i” dotted without the clanging of righteous truth and rapier wit.

      As for questions, logic, evidence, reason, etc., those are the primary arrows in my quiver. I generally regard myths and stories (including obviously the parables of Jesus) at meant to evoke moral, spiritual, and practical truths. How deep-down those truths go is really the Big Question.

      If for some faith is their way, then fine. Certainly enough of my friends here, and elsewhere, are of that mindset that I’ve gotten used to it. But it’s not my natural habitat.

      But I consider myself ambidextrous in this regard and understand more than I may let on. But I also think it’s absolutely vital that we come up for air from faith and various beliefs and also ask tough, probing questions. And not to do so in order to be a smarty-pants contrarian, but because I, for one, think the Creator of the universe is inherently beyond our complete and full comprehension.

      Even so, it’s my belief that we can get to the real God by getting rid of the false ones. It’s analogous to what we believe about God when we are five years old (He’s a nice man in the sky) to what we might believe when we are 30, and then what we believe when we are 50. The false or simple gods fade away to be replaced by something firmer, if often inherently more obscure. The onion is pealed away.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *