Anthony Hopkins Joins Darren Aronofsky’s ‘Noah’

Published 2 years ago by , Updated February 15th, 2014 at 8:47 pm,

anthony hopkins 2 Anthony Hopkins Joins Darren Aronofskys Noah

Say what you will about director Darren Aronofsky’s decision to follow up the box office success of Black Swan with an old-school Biblical epic, but there’s already one thing for sure… the filmmaker is assembling an incredibly talented cast to bring his vision of Noah to life.

Russell Crowe is already signed to play the title character, and both Jennifer Connelly – who collaborated with Aronofsky on Requiem for a Dream – and Ray Winstone - who appeared with Hopkins (albeit through motion-capture) in 2007′s Beowulf – are in talks for the female lead and villain roles, respectively. Now, Aronofsky himself has taken to his Twitter account to announce that Sir Anthony Hopkins has officially signed on for the film as well.

From Darren Aronofsky ‏@DarrenAronofsky

i’m honored to be working with the great sir anthony hopkins. we just added him to the stellar cast of ‪#Noah‪#methuselahlives.

Judging by Aronofsky’s tweet, it looks like Hopkins will appear as Methuselah, the Biblical figure who famously lived until the age of 969. In addition, he was Noah’s grandfather and passed away just prior to the beginning of the Great Flood. While no official statement has yet been made on how Hopkins’ role will figure into the plot, it’s likely that the majority of his scenes will be with Crowe as Noah comes to terms with his God-given task of building an ark in anticipation of the aforementioned storm.

 

anthony hopkins1 Anthony Hopkins Joins Darren Aronofskys Noah

Hopkins has been picking up a number of projects lately. He is already set to reprise his role as Odin in next year’s Thor 2 and to appear alongside fellow Brit Helen Mirren in Hitchcock. Furthermore, the Oscar-winning actor recently signed on to star in RED 2 (also co-starring Mirren).

At this early stage, there’s no way of knowing how Aronosky’s epic will turn out. Hopkins’ filmography is loaded with films both critically beloved (The Silence of the Lambs) and maligned (The Wolfman). The story of Noah has been tackled numerous times in years past, but if Aronosky’s past work is any indication, the film will likely feature a fresh – and increasingly star-studded – take on an old tale.

Noah is currently set to sail into theaters on March 28, 2014.

Source: Twitter

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: noah

36 Comments

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

  1. Finally Anthony has a role he can seek his teeth into again.

  2. I could actually see Anthony Hopkins playing Methuselah

  3. Seems like a pretty good casting choice. I can’t wait for this movie!!

  4. With a cast like this success or failure rests squarely upon Aronofsky’s shoulders.

  5. Check out the continuing adventures of Clark. From the hit CW show.

    • You’re on the wrong comment thread…

  6. If there was ever a person to play this God, it’s Hopkins.

    • Noah? Really? Becauuuusssseeeee…there’s a NEED for this kind of movie. Yes? Is, ah…is that about the concept here? You…you have some sort of interest in paying hard earned money to see a movie that’s probably (among a cacophony of similar) one of, if not THE most rediculous fairy tales ever to have been scribed by the paranoid old men who wrote the fable in their funny little book?

      This is, um…this…this is what you’re all doing the pee pee dance over?

      Wow.

      • Tony…

        You could NOT have picked a worse person to respond to in that particular manner…lol.

        Sam has made it quite clear, on many occasions, that he does not believe in any god (you may have noticed his very specific reference to “this God”).

        I am bemusedly curious to see how (if?) he responds… ;)

        • It’s currently awaiting moderation….

          • lol… :)

            • But there’s nothing bad in there, so hopefully it’ll pop up soon. Certain words cause instant moderation.

      • Tony,
        I often stay away from religious topics, especially on the net because I feel as free men and woman we have the right to believe in whatever you want and you should not be judged for it. But your comment is just rude and… ridiculous.
        Even if you believe the story of Noah us a fairy tale how is it any different than other fictional stories told on film? Is it because there’s a message behind it? Almost every film made is a fairy tale in one form or another so should we not see them also? Maybe we should just see documentaries then…

      • I wasn’t going to respond. I thought I’d just let you look like a fool. But I think it’s more fun to actually illustrate in a degree of detail how wrong your assumptions are.

        As Archaeon already pointed out, I don’t believe in any god. Whether the Christian one or the hundreds of others that exist in different cultures, or the ones that are long forgotten from civilisations long dead and buried. I like to discuss religious beliefs, as most here know, but I don’t think I’ve ever done it quite to the mocking tone that you did to me.

        My comment was that Hopkins has a very regal bearing, authority and booming over acting comes very naturally to him. All qualities I see in the Christian God described in the Bible. Now Hopkins also played a similar role when he was Odin in Thor, another “God” no more real than the one to be on show in Noah. Regardless of the authenticity of these stories, there is absolutely no denying there are certain moral codes from the Bible that are worth taking note of, plus there are some excellent stories and some truly exciting imagery in there. Prime stuff for a film adaptation.

        But here’s the real kicker. Religion is against everything I believe in but to actively mock others for believing in something that gives them comfort in the darkness, that’s pretty cruel. Especially the way you do it.

  7. This movie will be incredible. It is a great story and I am glad Hollywood is taking it seriously. You can count on a lot of “hard earned money” being spent on this one.

    BTW, using the lord’s name in vain is considered a profanity and making fun of religious people would constitue a personal attack to anyone that would be religious . .

    • Actually, lots of people say, “Oh my God”. Some people are offended by it, but not everyone (not even by some of those who take religion seriously).

      As for personally attacking by making fun of religion, THAT one is a bit more iffy. While it IS in poor taste, to look down on someone who has different views, I think it would need to be pointedly focused at an individual or a specific faith to be a “personal” attack.

      Of course, in the end, it comes down to what the SR staff deems “crossing the line”. They seem to have been fairly lenient, in terms of policy…though they WILL respond quickly and happily to those who seem to be expressing an attitude they consider arrogant.

      • “Jesus flipping Christ” is a little more offensive than “oh my god” wouldn’t you agree?
        I will assure that there is nothing “iffy” about it.

        • I’ve heard many a church-going Christian say, “Jesus H. Christ!” when expressing anger or shock. I’ll stick with iffy…

          • So if an African American uses a derogatory term to describe himself we should all be able to use that term openly? If you don’t condone it, then I wonder why you are so quick to “set me straight”…

            • If a black person is going to call himself or his brethren that particular term (or whatever others), he damn well better not get offended if someone from a different race then feels it’s okay. I feel the same way about ANY race, religion, creed, generation, gender, or orientation.

              Now, do I use such terms, phrases, or expressions? NO. I do not ever wish to offend anyone. Thus, one might say I consider it offensive to do so, but that is my own opinion…and, generally, looked down upon by society (at least, in the modern world). If someone who is part of the OFFENDED group either initiates or later adopts the offensive term(s), I feel they really should just shut up about being offended by its “outside” use.

              I AGREE with you that people SHOULD NOT speak in such a manner, but I was merely pointing out that your societal concern is not always shared by your religious peers…at least, not without a tad bit of hypocrisy.

              Oh, by the way, you would likely be considered by some diehard religious practitioners to be offensive because you did not capitalize “lord” in your above comment (“…using the Lord’s name in vain…”). The word is fine with a lowercase “l” EXCEPT in religious contexts when Judeo-Christians are referring specifically to God.

              Just something to consider…

              • Which brings right back to Screenrant’s policy. No profanity or personal attacks. What you believe is a personal attack or what I believe is, is of no consequence.
                I am not an overly religious person, Archaeon, but I know a personal attack when I see one. Capital A or lowercase a, an attack is an attack (even if it is intelligently written).
                I am tired of people who take religion very seriously having to suffer the “bullying” of people who have no right to mock them. Especially on a friendly movie site.

                • I happen to agree that NO ONE should be attacked for their beliefs (or mocked for them, for that matter). I guess I simply do not see what you see, in terms of an attack, in THIS PARTICULAR CASE. I DO think Tony could have expressed his thoughts a bit less…provocatively (he and I have had a go-round before about that on another thread and, I believe, resolved it as best we could). I really do not think Tony was trying to offend; I think he simply gives his opinion in a very…forthright manner.

                  You and I may may not like it, but IMO I did not think he was making a personal attack.

                  On another note, I too am looking forward to seeing what this film can become and hoping it’s enjoyable.

        • Oh, and I assure you I don’t condone what Tony said; I’m merely pointing out that he didn’t do anything particularly unique or drastic…

      • [Removed for trolling] – Moderator

        {Guys, we don’t care what your personal religious or non-religious beliefs are and you are welcome to speak them whenever you want…just not on our site. Please keep the comments relevant to the topic at hand, not a debate about religion. Thanks, Moderator}

        • Yes. I know I spelled it “hear”. And for the record, Jewish, catholic, Christian and Mormon background in my family. All currently practicing. All of which I was exposed to growing up.

        • Tony…Were you responding to me (darkscifious, aside)?

          If so, I’m not sure why…I was the one telling darkscifious that you were NOT being offensive…at least, not in any official or “prosecutable” manner.

          If you were, in fact, simply responding to darkscifious, never mind.

          • Responding to dark siferous. Thanks for defending me a bit Acheaeon.

        • Sorry don’t agree, but I don’t have all day…

        • @Tony – Well I CAN choose whether to take your comments as personal attacks if I want to – I’ve removed your JFC comment.

          If you aren’t a believer that is fine but honestly no one here cares. I know I don’t. I don’t need your permission nor do I need your validation to believe in whatever religon I choose.

          What I don’t understand and probably never will, is why Atheist always come out of the woodwork to proclaim how big of an Atheist they are whenever a story from the Bible is talked about in Hollywood.

          Talk about the casting. Talk about the plot. Talk about the possible script but leave your personal thought on religion out of it. No one cares and it really just sparks a religious deabte. This website isn’t the place for that type of debate.

          Thanks,

          Paul Young

  8. Thanks Potty mouth. Please remember; just because you don’t believe in something and feel that it is okay to mock it that very “real” people feel “personally” attacked. Start a blog if you want to tear something that people believe so dearly in apart.
    I am not defending religion, but the masses who live by it (which by the sounds of it, is your family as well as mine).

    • Fair enough.

  9. “How should we load the donkeys, Sir Anthony?”
    “ASS TO ASS!”

  10. This is gonna be silly.

  11. My comment is still waiting moderation. Really?

    • @Sam – Sorry, it had the word idiot in in I think which is why it got flagged. I posted it unchanged. It wasn’t personal I assure you.

      Paul

      • Cheers Paul, you and I have chatted about this film before. And I am quite looking forward to it, more with each casting announcement.
        But I fail to see the point of people getting nasty about it like that guy above.