‘Noah’ Trailer: Russell Crowe vs. The Flood

Published 1 year ago by , Updated March 14th, 2014 at 6:15 pm,

How can anybody summarize Darren Aronofsky’s upcoming Noah in 23 seconds of promo footage? Paramount tried yesterday with a brief (and admittedly effective) preview clip, but now that the full official trailer has gone online, it’s a struggle to imagine how the film could be synopsized even with a greatly expanded three-minute preview.

The big takeaway for all viewers should be clear: Noah operates on an absolutely massive scope and scale, one that’s appropriately sized in light of the Biblical exploration that makes up the core of its narrative. Certainly no one can accuse Aronofsky of a lack of effort; unlike so many blockbusters that get unnecessarily saddled with the term, Noah actually looks epic. Between the titular character’s dreams of devastation, the sheer enormity of the task he takes on as his personal burden, and the human threats to the safety of Noah, his family, and his quest, there’s an ever-present sense of grandiosity in nearly every frame on display here.

In other words, Noah means to be big and important, retelling the tale of Noah and the flood through the eyes of one of today’s most ambitious auteurs. The basics gist remains the same – Noah (Russell Crowe) builds an ark to protect his family (Jennifer Connelly, Emma Watson, Logan Lerman, and Douglas Booth) and the Earth’s creatures after receiving visions of the world’s destruction from God – but Aronofsky expands on the details, pitting his hero against not only impending Armageddon but also against the barbaric Tubal-cain (Ray Winstone), who believes Noah to be a madman rather than a true prophet.

russell crowe noah1 Noah Trailer: Russell Crowe vs. The Flood

Russell Crowe as Darren Aronofsky’s Noah

The trailer captures most of these details, taking special care to showcase Noah’s confrontations with Tubal-cain, but shows little and less of the film’s purported fantastical elements. Those hoping to catch a glimpse of a Nephilim – one of those six-armed angels spoken of in the production process – will be disappointed. At the same time, the effects on display here are really impressive, from images of the climatic flood to the painstakingly rendered hordes of animals that find refuge aboard Noah’s vessel.

If Aronofsky’s goal is to spin a visual feast out of the apocalypse, it looks like he’s succeeded. Perhaps that alone will allow Noah to skirt around controversy; the film could be taken as just as much a tale of human survival as a work of Bible interpretation, and regardless, Aronofsky’s work here (brought to life by his usual standby cinematographer, Matthew Libatique) looks stunningly gorgeous.


Noah will be in theaters on March 28, 2014.

Source: Paramount

Follow Andy Crump on Twitter @agracru
TAGS: Noah
Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


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. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. plot twist: except for one family all mankind dies in the end.

    • Yeah.. did you read the bible ? :-)

      those all mankind attack Noah in the video is false.. Just an addition as other 50% for more excited movie.

      The director of this movie mentioned only 50 percent is true from bible faithful translated for the movie. The other 50% will be make up.

      • Everyone remember! This is based off of the comic book of Noah! It is not directly based on the Biblical story!

        • That does not make this movie any less stupid!

          • Why is it stupid?

            • A movie about a comic book written about a fantasy? Unless this is presented as a fantasy movie, there is nothing about this movie that works in any way. To expect anyone to believe the movie has any basis in historical reality is simply wrong.

              • Actually … wouldn’t that merely put it in the company of the flood myths found all over the world that are corruptions to one degree or another of the original Biblical version? Each culture added in their own religion / worldview’s stamp on it to integrate it into their cultural mythos … in this case, it would apparently include fantasy elements and an emphasis on environmental concerns. This whole discussion has made me want to get a copy of the graphic novel just to see what that was all about.

                • The biblical account actually came out AFTER quite a few others…it is NOT the original.

                  • I’ve seen this stated as if it is a fact by several people in these Noah threads, but I think the question is at the very least debatable, depending on your operating assumptions and how you define the various terms … and I realize I should have been more precise in my own statement … so I might grant that it’s possible that the Biblical account was actually physically written down later than Gilgamesh (assuming it was Moses that transcribed the book of Genesis), but the story of the actual events (okay, assuming there was a Flood), which would have been passed by oral tradition, at the very least, would be older. Now, whether it was Moses that wrote it or not, and whether Moses was able to use the actual oral tradition or was “given” the narrative found in Genesis are probably unanswerable questions … and irrelevant ones if you aren’t a Christian, Jew, or Muslim, I suppose. Or, unless you’re making a movie about Noah … it will be interesting to read more about Aronofsky’s process in making this …

                    • people generally have misconceptions on the way history, and especially ancient history, works. multiple accounts don’t usually discredit one another. the affirm each other. cultural interpretation becomes evident but a common source material is very valuable in discerning events.

                      now take the flood story found the world over. something happened to leave such a distinctly similar record across all cultures on all continents. gilgamesh is only the oldest we have found. many accounts are long gone or waiting to be discovered. the Biblical version is definitely more detailed and has a vessel described in measurements that would actually float instead of the cube structure described in gilgamesh. the fact there is two different accounts involving a vessel is something to key on.

                      i am inclined to give the Biblical account more credence. the detail is there and the Hebrews were very particular in maintaining accuracy in their oral traditions handed down so they show little evolution. if you take the events that transpire after the flood (i.e. Nimrod, the Tower of Babel and the confusing of languages and scattering of peoples) then you have a recorded reason for the flood story being prominent in cultures all around the globe. i think saying it’s only because early civilizations simply lived by rivers is a cop-out by anthropologists in the face of evidence in the myths of cultures all around the globe

                    • In the end, it comes down to the same question Jesus asked His followers: Who do you say I am? Jesus not only specifically spoke of the flood (Matt. 24:7-41), He attributed all of Moses writings as about Himself (Luke 24:27). Therefore, the question is simple. We have, demonstrated by the Dead Sea Scrolls, precisely the same words in our hands Jesus would have had to read at the time of His life. We also have the eyewitness testimony(Luke 1:2, 1 Pet. 1:16) of all He did and said. So then, was He a fraud, yet able to work miracles, heal the sick, raise the dead, and even Himself raise from the tomb? If so, you’re right, there is no support for the Biblical flood account. Or was He instead a lunatic, insane, yet again able to do all He did, including His resurrection? Once more, if this is your answer, reject the account of the flood. However, as all eyewitness accounts are gathered together into the transcript of His “trial,” and none contradict Him there nor are there any hiding somewhere else, if you believe EVIDENCE and therefore realize Jesus was and is who He claimed to be, then His account confirming the flood does just that. So then, there are no other choices. Who do you say Jesus is?

              • From what I can tell from all of these comments, most of these people are not assigning any factual relevancy or historical accuracy to the Noah story. The only real issue is whether someone is placing any spiritual/religious value on the story OR simply considering it as just a story.

              • @Jerry

                Do you hate ALL movies then, including comic book movies and adaptions of novels?

                Do you also read the Bible, where 90% of the stories told in it are taken from earlier myths told thousands of years before Christianity existed by groups such as Pagans, Jews, Muslims, Egyptians, Sumerians etc?

                • Dazz, you make these statements with such conviction, I would like to know where your evidence was found? “90% of the stories in it are taken from earlier myths”? Where ever this evidence lies, evidence that has escaped the notice of all Jews and Christians, to make your point you might want to exercise more care in how you phrase it. “thousands of years before Christianity existed”? Not really relevant since Christians accept the ancient texts of the Jews, and studying the words of all 40 witnesses across more than 1500 years (for those who do study, rather than simply try to accumulate a few “Gotchas!” they feel are sufficient to discredit) see a finely integrated and consistent story from beginning to end. Therefore, you might want to just say, “thousands of years before Jewism,” if indeed you have such evidence to prove that point. If, instead, you’re more interested in truth than bashing Christians, study the matter for yourself, look at the entirety of the evidence, physical, cultural, arhaeologic, scientific, and eyewitness, consider the absolute lack of any contradictory evidence or testimony, and if you’re still stuck, look at my prior post and answer, “Who do you say Jesus is?” In the end, that demands a conclusion one way or the other. Not really into “bashing,” but if you find yourself sincerely interest in finding out what the Bible has to say, I would be very willing to help you find out, or anyone else reading this who, like myself only 15 years ago, thinks “The Bible is nonsense!” but then still finds themselves curious enough to challenge that thought. (I started reading to find my own “Gotchas!”, thinking “this won’t take more than 30 minutes!” Instead, as you can tell, truth overwhelmed me, and I have to admit with great shame how wrong I was throughout the prior years of my life. Grace and peace…

              • Jerry, I want to say this gently as I was “just like you” not that long ago. However, and of course this movie has denigrated things to a “Chronicles of Narnia” kind of fantasy it appears, for someone with no scholarly effort at all to make the kinds of bold assertions you make, as if they are fact, is offensive to those who have studied. I’m suspicious you’ll believe “the big bang,” without an ounce of concern for the fact that a) it couldn’t have happened as the density of matter was so great the velocity of it would have had to be too great to allow stars, planets, etc. to form and b) why would someone be perfectly willing to accept that the matter necessary to supply 300 sextillion stars, surrounding planets, meteors, comets, etc. “just existed” but find the idea “God just existed” seems a bit ingenuine. I’m also suspicious you have no doubts at all about “evolution,” despite the fact there has been no scientific method applied to show that dirt (or dirty water) actually can suddenly come to life, complete with the ability to take in nutrients from outside itself, process and use them, excrete waste and reproduce without any outside intervention whatsoever. Why then is it easier to believe that there are unseen somethings keeping atoms with multiple protons from splitting due to the electrostatic repulsion, or if you believe the “nuclear glue” theory, whatever keeps negatively charged electrons from crashing into the protons, or easier to believe unseen “black holes” explain away the mathematical certainty that gravity cannot explain why space bodies remain where they do, than to believe the Bible telling us that it is an invisible God that “just existed” and holds all things together? Why is it if science tells us “the earth hangs on nothing,” unlike all the fables suggesting Atlas, a cosmic turtle, or whatever, but when thousands of years prior to science’s discovery the Bible foretold that exact fact, you summarily reject it as what, “a lucky guess”? No, despite the fact that I realize this post will never overcome your desire to deny God, it is you that is “simply wrong,” and not that long ago, after spouting for decades the same kinds of things you do here, I had to admit my error. I hope and pray a day comes, sometime, where you study the issue rather than think you have an insurmountable “Gotcha!” that no one who has come to trust the Biblical record either thought of or has a defense for. Grace and peace…

      • So that means that 100% is fiction. Is English your native tongue?

    • Then its a QS SW origin story right?

    • Where’s the “twist?”

  2. The movie does look gorgeous and I have confidence in the cast and creative team. It does seem like a very literal adaptation (aside from the evil king guy). I know that it would make some people mad, but I would like to see a version based around the actual flood event in the Black Sea that inspired the Noah legend and the Sumerian, Babylonian, and Akkadian myths before it. Possibly as a tv miniseries, the story would take place on the Black Sea coast around 5400 BCE (It is impossible for “Noah” to have worshipped the Judeo-Christian god. No one did at that time). He would be a Proto-IndoEuropean polytheist, possibly a farmer or former member of the priest class, who sees the signs of an oncoming flood and tries to save his family and his people. You know, a real human drama that cuts out all religion except for what “Noah” believes (but the audience would not see).

  3. This is the type of movie that won’t do very well at the box office but I will love. Been looking forward to this one for a long time.

  4. Congratulations and Bravo the Auteur n Director Darren Aaronofosky for taking on the film and recreate history that was true as the BIBLE Speaks. Noah was instructed by Jehovah God of the impending dangers upon not changing their ways and attitude of immorality and merry making. The trailer is definitely stunning,headlined by Russel Crowe and his fab voice/vocals the character will be even more natural as in the Bible. The visuals and special effects seem to good and more to come in the future trailers…Waiting eagerly and all the best to TEAM NOAH…definitely people of today can learn and gather themselves to overcome destruction as was then and the now coming will be as never before. Appropriately timed and most needed for bringing out the true morals within…

  5. I Smiled when I saw who Noah’s wife was going to be Jennifer Connelly, Director Darren Aronofsky may have made another great one here. I’ve been a fan of his twisted mind for years ever since ‘Requiem for a Dream.’

  6. If the trailer is any indication, this will be an awesome cinematic experience!!!

  7. Seriously, where would the Bible be without Noah’s Ark? I’m an atheist, but had a catholic upbringing and this story is the one that get’s everyone’s attention. It’s got the whole “rebel” thing with everyone telling Noah he’s crazy (but we know he’s right), and then you’ve got all the animals. What’s not to love? It’s really a dramatic, romantic story. Of course the Adam and Eve story is another appealing story. I remember how we’d all annoy the hell out of the nuns asking all kinds of questions about how these stories fit into an historical timeline.

    When I was a kid, my parents got us a “Power Record” Space: 1999 story (this was an old sci-fi TV show that starred Martin Landau), called “back to the beginning.” It had them traveling back in time to witness the great flood. (It’s actually on U-tube now). Nowadays when I think about it, I find it odd how it was treated as a literal event.

    • Comment awaiting moderation.

  8. I love how people think the Bible has any historical accuracy, hilarious. I’m not a religious person but this movie looks epic. Its a must see for me.

    • I worry over the people who are so absolute that it doesn’t hold any accuracy. In the end, we live the lives we choose and hopefully we can do that peaceably and respectfully. When my time’s done, if I’m wrong, what did it cost me? If those who didn’t believe are wrong, however…

      Our differing beliefs aside, I don’t disagree that this does look amazing and is certainly a must-see for me too. I hope you enjoy the film.

      • Believers always want to hit you with the old Pascal’s Wager. “If you just believe, what have you lost?”. What you lose is time that you could have been using to read actual history books and science books, obviously. As to the fiery, eternal damnation–well, that’s a gamble that everyone takes. Mankind has produced thousands of different gods, so what are the chances that you picked the right one? “I contend that we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do”, said Stephen Roberts.

    • Many historical finds authenticate the bible as a legitimate history book. They just found what they believe to be one of king davids castles….and many ancient historians wrote about Jesus. I dont know what you think is not historically accurate…even the hebrews in Egypt was authenticated by James Cameron and a team of archeologists…people simply were not looking in the right time period or the fact the hebrews were known by another name in that time period.

      • Including historical people and places in a story does not make the story true. the bible is not a history book, it is a book of philosophy based on the people a places of the time. When things like the “great flood” and “Noah’s Ark” are included they are there to make a point not to be taken as historical fact. Historically speaking no great flood ever happened, because that would be physically impossible (not enough water in the world). The same can be said to be true of Noah’s Ark, there are far more species on the planet than would fit in a boat of any size let alone the Ark, not to mention feeding, control of the animals eating each other and the huge waste problem. If you make a fantasy movie don’t expect anyone to believe it is true.

  9. It definitely looks epic and one of the most spectacular films of 2014. Watching the actual flood itself it’s going to be awesome.

  10. A silent film was made about Noah’s Ark back in the 1920′s.

  11. Looks pretty dumb, lol. IDK Im just a stickler for accuracy in such an important biblical story. Instead they’ve turned Noah into a gladiator/ Robin hood type.

    These stories may not mean alot to non christians,non muslims & non jews but they mean alot to the faithful…to actual believers.

  12. I would have rather that Darren Aronofsky put a spin on Noah that stayed within the confines of the bible. A good example of what I mean:

    I was watching a Documentary on the real Jesus and they portrayed him as a human being…his disdain for the pharisees, his emotions & the reasons why & what would have shaped his thinking (environment, political & socio economic problems)…the documentary suggested the idea the whole reason he chose fishermen as his disciples is because they were tough…or that Jesus was prob an outcast from a young age because Mary had him out of wedlock (people thought)…good example.

    I hate what Darren Aronofsky has done here. Its not Noah, Its Russel Crowe & a white washed cast playing biblical (most likely) dark skinned Israelites, and the problem for me is not the color of the cast as it is the believability that Anglo Saxons dominated the middle east. I cant wrap my head around that one.

    • The cast of Noah doesn’t just have “Anglo-Saxon”s in it. Jennifer Connelly’s mother is Jewish and Logan Lerman is 100% Jewish. More to the point, “Anglo-Saxon” countries are certainly on the list of countries that wouldn’t let either of Logan’s Holocaust refugee grandfathers in until AFTER World War II. Anyone who calls Logan an “Anglo-Saxon” is a Holocaust denier as far as I’m concerned.

  13. Ha… :) First Mr. Crowe potrays the father of the last son of Krypton (Jor-El) who predicted the doom to befall all life on Krypton and now he takes on the role of our species 1st Doomsday Prepper (Noah)

    Russel Crowe has become quite enamored by World Saviors and Global Redeemers of late. How come that is, I wonder ;)

  14. Looks good, ill see it for sure.
    Russell Crowe looks perfect in the role.

  15. STILL MORE ‘on board’ rewrites and predictive programming
    and moral alibis for the unfolding Globalist EUGENICS agenda.