![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/227\/2014\/04\/n-40697r.jpg\" "\\"NOAH\\"")
<\/a>So, Noah<\/a><\/i> had a great first weekend<\/a> in North America and many other territories. How did it do so well? What are the film\u2019s prospects going forward? And what does this bode for other possible Bible movies?<\/p>\nFirst, Paramount vice chairman Rob Moore \u2014 who attends a Vineyard church in Los Angeles<\/a> \u2014 has given a few interviews commenting on how his studio beat some of the controversy that some people had whipped up in the months leading up to the film\u2019s release.<\/p>\n Speaking to The Hollywood Reporter<\/a><\/i>, he said a key \u201cturning point\u201d came when the studio openly admitted that the film was \u201cinspired by\u201d the Bible story but was not a \u201cliteral\u201d version of it, whatever that would mean. He also commented on how the film has been received by different communities: Noah<\/i> is doing big business so far overseas, including in Russia. Is there the same sort of controversy internationally?<\/b><\/p>\n Maybe a little bit in the U.K., but otherwise, no. Other countries and other cultures are more accepting of the idea that art can be inspired by the Bible.<\/p>\n Where did Noah play best in the U.S.?<\/b><\/p>\n It was unusual. You had screens in New York doing well, and then screens in places like Nashville. You definitely have an upscale audience in terms of people who are fans of Darren\u2019s movies, and then you see where the movie really delivered in Hispanic Catholic markets and Southern Christian markets.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n In a similar vein, Paramount marketing and distribution president Megan Colligan commented on the diversity of the audience in the Los Angeles Times<\/a><\/i>:<\/p>\n \u201cNoah\u201d brought in a diverse crowd, Colligan said, a 50-50 split of male and female audience members. The film generated strong turnout among Christians, Catholic Latinos and African Americans, plus \u201clots of Aronofsky fans in major cities,\u201d Colligan said.<\/p>\n \u201cThere was a pretty good balance of age ranges but a little bit of an older crowd, which we expected,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n In Santa Monica, one packed AMC theater gave the film a standing ovation Saturday night.<\/p>\n \u201cAt first I thought maybe we walked into the wrong movie \u2014 it was a little cheesy of a start,\u201d said Astacia Christenson, 36. \u201cBut it worked out because you got into the characters, there was some good acting and the story picked up and got more interesting. The movie saved itself.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Meanwhile, in USA Today<\/a><\/i>, Moore commented on the film\u2019s C rating at CinemaScore:<\/p>\n \u201cThe one thing CinemaScore doesn\u2019t pick up well is when feelings are passionate on either side,\u201d says Rob Moore, Paramount\u2019s vice chairman.<\/p>\n He says that 63% of audiences gave the PG-13 movie an \u201cA\u201d or \u201cB,\u201d while 14% gave it a \u201cD\u201d or \u201cF,\u201d bringing down the average. He says that the backlash comes from \u201coutliers\u201d who expected Noah to be a strict biblical interpretation.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n To my Patheos colleague Rebecca Cusey<\/a>, Moore said that the film\u2019s success overseas may pave the way for even more Bible films:<\/p>\n The shift to an increasingly global focus by studios will mean that the success of Noah internationally may smooth the path for future Bible films, Moore said. \u201cThe biggest dynamic that\u2019s changed in the last five years is the global focus,\u201d he said, \u201cMovies that resonate with a global market have a bigger opportunity to get made because of their international appeal.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n CNN\u2019s Belief Blog<\/a> notes that John Snowden, the film\u2019s biblical advisor, is a former youth pastor at Moore\u2019s church \u2014 and it notes how the conversations between Snowden and the filmmakers ranged from the trivial to the significant:<\/p>\n The studio also hired a Christian consultant for the film. John Snowden is a former youth pastor at Vineyard Christian Fellowship Church, where Moore, the Paramount executive, is a member.<\/p>\n Snowden, who was pastor to Moore\u2019s son, said the filmmakers\u2019 questions ranged from the sublime (Why did God create human life?) to the ridiculous (Would Christians be upset if Noah wears pants?).<\/p>\n \u201cI gave them a sort-of manifesto of Christian theology,\u201d said Snowden, 38, who now lives in Nepal. \u201cThe most important part of the story is why God created humanity, which is basically to reflect God\u2019s glory. Those are the kind of conversations we would have.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The Christian Science Monitor<\/a><\/i> observes that the controversy over Noah<\/i> may reflect a generational shift between two kinds of evangelicals:<\/p>\n But the return of the biblical epic, say many in the industry, has a lot to do with changes among Evangelicals themselves.<\/p>\n \u201cI think what we\u2019re seeing is that there\u2019s really a break between two audiences in this group,\u201d says Erik Lokkesmoe, a co-founder of Different Drummer, a global marketing and publicity agency with expertise in the religious-themed film market. An older generation of Evangelicals, he says, places more of an emphasis on the \u201cmessage\u201d of a film versus the story and sees the value of a movie in its affirmation of cultural beliefs, or even its ability to convert an audience.<\/p>\n \u201cBut I think that is a peaking audience,\u201d says Mr. Lokkesmoe. \u201cThere\u2019s certainly a market for that, but it\u2019s not going to be the future, because I think more and more Evangelicals, especially young Evangelicals and young believers, are wanting more of a story-based, very aspirational kind of film.\u201d . . .<\/p>\n It is such an emphasis on the inherent ambiguities of storytelling, say industry observers, that might drive a younger generation of Evangelicals, who are more tech-savvy, diverse, and globally aware, to go out and see the new Bible-based films. <\/p>\n \u201cMy sense is that Noah really captured these more story-driven believers who are looking for pure entertainment that allows them to think deeply about their faith and about what it means to be a Christian \u2013 and even to create great imaginative works of art,\u201d says Lokkesmoe.<\/p>\n \u201cThey want to know the reality of characters,\u201d he continues. \u201cThey don\u2019t want it to be fixed and predictable, they want margins to allow themselves to be able to think about it, or have meaningful conversations about what the Scriptures are saying, or what should a filmmaker be portraying on the screen when it comes to the Scriptures.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The Wall Street Journal<\/a><\/i> notes, similarly, that religious groups are \u201csplit\u201d on Noah<\/i>. It adds some interesting detail on the role some Christians \u2014 especially Jerry Johnson and the National Religious Broadcasters \u2014 played in shaping the film\u2019s reception:<\/p>\n Crucial feedback on \u201cNoah\u201d came last month when Jerry A. Johnson, the head of the National Religious Broadcasters, settled into his seat in a screening room on the Paramount lot. His thumbs-up would give the studio a valuable endorsement from the largest network of Christian broadcasters in the U.S., reaching tens of millions of listeners and viewers.<\/p>\n Mr. Johnson, a Baptist who taught college courses on film and theology, wasn\u2019t quite prepared for some of what followed\u2014including Mr. Crowe\u2019s Noah scolding his son for picking a flower amid a desolate landscape, and later contemplating killing his infant grandchildren.<\/p>\n Before the lights came up, a member of the organization also invited to see the film turned to Mr. Johnson and said, \u201cI\u2019m not sure we should do this at the NRB.\u201d<\/p>\n While not endorsing or opposing the movie, Mr. Johnson says he objects to the movie\u2019s environmental message but applauds the film\u2019s \u201cserious treatment\u201d of sin and God\u2019s judgment\u2014and its high production value. At his urging, Paramount added a disclaimer to marketing materials saying the film is \u201cinspired by the story of Noah\u201d and alerting viewers that \u201cartistic license has been taken.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The Journal<\/i> also speaks to people who have been involved with upcoming films like Exodus: Gods and Kings<\/a><\/i> and the still-in-development Mary<\/a><\/i> and Pontius Pilate<\/a><\/i>:<\/p>\n \u201cMary,\u201d which producers expect to be released by Lions Gate Entertainment Corp. next year, chronicles the early years of Jesus\u2019 mother\u2014a focus one producer said would help cast her as a heroine for a market that\u2019s taken to young female characters like Katniss Everdeen of \u201cThe Hunger Games.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cHollywood is very predictable, and if \u2018Noah\u2019 doesn\u2019t work, Hollywood would take it as, \u2018We can\u2019t do this,\u2019 \u201d said Mark Johnson, a producer at Gran Via Productions who is developing a movie about Pontius Pilate at Warner Bros., with Brad Pitt slated to star. A Hollywood prayer group recently asked members to pray to give Mr. Pitt \u201cthe wisdom to take the role.\u201d<\/p>\n Support from influential church leaders can translate to endorsements from the pulpit and sold-out theaters.<\/p>\n Outreach can begin as much as a year before a film\u2019s release, and must engage \u201cbell cows\u201d: influential, socially connected Christians who can share the movie with others, said Larry Ross, who runs a Christian consulting and public relations company.<\/p>\n Barry Taylor, an Episcopal priest asked by filmmakers to review the script for \u201cExodus: Gods and Kings,\u201d a December release from director Ridley Scott and starring Christian Bale as an armor-wearing Moses, said Hollywood is trying to be respectful of believers without being \u201cheld hostage\u201d to particular interpretations.<\/p>\n Mr. Taylor, who teaches culture and theology at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, Calif., believes Hollywood \u201chas a genuine desire to have both support from and give honor to\u201d religious communities.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n On the day of the film\u2019s release, The Hollywood Reporter<\/i> also had a story looking at how many of the same church leaders who promoted Son of God<\/a><\/i> in February were being more cautious about Noah<\/i><\/a> \u2014 though some did like the film.<\/p>\n On a completely different note \u2014 trivial from a theological perspective but perhaps significant from an industry perspective \u2014 Pete Hammond<\/a>, who writes about everything Oscar-related for Deadline, asks whether Noah<\/i> might get any attention from the Academy<\/a> despite being released so early in the year:<\/p>\n Of course this is not exactly crunch time for serious 2014 Oscar contenders, so distributors need not worry too much about disgruntled voters getting turned away from their hot-button potential nominees. But recently I got an email from a veteran Oscar campaign consultant who asked the simple question, \u201cIs NOAH a contender?\u201d And it got me wondering if not only director Darren Aronofsky\u2019s towering epic, which screens Sunday at 3 PM, but also Wes Anderson\u2019s Grand Budapest Hotel, <\/em>which runs Saturday at 7:30 PM both<\/em> might actually have a decent shot at racking up numerous nominations, including Best Picture, despite <\/em>their first quarter release dates (Noah <\/em> opened March 28 and Budapest <\/em> has been playing since March 7th). Both are doing extremely well at the box office and riding high with critics too (Noah <\/em>is 77% fresh and Budapest <\/em>is 91% fresh at Rotten Tomatoes) and have the kind of first-rate production values to which Oscar voters usually pay serious attention. In fact, it is hard to imagine that either could possibly be denied a Production Design nod, for example, no matter what <\/em>comes along in the rest of the year. Both have potential way beyond that, at least on paper, as both also come from very critic and Academy-friendly directors. But the odds are already really stacked against these two if their respective studios have Best Picture ambitions brewing based on strong early response to the films. . . .<\/p>\n The fact is the Oscar voters just don\u2019t seem to have long memories anymore (no age jokes, please). The last film released before May to get a Best Picture nomination was Erin Brockovich, <\/em> a March release in 2000. Before that, Fargo, <\/em>a 1996 March release also managed a Best Pic nod. The last film to win <\/em>Best Picture with a first quarter release was 1991\u2032s Valentine\u2019s Day opener, Silence Of The Lambs. <\/em>Things are a little better for releases in the first half of the year if you come out in May or June. May releases Braveheart <\/em>(1995), Gladiator <\/em>(2000) and Crash <\/em>(2005) all managed to win Best Picture Oscars in the last quarter century, and most recently The Hurt Locker<\/em> (2009) <\/em>turned that trick despite a late June opening. In the case of the latter two movies, lots<\/em> of screeners helped enormously in leveling the playing field against stiff December competition. But the odds, at least based on more recent Oscar voting patterns, are clearly daunting for the Aronofsky and Anderson pictures. It\u2019s true that in 2011, Midnight In Paris <\/em> and The Tree Of Life, <\/em>both May releases, landed Best Picture nominations but the norm is more like 2013 when the earliest contender, Gravity <\/em>didn\u2019t come out until October. It\u2019s not called \u201cawards season\u201d <\/em>for nothing.<\/p>\n
\n<\/p>\n