Darren Aronofsky Tweets Photo From ‘Noah’

COMMENTS (38)

• I dreamed of lots of things at thirteen, but as time passed many of these dreams were put aside as impractical, silly, youthful and /or not doable.

  Lucky Darren has Hollywood to make his dream, as a thirteen tear old, a reality. And, for what it is worth, Noah is at least not a remake, and I will predict this will not be remade, rebooted or have a prequel or sequel.

  Darren, this is your shot…prove me and the other doubters wrong.

  Comment by FTCS — Wednesday July 11, 2012 @ 4:59pm PDT  Reply to this post

  • yeah Darren, you owe it to this yahoo FTCS, don’t disappoint his fragile world.

    Comment by WTFcs — Wednesday July 11, 2012 @ 5:42pm PDT  Reply to this post

  • Okay this may be the single most incoherent post in the history of Deadline.

    Comment by Adam — Wednesday July 11, 2012 @ 6:04pm PDT  Reply to this post

    • Really, what are they going on about?

      Comment by Tom — Friday August 10, 2012 @ 1:23pm PDT  Reply to this post

  • what the hell are you talking about?

    Comment by uh — Wednesday July 11, 2012 @ 6:44pm PDT  Reply to this post

  • This is a movie. Not a cure for restless leg syndrome. Pump the brakes.

    Comment by OkyDoky — Wednesday July 11, 2012 @ 7:59pm PDT  Reply to this post

• Awesome. I love science fiction movies.

  Comment by Hank Petchow — Wednesday July 11, 2012 @ 5:25pm PDT  Reply to this post

• Right… what’s a “cubit”?

  Comment by Cosby — Wednesday July 11, 2012 @ 7:50pm PDT  Reply to this post

  • Cubic

    Comment by blueeyes0901 — Thursday July 12, 2012 @ 10:51am PDT  Reply to this post

    • You fail.

      Comment by b — Thursday July 12, 2012 @ 11:09am PDT  Reply to this post

  • Right! Who is this really?

    Comment by everyonesacritic — Friday August 10, 2012 @ 2:16pm PDT  Reply to this post

• Clarification:

  Obviously, in an effort to be nice I completely lost the point.

  I don’t get this film, and as much as I respect Darren’s directing talent with his all star cast…I believe this will be a major flop.

  Is that clear enough?

  Comment by FTCS — Wednesday July 11, 2012 @ 8:06pm PDT  Reply to this post

  • I understood and enjoyed your first comment, but the reboot was good too.

    Comment by markLouis — Wednesday July 11, 2012 @ 10:59pm PDT  Reply to this post

  • I too was able to read between the lines. You pretty much expressed my sentiment.

    Comment by Cinesnatch — Thursday July 12, 2012 @ 9:49am PDT  Reply to this post

• They could have saved a lot of money by using the ark from Evan Almighty. Universal would be happy to get some money back from that film and the ark they built is still around somewhere down south I think it’s a tourist attraction now.

  Comment by Noah Body — Wednesday July 11, 2012 @ 8:21pm PDT  Reply to this post

• 1. “Lucky” is not why Aronofsky is making movies and you are not. He’s one of the best directors working today. That might have a tiny bit to do with it.

  2. Look over your shoulder. You are the only doubter.

  3. Aronofsky proved himself some time ago.

  4. Are you on meds? Take them and stop posting.

  Comment by Vincent Hanna — Wednesday July 11, 2012 @ 8:27pm PDT  Reply to this post

  • I am a doubter. Yeah, Noah’s ark, I can’t WAIT to catch that one. I love the orig post. It’s called humor, get some.

    Comment by notafan — Thursday July 12, 2012 @ 8:32am PDT  Reply to this post

• Awesome! Is Aronofsky finally going to explain how Noah squeezed millions of pairs of species onto the boat and none of them ate each other yet none of them starved? Or how the Earth was covered in water, presumably salt water from the sea, yet when the water receded it still left lakes and ponds filled with fresh water. Come to think of it, how did fresh water species survive? Did Noah build a giant aquarium on the ark, too?

  Comment by Shazoink — Wednesday July 11, 2012 @ 8:29pm PDT  Reply to this post

  • Hello!!! SPOILER WARNING!!!

    Hey there you just gave away half the plot! Save a little for the rest of us.

    Love Aronofsky on a budget. Scares the hell out of me when he gets studio money to burn.

    Anyone want to defend The Fountain?

    Comment by JOSH HUFFMAN — Wednesday July 11, 2012 @ 10:01pm PDT  Reply to this post

    • Sure, Josh– I won’t defend the story, because that’s pretty subjective, but I will defend the budget.

      You consider $35M to be big studio money? The Fountain WAS Aronofsky on a budget. Noah’s budget will be upwards of $100M.

      Comment by Underground Anthem TX — Thursday July 12, 2012 @ 12:17pm PDT  Reply to this post

      • 35 million is on a budget??? To date all of DA’s studio films have been anywhere from 7-13 million. The Fountain was his biggest budget until Noah and one of his greatest misfires in my opinion. I just think some directors work better with financial constraints.

        Not bashing unseen work but far from sold.

        Comment by Josh Huffman — Thursday July 12, 2012 @ 5:50pm PDT  Reply to this post

  • @Shazoink 1.) Far fewer species of animals on earth at that time. “Kinds” of Gen 1 doesn’t necessarily equate to “species.” Micro-evolution (over time broadened number of species exponentially. 2.) Certain “clean” animals used for food were gathered in 7 pairs, not one pair. Pro-creation over 150 days they were in the arc kept clean species populated. 3.) Before flood, all surface water was most likely freshwater. Gen 7:11 states “springs of the great deep burst forth” suggesting underground tectonic activity. Underwater springs would have likely been super-heated by magma, and minerals in super-heated water will dissolve into salt. Therefore, salt water was a result of the flood. Sea species would have adapted over time (again, micro-evolution) to live in salt water. 4.) No, Noah did not take sea creatures on the arc. The answers to your questions are in Scripture, if you’ll take the time to read it before you scoff at it.

    Comment by Gabriel Caligiuri — Saturday July 14, 2012 @ 9:30pm PDT  Reply to this post

    • Hello. Not scoffing at anything, but your approach to explaining things interests me and I’d like to ask you about something you wrote, please;

      “3.) Before flood, all surface water was most likely freshwater”

      es this mean surface water (as in bodies of water on a continent) or surface water (as in water in the ocean/seas)was fresh water?

      kthanks

      Comment by alex — Saturday August 11, 2012 @ 11:49am PDT  Reply to this post

• Darren,
  Netflix: Evan Almighty
  It doesn’t end well.

  Comment by Ben There — Wednesday July 11, 2012 @ 9:17pm PDT  Reply to this post

• well this is no Black Swan

  Comment by joe — Thursday July 12, 2012 @ 6:28am PDT  Reply to this post

• Cimino, Lonergan, Aronofsky.

  Let’s hope not…

  Comment by rican havoc — Thursday July 12, 2012 @ 8:06am PDT  Reply to this post

• Did you know that every major culture has a “flood” story in their history? It sounds like most of you don’t read your Bibles. This true story is EPIC. Read Genesis 6 through 10. It would require big names and big budget to even pull this thing off. Must have dull minds caught up in iPods and facebook to be making comments like that. I’d prefer if everyone making their comments would preface their opinions with something like, ” I know I’m talking out of my head, completely ignorant, and have no clue what I’m talking about but……”

  Comment by yall are crazy — Thursday July 12, 2012 @ 3:21pm PDT  Reply to this post

  • All of the current species would not be on the ark. Only the “Kinds” of animals that breathe through nostrils that contained the genetic information to make all of the species were on the ark. See this video for a quick, explanation. It was a miracle, but the required animals all fit on the ark with plenty of room for food and water. Fish were in the ocean and floodwaters.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGkbMVCb4Wo&feature=g-all-lik

    Comment by Lonnie — Saturday July 14, 2012 @ 10:32am PDT  Reply to this post

• @ Shazoink – Because it’s a miracle. duh! read the bible it might help you with these question

  Comment by the truth serum — Thursday July 12, 2012 @ 3:56pm PDT  Reply to this post

• a cubit is/was a unit of measure roughly equal to the distance from the tip of a man’s fingertip to his elbow.

  Comment by scout — Friday July 13, 2012 @ 12:33am PDT  Reply to this post

• I’m predicting a flood sequels to this one. Hopefully we won’t get get them two by two.

  Comment by Stuart — Friday July 13, 2012 @ 3:50am PDT  Reply to this post

• Apparently the script is fairly dry.

  Comment by Stuart — Friday July 13, 2012 @ 3:52am PDT  Reply to this post

• Look into gentics, example: Wolfs came on the ship, not everybreed of dog, yet all dogs come from wolfs. This can be done will every species, see atleast evolutionists can agree with that.

  Also you take issue with how they got feed, yet not the issue of the flood, so of you can agree to the premise, God floods the earth, surely you can agree he can provide some grub on a timely basis.

  One last thing the water came from the deep and below, this wasnt salt water, this what flooded the earth. God bless.

  Comment by lance — Friday July 13, 2012 @ 7:41am PDT  Reply to this post

• You are very ignorant about the bible and the flood? Do you know why there was even a flood? Oh let Darwinism worry about the animals.

  Comment by Braytar — Sunday July 15, 2012 @ 10:14am PDT  Reply to this post

• Could be good. I like mythical stories. Much easier to suspend reallity. Russell Crowe is always great to watch.

  Of course, the photo of Russell Crowe as Noah has me perplexed. He does not look 600 years old. According to the bible, Noah was 600 when he got to work on his DIY project.

  Comment by Cyn — Friday August 10, 2012 @ 1:17pm PDT  Reply to this post

  • Actually, according to several sub-scriptures before the flood there was a constant cloud cover over the earth. This blocked out the harmful rays of the sun, so their skin wouldn’t have “aged” like ours does now. So he really wouldn’t have looked 900. And the residual “effects” or “energy” from their time in Eden would have kept him, strong and somewhat “young” or youthful.

    Comment by Zero — Friday August 10, 2012 @ 6:43pm PDT  Reply to this post

  • Sorry, I meant 600. I seemed to have gotten Noah’s age confused with Seth’s. LOL

    Comment by Zero — Friday August 10, 2012 @ 6:45pm PDT  Reply to this post

• Studio exec: I’m not up on my bible stories…

  Aronofsky: Think TITANIC meets…WE BOUGHT A ZOO

  Studio exec: Okay…

  Aronofsky: …meets…PASSION OF THE CHRIST

  Studio exec: huh… Brilliant! I know you work well with animals – that whole swan thing was genius.

  Comment by Anonymous — Friday August 10, 2012 @ 10:27pm PDT  Reply to this post