Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...

New Pic From 'Noah' Reveals Darren Aronofsky's Ark Has A Lot Snakes In It

News
by Kevin Jagernauth
September 25, 2012 4:54 PM
12 Comments
  • |

Is there a rodent problem on the ark? That must be the case, or else Noah missed that whole "two of each" detail from God, because there are a lot of motherfucking snakes on this motherfucking boat.

This newest look at "Noah," Darren Aronofsky's upcoming biblical epic, comes courtesy of his regular collaborator, cinematographer Matty Libatique, who posted the pic to Twitter saying: "Pre lighting on the holiest day of the year." (Meaning Yom Kippur, for all you Gentiles). There is also an alligator in there too, so hopefully no one who is part of Noah's gang is afraid of reptiles and closed spaces.

The movie will be tackling the familiar Sunday School fable, although imbuing it with lots of elements that aren't part of the usual story kids hear, with Cain and Abel making an appearance, along with Methuselah, and crazy demon angels. So really, snakes aren't even the half of it.

Starring Russell Crowe, Jennifer Connelly, Douglas Booth, Logan Lerman, Emma Watson, Ray Winstone, Anthony Hopkins, Kevin Durand and Mark Margolis, "Noah" will ride the waves on March 28, 2014.

News
  • |

More: Noah

Free Indie Movies and Documentaries    

12 Comments

  • Archer Slyce | September 26, 2012 6:40 AMReply

    Samuel L. Jackson should join the cast ... "I have had it with these motherfucking snakes on this motherfucking ark". Seriously though, I guess I'm one of the few who will gladly pass on this one (haven't dug anything from Aronofsky in years).

  • snakeboat | September 25, 2012 10:18 PMReply

    2 types of every species of snake. so he gets lots of them shits. then puts them asleep with magic dust (no shit). so they don't run riot all over the place.

  • HUH? | September 25, 2012 10:01 PMReply

    I thought Saoirse Ronan was attached previously but never confirmed? 'Noah' isn't listed on her IMDB unlike the other actors involved...

  • Real | September 26, 2012 12:11 AM

    Saoirse was never attached. Dakota Fanning was the first choice but had a scheduling conflict so Emma Watson was her replacement.

  • Eoin Daly | September 25, 2012 11:59 PM

    I think Saoirse was replaced by Emma Watson which was a bad choice.

  • Kevni | September 25, 2012 10:09 PM

    Brainfart.

  • jimmiescoffee | September 25, 2012 9:06 PMReply

    March 28, 2014...really odd release date

  • Ray H | September 25, 2012 7:55 PMReply

    "Snakes. Why'd it have to be snakes?" Whoops, wrong Ark! :P

  • cirkusfolk | September 25, 2012 6:20 PMReply

    There is no logical reason why this can't be done in time for a December or even a November release in time for the awards...why March of 2014...March is for shitty movies!

  • Huffy | September 26, 2012 5:03 AM

    It probably means that they know something that we don't. In other words, this might not be the kind of picture that appeals to the Academy. Given the liberties that it's taking with the source material I think it's likely that this could be a more genre-oriented take, which would definitely not be the Academy's cup of tea.

  • monsoontitty | September 25, 2012 10:16 PM

    I feel like ever since 300 opened to big numbers in March of 07, some studio always tries to cram an epic fx picture into a March slot. (10,000 bc, watchmen, alice in wonderland, sucker punch). maybe they feel it has better legs as an event picture than an awards season winner.

  • Christian | September 25, 2012 5:19 PMReply

    This is gonna be SO epic!

Email Updates