alexan1 I was surprise by low rating of this film. I think it's perfect movie for this kind of story. Some people said it's not historically accurate, but who know if Bible is historically accurate itself. I think that including Sodom and Gomorrah story to the film's plot is totally appropriate. Good cast: Jon Voight is perfect, his wife (Mary Steenburgen) is good too. And James Coburn. And what I like most, it's humor in almost of every scene, for example:How did it happen? God destroyed them for their wickedness. Some religious thing, huh? So, I recommend this film to everybody, who is interested in religion and especially who is not.

takecarebeware I bought this as part of a boxed set of other Hallmark mini-series. I had just watched In The Beginning which wasn't too bad, it went the same length of time as Noah's Ark and included several story lines from the Old Testament, from Genesis to Exodus. Though the DVD did have a video fault for some of it which distracted. Noah's Ark was one biblical story for about the same length of time so some amount of filler seemed to be expected. The story is basically somewhat of a mess. Though I wouldn't say the acting was bad. I don't know why people associate bad movies with bad acting automatically. I was amused when Mary Steenburgen seemed to change into Kate Bush during the late boredom sequence on the ark. For reasons known only to the makers, though time length was probably a factor, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah was added. Our God of this story justifies the destruction as being a warning that went unheeded and so led to the flood. Though I gather these events in the bible occurred much after the flood. Seemingly aware of this odd take on the story, our Noah and wife talk about their mistrust of scribes and how they would probably not include them as being present during the events of Sodom and Gomorrah. The voice of God at times oddly resembles John Huston from the 1966 movie of the bible. Apparently if you are going to do the voice of God, that one seemed like the way to go. Noah gets going on the building of the ark sometime into the story. I don't know if I missed it, but I don't recall God telling him to build the ark when Noah started, just to walk around a field with a stick. Reviewers who called this an attempt at Monty Python were correct. At times it quite obviously seems to evoke Python with almost endless witty dialogue and silly mugging. The other reviewer who said it showed how God worked in mysterious ways by encouraging people to check the real story in the bible was probably correct too. Noah is shown as drinking alcohol quite a lot and this apparently was correct about him. Maybe the cults and debauched behaviour before the flood is meant to show why God means to destroy life on earth, though I didn't see what was funny about the mass killing in the town by water. It seems to go too far with other boats showing up after the flood. Here it seems to evoke Waterworld. It is with some relief that it is confirmed that all life is killed after these episodes. The high point of absurdity is when the human crew of the ark respond to boredom and start acting crazy. I'm sure Noah said something about poisonous mushrooms at some point, which might explain the writing too. It is during this that Mary Steenburgen turns into Kate Bush.I watched this as part of Easter viewing but the disregard for the biblical account is a bit too distracting. Special effects seem crude for the most part but effective enough.The possible reason this was made in Melbourne might have been because of the tank used. A late version of Moby Dick was made there also with Gregory Peck having a part. I was amused by the obviously Australian acting at times in Noah's Ark.

ejonconrad Let's make this clear, I'm rating this highly because it's a very entertaining BAD movie. If you like that sort of thing (and you know who you are), this may be the movie for you. If you're looking for a serious Biblical epic or an *intentionally* funny movie, keep looking.I saw some clips on Encore, and assumed it was a parody (think "Monty Python's Life of Noah"). Then I googled it, and realized it was meant to be taken seriously. With that in mind, it's kind of like a horrible car wreck you can't look away from.Where to start...First of all, they combine the stories of Sodom and Gomorra. Since I don't actually believe either one, this didn't bother me so much. God warns Noah that He's going to destroy Sodom, and Lot gets saved because he's Noah's friend, rather than the whole "Please rape my daughters" thing that's in the Bible. In fact, Lot's daughters are left out entirely, which also gets them out of the awkward part where he gets drunk and has sex with them after they leave the city (what, you never learned that part in Sunday school?). The Ark stuff comes later.In order to make appeal to a wider audience, the "punched it up" a bit, with action, cheesy special effects, and attempts at humor, some which are funny - although the funniest bits are unintentional. There's also an incredible amount talent wasted on this film. Oscar winners (!) Jon Voight and F. Murray Abraham play Noah and Lot, with Mary Steenburgen and Carol Kane playing their wives. Even James Coburn makes a couple cameos. Their salaries didn't leave them a lot left over for minor things like decent sets. The battle scenes really do look like Monty Python. In addition to playing Noah, Voight also provides the voice of God, presumably because they couldn't afford James Earl Jones. Also, what is it about made for TV movies and accents? Noah and his wife clearly have American accents, while most other people - including their kids - have strong British accents.The tone is a roller coaster, ranging from sincerely reverent, to bawdy humor (Lot: "Not staying for the orgy, Noah?") to actual slapstick (Lot's wife fall head first into a vat of dye at one point). The music faithfully tracks the tone, transitioning from Cecile B. DeMille to Three Stooges.You may wonder why the flood happens only halfway through the movie. Without giving any spoilers, I'll just say that there's plenty to come. Grab your beer and popcorn, because that's when things get *really* weird.So if you like to watch bad movies and give them the Mystery Science 3000 treatment, keep this one in mind.In the end, I dinged it a couple of points because as a two part miniseries, it's a bit too long, and when it's not really bad, it's merely boring. I'm seriously considering buying the DVD so I can edit down to a 90 minute party cut.

alicia-95 The first piece stupidity in this is the author having Noah living in Sodom with his family and his "nephew" Lot. Second they have Noah living in Sodom a city that did not exist in Noah's day. Third they have the destruction of Sodom occurring BEFORE the flood rather than several millennia later.Noah did not live in Sodom, Sodom did not exist in the time of Noah. Lot was Abraham's nephew and Noah was nothing more than a VERY distant(in time)ancestor.Basically the author has confused the the story of Sodom and Gomorrah with the story of Noah, events that were separated in time by several thousand years. It is a sad commentary on the author's knowledge of the Bible.If you want a huge laugh at the stupidity of the people who made this movie, go ahead and watch it.