Name: Noah.
Age: Minus two weeks.
Appearance: That depends. There are about seven different versions.
I'm confused. I thought there was only one Noah in the Bible? And didn't he live for 950 years? Sure, in a biblical kind of way.
But? But we're not talking about Noah the person, we're talking about Noah the movie.
There's a movie? Actually there are several. They all star Russell Crowe as Noah, and they were all directed by Darren Aronofsky.
Eh? Paramount Pictures has edited and re-edited Aronofsky's original to try to find a version that Christians will go crazy for, like they did for The Passion of the Christ.
OK. And how's that going? Not well. Test audiences didn't like Aronofsky's own cut and they didn't like at least four others either – despite one of them featuring a religious montage and a Christian rock finale.
What? Why not? There were reports of people complaining about the scene in which Noah gets drunk and then curses his son Ham, who walks in on him naked and hungover. Even though that is pretty much exactly what happens in the Bible, according to Genesis, chapter nine.
Ah. And I suppose it might also be a rubbish film? That cannot be ruled out.
Still, lots of people around the world aren't Christian. Maybe some of them will like it? Maybe, but I wouldn't count on the Muslims. The film has already been banned in Qatar, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, and Paramount expects further bans in Egypt, Jordan and Kuwait.
Ouch. How come? Noah is also a sacred figure in Islam so, as with Muhammad, depicting him is considered to contravene Islamic laws.
Even as a very bearded Russell Crowe, Oscars be upon him? Nope. In the end, Paramount has just gone back to Aronofsky's version – and put a statement on its advertising about "artistic licence" and being "true to the essence" of the original Noah story.
In the sense that it's total fiction? Er, no. I don't think that's what it meant.
Do say: "Picture this: Gladiator meets Singin' in the Rain."
Don't say: "Why would a Jewish man call his son Ham?"
