This is a hard movie to watch and rate.
The Good: The images of the flood coming from both above and below the earth were spectacular. The trauma that Noah deals with during the flood and post-flood is beautifully depicted. I loved the image of Noah realizing that the ‘sickness’ is in him as well as the others. The story-telling of creation to fall to the flood was beautifully done. I also liked the tension of Noah and the family on the ark as they wrestle with the possibility that the Creator has forgotten them.
So with all that good, what ruins the movie?
I do think a director/writer has an obligation to the source material. Subtract the religious aspect of this movie and imagine the outrage if someone changed the story of Harry Potter or Thor. (Oh wait…they are doing that.)
Point is: if you have source material, use it. Go ahead and be creative when there are blanks to fill in but why have source material if you're not going to use it? The director did merge two ancient flood stories – the Bible and the Babylonian Enuma Elish. In the end – neither tradition gets a clear telling of their story.
Other issues? The role of Methusala was a complete waste of the talented Anthony Hopkins. And I still have no idea as to why he was even in the film.
The conclusion felt hollow and rushed. Noah at the beginning of the film leads an isolationist lifestyle focused on raising his children to be good stewards of the earth. How is this different at the end of the film? It's not. Their understanding of life, the Creator, the world isn't any different than the beginning. There really isn't a pay off to the story...at all.
It's just an average film and I expected more with this cast.