This movie presents a challenge when it comes to forming an opinion about it. The positives are undeniable: the visuals of the flood, both from the sky and rising up from the ground, were truly impressive. The emotional toll on Noah throughout the flood and afterward is portrayed with sensitivity. A particularly striking moment occurs when Noah recognizes that he carries a burden similar to those around him. The narrative arc, spanning creation through humanity’s downfall and culminating in the flood, was also skillfully presented. I appreciated the sense of unease created by Noah's family questioning whether the divine power has abandoned them while they are on the ark. However, what holds this film back? I believe filmmakers have a responsibility to respect the material they adapt. Consider how upset people would be if someone altered the plot of Harry Potter or Thor—and yet that’s happening. The point is, when you're working with existing stories, it’s important to utilize them. It's fine to add details where needed, but what’s the purpose of having source material if you aren’t going to incorporate it? The director did combine two ancient flood myths—the biblical account and the Babylonian Enuma Elish—but ultimately, neither story receives a complete or satisfying telling. There are other problems too. Anthony Hopkins' portrayal of Methuselah felt like a missed opportunity; his presence in the film seems almost pointless. The ending felt abrupt and empty. Initially, Noah lives as a recluse, dedicated to teaching his children about environmental responsibility. But by the end, nothing has changed. Their perspective on life, their understanding of the divine, and their view of the world remain exactly as they were at the start. There’s no real resolution or sense of purpose to the story. Ultimately, it's an unremarkable film, especially given the talent involved.

Source on TMDB