Catholic Exchange

USCCB’s Review of Evan Almighty

Written by

U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops

in

Funnyman Steve Carell might not seem a likely choice for a present-day Noah, replete with white beard and flowing robe, but he turns out to be just dandy in Evan Almighty (Universal/Spyglass), a delightful contemporary spin on Genesis.

At the outset, Carell (reprising his TV anchorman role from Bruce Almighty) is leaving the nightly news desk in Buffalo, NY, having just been elected to Congress.

Together with his wife, Joan (Lauren Graham), and their three young sons — Dylan (Johnny Simmons), Jordan (Graham Phillips) and Ryan (Jimmy Bennett) — they move into a luxurious new home in the fictitious town of Huntsville, Virginia. Before retiring to bed that first night, he kneels at his bedside and prays to God to "change the world."

At work, he meets his chief of staff, Marty (John Michael Higgins), administrative assistant Rita (Wanda Sykes), fawning intern Eugene (Jonah Hill) and his patron — powerful Congressman Long (John Goodman) — who wants him to co-sponsor a major bill.

He takes the assignment as a great honor, but it will mean reneging on his promise to spend time with his boys.

The stage is set for an ideal life, but suddenly unwanted lumber and tools begin showing up on his front lawn. And his digital alarm clock-radio starts setting itself to 6:14 — the verse in Genesis containing God's injunction to Noah to build an ark. Then those numbers start showing up everywhere else, too. Is someone trying to tell him something?

Even when Evan is visited by God (in the person of Morgan Freeman) who speaks of an impending flood, Evan refuses to accept the obvious. But before long, especially with birds and animals suddenly besieging him two by two, he comes to accept his mission, much to the skeptical consternation of his staff and wife.

Director Tom Shadyac and screenwriter Steve Oedekerk skillfully mix slapstick with sentiment and surprising reverence. The script has admirable pro-family and pro-environmental themes, the latter providing sensible rationale for the biblical events as they play out.

All these elements are beautifully embodied in Carell's seriocomic central performance. Early on, Carell gets to do his comic shtick, including being bitten in the crotch by a mutt, shaving his nostril hair in an extended montage, and coping with the swarm of birds that poop on his suit as they perch on his head.

But as he starts to morph into Noah, with a beard he simply cannot shave off, and rough-hewn ancient robe he cannot remove, the funny shenanigans subside and he projects warmth and humanity through his eyes alone. Frankly, Carell's playing Noah and indeed the central section of the "serious" part of the story are far better done than the comparable John Huston sequence in 1966's The Bible.

Freeman's God is likewise carefully and reverently written and enacted. His gentle advice to Joan — who has left home with the kids, thinking Evan has lost his mind — is a special high point.

The paired animals (part real, part computer graphics), the flood effects and even the physical ark itself are heart-stoppingly beautiful in their execution, and there's a powerful message stressing the importance of performing one act of random kindness at a time to change the world.

The film contains a smattering of mildly crass language, humor, irreverence and innuendo. The USCCB Office for Film & Broadcasting classification is A-II — adults and adolescents. The Motion Picture Association of America rating is PG — parental guidance suggested. Some material may not be suitable for children.

Comments

  1. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    This is the first positive review I have seen for this movie.  Surprising!

    Thanks.

    GK – God is good!

  2. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    It's really expecting a lot from nearly anyone in America today, to actually grasp the splendor of Christianity.  This is all the more so in Hollywood.  I am far more interested in which way it will lead viewers.  If it leads them closer to God than they were before, then the film is a blessing.

  3. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Is this film a glass mostly empty or partly full?

    Should we expect our culture to produce a motion picture regarding Noah as a type of Christ? No, not really.  But perhaps this movie is a teachable opportunity for us to talk to others, and better learn ourselves, about how Noah points to Jesus Christ.

    ·         How he was called upon to do God's will in the midst of an evil world,

    ·         how he trusted God when no one else did,

    ·         how he was ridiculed and yet persevered,

    ·         how his family came to trust God through him,

    ·         how God's covenant with Noah was for the whole world,

    ·         how the ratio for the ark's dimensions match the ratio of a human being,

    ·         how the wood of the ark points to the wood of the cross,

    ·         how all creation is saved through him,

    ·         how life flowed from the side of the ark like life poured forth from the side of Jesus on the Cross,

    ·         and on and on.

    It's the same movie — we can either see it as a missed opportunity or make into an evangelizing opportunity. The difference will be how we respond to it.

  4. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    I am seldom impressed by the reviews that are done at the bishops homepage.  Do they have more then one person doing these?

    Is there something we can do to encourage improvement?

     

    Churchbeast – i don't recall running across many catholic figures who go so far as to suggest that noah as a person did not in fact exist. 

     

    there is a need however to recognize 2 things:

    1) gensis was not a science book and what it says is meant as much metephorically as historically

    2) gensis was written from the prespective of it's human author as inspried by the holy spirit.

     

    So,  when gensis says 'the flood covered the whole world' it is not NESSARY to believe it covered the entire earth only the whole world as known to the person who told the story as it was passed down to the author of gensis.  The whole world can be for instance the whole known world.

    The important thing is this: weather the entire earth or the whole 'known' world was flooded , the moral lesson to be learned is the same.

     

  5. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    1) There is plenty of scientific evidence to show that there was a world wide flood.

    2) And although the Bible is not a science book it still is accurate in its science.

    I have found that ideals like you have given usually, but not always, are started by a liberal Christian or a scientist that has more faith in science then in God.

    I understand that it is not NESSARY.to believe it covered the entire earth. But were does it end? Every time scriptures says something happened, do we have to say it was somebodies perspective only because we think we can not prove it?

    Todd Davis

  6. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Todd,

    Read Dei Verbum, the Vatican II document on Sacred Scripture.  It's less than ten pages long (5,000 words) and very readable.

    PTR!

Leave a Reply

More posts