Marginal Noah's Ark cartoons

I recently posted a list of 'all' the screen productions to adapt the story of Noah and the flood. As ever with these things you soon remember how impossible it is to list them 'all': there are just too many. With a story as popular as this there are always brief fantasy sequences where lead characters imagine themselves as Noah, or something that someone has just created for YouTube (how many views of an original Noah adaptation make it a worthy production in itself).

Anyway, as part of that process I went back on forth several times on a handful of films that all landed somewhere around the cut-off line, and, seeing as I'm wanting to post some brief thoughts about some of the Noah / flood / Ark films I've watched recently, I thought I'd start with these, particularly as the first two go back to the 1920s.

Amateur Night on the Ark (1923)

Between 1921 and 1929 American animation pioneer Paul Terry produces a series of over 450 cartoons called Aesop's Fables Cartoons, the earliest of which, such as The Cat and the Canary (1922) were more closely related to Aesop than Amateur Night on the Ark. Terry had started out at Thanhouser animating a character called Farmer Alfa, and when he left them in 1917 to set out on his own he brought his "star" Alfa with him. 

The Alfa character a bald older man with a white beard, featured in many of Terry's silent animations and here he appears as the sole human aboard a steamboat called "Ark" which aside from the chimney emit smoke as it powers the boat forward, otherwise resembles Noah's Ark (see above). But he's never identified as Noah, and his role doesn't really correspond to the biblical character. The Amateur Night" is a variety show which families of animals (certainly not just pairs) turn up for, and Alfa is takes the door money. Later he appears on stage, but is chased off stage when a box match he is performing in is exposed as a fake. 

Really, then, Terry's black and white cartoon uses aspects of the Noah story, the shape of the boat, the look of the character, the exotic animals, in a more modern context, with a certain amount of  anthropomorphising of the animals. However, aside from the use of the word “Ark” and the presence of animals and an older man, Amateur Night has little to do with the flood story, other than cultural resonance, so I might not qualify it at all as a Noah film, but for it's similarities with... 

Availability: YouTube.

Noah's Lark (1929)

As with the above, Noah's Lark, directed by Dave Fleischer, starts off as recognisably as a modern-twist on the biblical tale. Noah is portrayed as a modern-era sailor replete with an anchor tattoo on his forearm and accompanied by The Sailor's Hornpipe. If that all sounds a little reminiscent of a certain spinach-chumping sea-farer then you won't be surprised to know that it was Dave Fleischer's big brother Max who adapted the Popeye comic strip for the screen in 1933 (the comic strip began in 1929 as well).

As with Amateur Night the original biblical premise, a bunch of animals stuck on a boat captained by a human, is merely a leaping off point for Fleischer's flights of fancy and artistic imagination. Here it spins it off far beyond the typical edges of what that usually entails, as the animals -- who here seem more of a crew -- arrive on land to a fairground and get involved in all kinds of antics and visual jokes (a monkey plucking a tiger's stripes as bass notes in the soundtrack being a particularly good gag given this cartoon was from the early months of the talkie era).

So again the links to the biblical story are fairly tangential, but the use of the song "The animals came in Two by Two" over the opening credits, the explicit reference to Noah in the title, and the pun on Ark, the fear of the (flood) waters and perhaps just the sense of their joy/relief when they arrive on land once again tip their hat just a little more in that direction than the previous film. 

Availability YouTube.

Yogi’s Ark Lark (1972)

As with the above films, Yogi's Ark Lark has little to do with the flood story, other than cultural resonances. Again the boat in question is called “Noah’s Ark” and their are animals (Yogi Bear and a host of his other, early 1970s Hanna Barbera cartoon colleagues) and an older man who is named Noah. Essentially Yogi and friends get together and share their worries about the state of their home environments, such as their homes are being destroyed by litter and over-population and so decide to leave it all behind on an ark and head off in search of "the perfect place" (a phrase that becomes the title of a song that is used regularly throughout the show).

What was interesting for me was how the complaints about the state of the world were far more soft-right than you would get on this kind of show today making a host of usually fairly wacky characters seem rather old in yearning for a lost past they (presumably) ever experienced. Moreover, ultimately , they decide on a rather ‘Big Society’ solution of sorting out those issues themselves, with Top Cat and Lenny, for example, deciding not only to clean up their alley, but their entire city.

It all makes for pretty dull entertainment. Jokes are thin on the ground, with even the moments of slapstick falling short (actually if anyone had literally fallen short of something, it might have been the funniest thing in the programme) and the Noah parallels are extremely thin indeed. The Noah character really only feels like he's been brought on board [wink] to make the catchy title stick.

Availablity: archive.org.

Animaniacs: Noah’s Lark (1993)

The Animaniacs take on the flood story comes in episode 33 Cartoons in Wakko's Body where it sits alongside two other stories The Big Kiss and Hiccup. I'm not overly familiar with Animaniacs, so my comments will probably seem a bit odd to those who know the show, but essentially this is a kids-focussed cartoon, although very much with a few adult jokes smuggled in for the benefit of any adults watching. The New York comic style of deadpan humour is particularly to the fore, not least in Noah’s detached cynicism. Other jokes include some late-to-the-party, yet snobby, hippos and Noah’s fear of spiders.

Jokes aside this one sticks fairly closely to the plot. It's certainly far more recognisably a Noah story than the three episodes above. Interestingly, Noah (pictured above) is a lot younger here with dark hair and no beard. He also likes playing with one of those table tennis bats with the ball attached to it with a bit of elastic. While I'd have to consult with an archaeologist to be sure, I don't think those are in the Bible...

Availability: The only place I found this online gave me PC issues.

(Image taken from the Cartoonatics blog)

Gospel Films Library: Scores of old Bible films free on GFA's new website

At various times in the past I've mentioned the wonderful work done by Bob Campbell and the rest of the team at the Gospel Films Archive in preserving mid-20th century biblical films and other Christianity-related films. 

So it's really exciting to mention their new website – Gospel Films Library – where you can now view dozens of old biblical movies, not only for free, but also without any ads etc.

There's a really good range of these films available from short, rarely-treated stories from the Hebrew Bible such as Ruth (1948) to those released in cinemas such as Day of Triumph (1954, my review). When I think about what I had to go through to watch this film when I first got into Bible movies around the year 2000, it's incredible how easy it is now!

There's a bunch of films I've already reviewed, such as the Living Christ series, No Greater Power (1942), The Living Bible : Old Testament series and Queen Esther (1948) as well as those I'm planning to review when I get a moment. There's also a making of documentary for Day of Triumph  which I am looking forward to seeing.

One of the things that is really good about the new site is that it seems really easy to navigate – it's laid out nicely like a modern streaming service. And for those who might prefer (and are based in the US/Canada or Mexico) you can also stream it on Roku. Check it out and bookmark it as I'll be reviewing some of these films in the coming weeks and months.

Noah's Ark: A Musical Adventure (Arca de Noé, Brazil, 2024)

Despite all my research into the story of the flood in recent months, somehow I almost missed the release of Noah's Ark: A Musical Adventure, or as it is known in it's native Brazil, simply Arca de Noé. It's an animated film that sits squarely in the box of animation for kids and hit theatres in the UK rather aptly during the summer holidays when parents often find themselves seeking shelter from the rain.

Arca is inspired by a 1975 poem by Brazilian poet, musician, playwright and diplomat Vinicius de Moraes, perhaps best known outside of his own country for pioneering bossa nova music on the soundtrack for Orfeu Negro (Black Orpheus, 1959) along with his co-writer Antônio Carlos Jobim, singer Elizeth Cardoso and guitarist João Gilberto. Moraes' poem (translated here) offers a loving tribute to the biodiversity of the flood story. Noah gets a mention, early on but Moraes quickly moves on to his family, before there's a flurry of neat little descriptions of animal activity overflowing with life.

If this adaptation of the flood story comes to us via Moraes, directors Alois Di Leo and Sergio Machado and their writers Heloísa Périssé and Ingrid Guimarães have certainly brought in plenty of their own ideas too. Neither the Bible nor Moraes talk about two musical mice who having not received an invitation to board the ark, delivered courtesy of literal blue birds, are determined to try and get on anyway. The bluebirds, certainly as represented by their leader Kilgore, tip the hat to various cultural landmarks: the delivery company; Apocalypse Now;* the former Twitter logo; and the computer game turned movie Angry Birds. In a way they typify the movie, which always feels like it's trying to be, or at least refer to, something else. At times it feels like Madagascar (2005) or Singin' in the Rain (1952) or The Lion King (1995). Even Noah's quirky coloured shades seem to borrow from El Arca (dir: Juan Pablo Buscarini, 2007) although I suppose that may in turn derive from an illustrated children's book based on Moraes' poem that's popular in both South American countries. 

Like various animated re-tellings of the flood story, Noah's role is fairly small (the last animated Noah film to percolate down to local cinemas in the UK, 2015's Two by Two, left him out entirely). We witness him hearing God's call at the start of the film, and he crops up regularly throughout, but we do so mainly because one of the film's two rodent heroes Vini and Tom/Tito awakes during the moment of revelation and so goes to investigate.

The moment itself draws on God's call to Moses in films like The Prince of Egypt, although here the booming words from the sky are accompanied by southern lights-style colours in the sky. This is particularly apt given that I've been enjoying their northern counterparts causing wonders this week amidst the aesthetically pleasing aftermath of the X7.1 electromagnetic solar storm.

In a strange sort of way it's God's part of the conversation with Noah that seems most reminiscent of the call of Moses. God does not come out of it particularly well. He's presented as unstable and unpredictable. Initially he tells Noah of his plans to destroy the world and the audience can sympathise with Noah when he questions what he's told with "don't you think that's a bit much?" Recently I've been comparing the way Jewish tradition contrasts Noah, who in the Bible fails to protest when God informs him of his plans, with Abraham and Moses, both of whom question God and win some concessions as a result. So if God is shown in this film to be a bit changeable, that certainly has its origins in the Bible. 

Soon after, God moves into a more angry mode when Noah fails to agree straight away: "am I stuttering?" he thunders back in a way that will perturb both fans of the Bible/Torah/Qur'an and anyone who, like me, is finding the repeated use of that particular phrase deeply grating. But then when Noah asks what God's going to do while he is building the boat, God seems slightly hurt as he suggests "I can get the invitations out". 

Having realised God's plans, the two mice (or are they rats? I'm sure they're called both during the course of the film) decide to try and sneak aboard, even though the invitations are quite clear that it's only one male and female of every species. Back at Noah's house this part of God's dictum is also causing some consternation. "What about other types of families?" Noah's granddaughter Susana asks. It's fair to say Susana is not on board with the whole operation. When her grandfather fist reveals his plans she exclaims "What if everyone drowns? That's going to look so bad for him."

Interestingly Susana becomes the film's most prominent human from that moment on. She's a similar age to most of the film's target audience (about 7 I would imagine) and is enchanted by and becomes friends with many of the animals. Still it's interesting that concerns that pass many by are put so simply and eloquently on the lips of a young child. From a biblical point of view, it's interesting that Noah's three sons are not really part of the film. Susana is not presented as an orphan, nor is there any mention of them. Given the kind of film this is, I think that's quite a bold and positive move. The symmetry of the eight people on board the ark in Genesis doesn't completely preclude infants, and it makes the story far more relatable to its core audience (children).

The film's other interesting decision in this respect is that -- aside from the call of Noah -- Noah's wife (called Ruth here) gets equal screen time her husband thereafter. This is something of a first. Both Jennifer Connelly in Noah (2014) and Joanne Whalley in The Ark (2015) play more-developed versions of Noah's wife than the character found in the Bible whose actions and contributions are not recorded; whose words are not documented; and who is mentioned only as a passenger. Here her contribution is certainly felt. She brings warmth, wisdom and compassion to proceedings, a care for the animals and for Susana. 

More recent depictions of the flood story, particularly 2014's Noah, have been criticised for their all-white casts (see Wil Gafney, Micah David Naziri and Ryan Herring for example). But this film is not a Hollywood film, it's from Brazil, a country where, according to its latest census, "45.3% of the country’s population reported being brown.... 43.5% reported being white... 10.2%, black". So it's perhaps not surprising that this ethnic mix is reflected in the three human characters: Susana is depicted with brown skin, Noah is White and Ruth is depicted as and voiced by a Black woman. It's surprising that it's taken so long for this mix of nationalities to emerge, given that the conclusion of the story is that all people (and thus all ethnicities)  come from the handful of humans who survive the flood.

If questions about "other types of families" and the use of a diverse 'cast' sound a little too modern, then this probably isn't the film for you. The film delights in slipping anachronistic elements of the modern world into this almost pre-historic story. There are mentions of selfies, body shaming and going viral. The Scar-esque male lion Baruk even tells the other animals to "give me a like" at one point. 

Anyway, having got wind of the ark's imminent departure, Tom and Vini (who is presumably named after Moraes) try to get onboard anyway. Their first effort sees them simply walking up the gang-plank along with all the other animals, simply hoping not to get seen. However, as they progress up the slope their mood turns to fear. Indeed, there's an unusual atmosphere among all the animals. The film really brings out their differing concerns. Big creatures are concerned about stepping on smaller ones. Some worry other animals will eat them. The latter fears turn out to be not without foundation. When the verbosely loquacious Baruk and some of his predator cronies see so many animals in such a confined space they draw on another modern phrase describing the scene as an "all you can eat buffet". I can't quite work out if giving the lion a very similar first name to a recent US President is a deliberate reference to American self-interest overseas, but perhaps I'm reading too much into that.

But the musical duo's initial efforts flounder when they meet Nina, the female mouse who had received an official invite. Having two male mice turn up throws her off guard and the resulting kerfuffle sees plan come into action. A second, much smaller boat, housing some of the other less-desirable animals has set sail to try and board the ark surreptitiously. Here we find that the cockroaches, mosquitoes and head lice turn out to be of a far greater moral character than the king of the beasts, Baruk.

Despite Baruk having seized control of the assembled animals, through fear and intimidation, he has one fatal flaw -- a desire to be lauded as a musician and it's here where the mice and their new friends are able to use their musical prowess to save the day. But this whole extended section is overly complicated and dull and even an interesting subplot involving a low-on-confidence dove can't keep the second half afloat. Moreover, despite a number of songs being crammed into this final section, none of the film's music really stands out. I wanted Tom and Vini to have at least one really good ballad. 

That said, the film is certainly not as bad as its current 4.3 rating on IMDb suggests. There are some interesting ideas as well as some fun ones and, among the plethora of nods to other films, there's some originality there as well. That's quite an achievement given 4000 years of adaptations of the flood story. So even if it's nowhere near The Prince of Egypt (1998) its certainly superior to 2002's Jonah a VeggieTales Movie.  

* I owe that observation to Jeremy Clarke's review of the film.