'Babylonian Chainsaw Massacre’: Glenn reviews Noah after attending screening in LA

March 24, 2014

The Glenn Beck Program

Glenn spent an action-packed weekend in California, and he reflected on the experience on radio this morning. On Friday, Glenn addressed a crowd at David Horowitz’s West Coast Retreat in California over the weekend about the importance of culture and American history. On Saturday, Glenn had lunch with the Friends of Abe – a group of roughly 1,500 conservative-minded individuals in Hollywood who made headlines earlier this year when it was revealed they had been trying for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status for nearly two years.

But perhaps the most surprising event on Glenn's itinerary was a private screening of the soon to be released motion picture Noah at Paramount Studios. On Friday, Glenn had some harsh words for the movie that has already been panned by critics for its “aggressive environmentalism” and failure to mention God.

Perhaps in an effort to change the buzz ahead of the film’s release this week, Paramount executives reached out to Glenn and asked if he would like to join them for a screening of the movie. Admitting he felt like a bit of a “dirtball: on Friday for basing his critique purely on someone else’s review, Glenn decided to take Paramount up on its offer.

But would the screening change his mind?

Not exactly.

On radio this morning, Glenn did explain why the movie is “awful” – not for the reasons The Hollywood Reporter review listed – but for “100 other reasons.”

PLUS: Photos from Glenn's tour of the Paramount Pictures studio backlot

Below is a partial transcript of Glenn's review:

I went to Los Angeles this weekend after we talked about the movie Noah on Friday and not such a nice way. The producer of the movie, or executive vice president of Paramount called and found out I was in Los Angeles and asked if I would actually see the movie and judge it on its merits. He said the reviewer we were basing our comments on was completely wrong, and he kindly invited us to come to the studios and watch the final print of the movie on Saturday. And we did, because I felt like kind of a dirtball, basing my review on something that I hadn't seen but on someone else's review. That's what people do to me. They don't listen or watch and then they review. It was wrong of me to do. I want to say this: Everybody at Paramount was unbelievably gracious. And I would love, as I said to him after the movie, I would love to be able to come and report that the movie is great, but I can't. It is awful, but it is not for the reasons that the reviewer said on Friday. It is awful for 100 other reasons.

Friday, we talked about the review. And in the review, it say it was a heavy-handed environmental movie and there was no mention of God… The review made it sound like this was a godless climate change movie. I believe that it is not a godless climate change movie. It's more like Sinbad the Sailor meets Shining and Friday the 13th, with a sprinkle of Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome.

And it plays as well as a movie that was just clipping all of that stuff together. Instead of referring to God as God, every reference in the movie is ‘the creator.’ That's fine, but they are definitely talking about God. Noah doesn't really seem to have a real good relationship with God. He sees some miracles, like oh, I don't know, his whole family being saved. In an amazing scene, he plants a seed and an entire forest grows in the desert, while he is standing there. Then he looks into the tent and he's like, ‘Kids, here's the one for the ark.’ Really, Mr. Noah? That's what you would say? You wouldn't even go behold the awesome power of God. You wouldn't go, ‘Whoa!’ That was weird… It's so ridiculous, the entire thing. But he is talking to God occasionally…

If you are looking for a biblical movie, this is definitely not it. Others on the team disagreed with this. This was split. Half the team said they couldn't take the environmentalism. I don't think it's an environmentalism thing as much as it's just pro-animal and antihuman. I mean strongly antihuman, but it's not the story of Noah that I was hoping for. If you are going for that, you will be horribly disappointed. If you are going for a campy, kind of bad, this is the movie to see. If you are looking for something good, you might not make it past the rock people because we nearly didn't.

Giant rock people appear at almost the beginning of the movie, kind of like the tree people in Lord of the Rings, except not as well done and of course made of rock. Not quite as talkative. I suppose they won't burn as easily as the tree people, but… don't bother checking on the scriptural reference to the rock people…

Have you ever wondered, ‘Hey, how did Noah clear the forest that just sprung up?’ Of course the rock people that God sent down as spirits. Then they were encased in lava, and then they got up, they're like, ‘Oh, we are watchers. We help Adam. We help you now too.’ You're like honestly? I felt really bad, because as the rock people story line continued, we all got giggling fits and we started to laugh and mock the movie. And at one point looked over and realized the executive vice president of Paramount, who invited us was standing this, observing how we were reacting to it. And I'm like, ‘I don't think we're going to get out of here without telling him exactly how we feel because I think he probably knows at this point.’ Literally laughing at the rock people.

That’s not the biggest problem with Noah. The biggest problem for me was Noah himself. Maybe it's just me. I'm a little different than some people. I always thought of Noah as more of a nice, gentle guy, prophet of God… I think of him more like that and less of the homicidal maniac that Paramount found in the Bible somehow or another… That is more of the Noah in the Babylonian Chainsaw Massacre – running around, not kidding, trying to kill his whole family… Really quite amazing.

Kathleen Parker in the Washington Post, she really liked the movie. She says:

I recently viewed the film and can confidently report the following: If you liked “Braveheart,” “Gladiator,” “Star Wars,” “The Lord of the Rings,” “Indiana Jones” or “Titanic,” you will like “Noah.” If you liked two or more of the above, you will love “Noah.” Your enjoyment increases exponentially with each movie checked above, though I should warn that “Titanic” made the cut for only one reason, the major difference between it and “Noah” being obvious. “Noah” also includes the essential love story or two, without which no story floats.

Kathleen, could I tell you something, honey? I don't know what kind of medication you are on, but I loved all of those movies, and all of us hated Noah. We honestly had a conversation, ‘Is it too rude to get up and walk out now, because we've got other things to do. We can go collect rocks in the parking lot, where there's other things we could do?’

[…]

I don't care if you believe in the Noah story. I don't believe if you think it's an allegory, if you believe it's complete fiction, it is entirely up to you. I happen to believe the story of Noah's Ark is true. And after the invitation, we went and we really wanted to like it. We really did… I really want a good Noah movie.

Bill Maher is like, ‘You can't be satisfied.’ Rock people, Bill. Rock people. And people like Bill Maher will say, ‘Well, you believe in a sky God.’ I don't believe in rock people, okay? I have a hard time with that one. It's not just a biblically bad movie because it treats a prophet of God like a lunatic. There's no redeeming value in Noah, none. He hates people. I'm sorry. No prophet of God hates people. I never see him try to breach and say turn from your evil ways. Instead, he hides from people because he hates them so much.

He tries to kill his own family. To me, a prophet receives direct communication from God, and Noah is wrong about everything… In the end, the person who makes all the sense is Hermione from Harry Potter. I know she was always the smart one at Hogwarts; but in the ark, I would have liked the prophet of God Noah not to have to go to Hermione and say, ‘Really? We shouldn't kill the whole family?’ It's crazy. Crazy…

It's a $100 million disaster. That's what it is. They just don't know what to do… I wish I could have brought different news to you, but I can't. And I appreciate the people at Paramount understanding because I did talk to them after. It was a really uncomfortable 20 minutes afterwards. He was in there pitching. I wish I can, but I can't. And I'm sorry. Next time – please invite me again and hopefully it will be a good movie.

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The dangerous lie: Rights as government privileges, not God-given

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is America’s next generation trading freedom for equity?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Glenn's Show Prep