'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.

5 Democrats who have endorsed Kamala (and two who haven't)

Zach Gibson / Stringer, Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

With Biden removed from the 2024 election and only a month to find a replacement before the DNC, Democrats continue to fall in line and back Vice President Kamala Harris to headline the party's ticket. Her proximity and familiarity with the Biden campaign along with an endorsement from Biden sets Harris up to step into Biden's shoes and preserve the momentum from his campaign.

Glenn doesn't think Kamala Harris is likely to survive as the assumed Democratic nominee, and once the DNC starts, anything could happen. Plenty of powerful and important Democrats have rallied around Harris over the last few days, but there have been some crucial exemptions. Here are five democrats that have thrown their name behind Harris, and two SHOCKING names that didn't...

Sen. Dick Durbin: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

High-ranking Senate Democrat Dick Durbin officially put in his support for Harris in a statement that came out the day after Biden stepped down: “I’m proud to endorse my former Senate colleague and good friend, Vice President Kamala Harris . . . our nation needs to continue moving forward with unity and not MAGA chaos. Vice President Harris was a critical partner in building the Biden record over the past four years . . . Count me in with Kamala Harris for President.”

Michigan Gov. Whitmer: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

The Monday after Biden stepped down from the presidential VP hopeful, Gretchen Whitmer released the following statement on X: “Today, I am fired up to endorse Kamala Harris for president of the United States [...] In Vice President Harris, Michigan voters have a presidential candidate they can count on to focus on lowering their costs, restoring their freedoms, bringing jobs and supply chains back home from overseas, and building an economy that works for working people.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

Mere hours after Joe Biden made his announcement, AOC hopped on X and made the following post showing her support: "Kamala Harris will be the next President of the United States. I pledge my full support to ensure her victory in November. Now more than ever, it is crucial that our party and country swiftly unite to defeat Donald Trump and the threat to American democracy. Let’s get to work."

Rep. Nancy Pelosi: ENDORSED

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is arguably one of the most influential democrats, backed Harris's campaign with the following statement given the day after Biden's decision: “I have full confidence she will lead us to victory in November . . . My enthusiastic support for Kamala Harris for President is official, personal, and political.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Stringer | Getty Images

Massasschesets Senator Elizabeth Warren was quick to endorse Kamala, releasing the following statement shortly after Harris placed her presidential bid: "I endorse Kamala Harris for President. She is a proven fighter who has been a national leader in safeguarding consumers and protecting access to abortion. As a former prosecutor, she can press a forceful case against allowing Donald Trump to regain the White House. We have many talented people in our party, but Vice President Harris is the person who was chosen by the voters to succeed Joe Biden if needed. She can unite our party, take on Donald Trump, and win in November."

Former President Barack Obama: DID NOT ENDORSE

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Former President Barack Obama wasted no time releasing the following statement which glaringly omits any support for Harris or any other candidate. Instead, he suggests someone will be chosen at the DNC in August: "We will be navigating uncharted waters in the days ahead. But I have extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges. I believe that Joe Biden's vision of a generous, prosperous, and united America that provides opportunity for everyone will be on full display at the Democratic Convention in August. And I expect that every single one of us are prepared to carry that message of hope and progress forward into November and beyond."

Prominent Democratic Donor John Morgan: DID NOT ENDORSE

AP Photo/John Raoux

Prominent and wealthy Florida lawyer and democrat donor John Morgan was clearly very pessimistic about Kamala's odds aginst Trump when he gave the following statement: “You have to be enthusiastic or hoping for a political appointment to be asking friends for money. I am neither. It’s others turn now . . . The donors holding the 90 million can release those funds in the morning. It’s all yours. You can keep my million. And good luck . . . [Harris] would not be my first choice, but it’s a done deal.”

How did Trump's would-be assassin get past Secret Service?

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Former President Donald Trump on Saturday was targeted in an assassination attempt during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania. It occurred just after 6:10 p.m. while Trump was delivering his speech.

Here are the details of the “official” story. The shooter was Thomas Matthew Crooks. He was 20 years old from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. He used an AR-15 rifle and managed to reach the rooftop of a nearby building unnoticed. The Secret Service's counter-response team responded swiftly, according to "the facts," killing Crooks and preventing further harm.

Did it though? That’s what the official story says, so far, but calling this a mere lapse in security by Secret Service doesn't add up. There are some glaring questions that need to be answered.

If Trump had been killed on Saturday, we would be in a civil war today. We would have seen for the first time the president's brains splattered on live television, and because of the details of this, I have a hard time thinking it wouldn't have been viewed as JFK 2.0.

How does someone sneak a rifle onto the rally grounds? How does someone even know that that building is there? How is it that Thomas Matthew Crooks was acting so weird and pacing in front of the metal detectors, and no one seemed to notice? People tried to follow him, but, oops, he got away.

How could the kid possibly even think that the highest ground at the venue wouldn't be watched? If I were Crooks, my first guess would be, "That’s the one place I shouldn't crawl up to with a rifle because there's most definitely going to be Secret Service there." Why wasn't anyone there? Why wasn't anyone watching it? Nobody except the shooter decided that the highest ground with the best view of the rally would be the greatest vulnerability to Trump’s safety.

Moreover, a handy ladder just happened to be there. Are we supposed to believe that nobody in the Secret Service, none of the drones, none of the things we pay millions of dollars for caught him? How did he get a ladder there? If the ladder was there, was it always there? Why was the ladder there? Secret Service welds manhole covers closed when a president drives down a road. How was there a ladder sitting around, ready to climb up to the highest ground at the venue, and the Secret Service failed to take it away?

There is plenty of video of eyewitnesses yelling that there was a guy with a rifle climbing up on a ladder to the roof for at least 120 seconds before the first shot was fired. Why were the police looking for him while Secret Service wasn't? Why did the sniper have him in his sights for over a minute before he took a shot? Why did a cop climb up the ladder to look around? When Thomas Matthew Cooks pointed a gun at him, he then ducked and came down off the ladder. Did he call anyone to warn that this young man had a rifle within range of the president?

How is it the Secret Service has a female bodyguard who doesn't even reach Trump's nipples? How was she going to guard the president's body with hers? How is it another female Secret Service agent pulled her gun out a good four minutes too late, then looked around, apparently not knowing what to do? She then couldn't even get the pistol back into the holster because she's a Melissa McCarthy body double. I don't think it's a good idea to have Melissa McCarthy guarding the president.

Here’s the critical question now: Who trusts the FBI with the shooter’s computer? Will his hard drive get filed with the Nashville manifesto? How is it that the Secret Service almost didn't have snipers at all but decided to supply them only one day before the rally because all the local resources were going to be put on Jill Biden? I want Jill Biden safe, of course. I want Jill Biden to have what the first lady should have for security, but you can’t hire a few extra guys to make sure our candidates are safe?

How is it that we have a Secret Service director, Kimberly Cheatle, whose experience is literally guarding two liters of Squirt and spicy Doritos? Did you know that's her background? She's in charge of the United States Secret Service, and her last job was as the head of security for Pepsi.

This is a game, and that's what makes this sick. This is a joke. There are people in our country who thought it was OK to post themselves screaming about the shooter’s incompetence: “How do you miss that shot?” Do you realize how close we came to another JFK? If the president hadn't turned his head at the exact moment he did, it would have gone into the center of his head, and we would be a different country today.

Now, Joe Biden is also saying that we shouldn't make assumptions about the motive of the shooter. Well, I think we can assume one thing: He wanted to kill the Republican presidential candidate. Can we agree on that at least? Can we assume that much?

How can the media even think of blaming Trump for the rhetoric when the Democrats and the media constantly call him literally worse than Hitler who must be stopped at all costs?

These questions need to be answered if we want to know the truth behind what could have been one of the most consequential days in U.S. history. Yet, the FBI has its hands clasped on all the sources that could point to the truth. There must be an independent investigation to get to the bottom of these glaring “mistakes.”

POLL: Do you think Trump is going to win the election?

Kevin Dietsch / Staff, Chip Somodevilla / Staff, Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Image

It feels like all of the tension that has been building over the last four years has finally burst to the surface over the past month. Many predicted 2024 was going to be one of the most important and tumultuous elections in our lifetimes, but the last two weeks will go down in the history books. And it's not over yet.

The Democratic National Convention is in August, and while Kamala seems to be the likely candidate to replace Biden, anything could happen in Chicago. And if Biden is too old to campaign, isn't he too old to be president? Glenn doesn't think he'll make it as President through January, but who knows?

There is a lot of uncertainty that surrounds the current political landscape. Trump came out of the attempted assassination, and the RNC is looking stronger than ever, but who knows what tricks the Democrats have up their sleeves? Let us know your predictions in the poll below:

Is Trump going to win the election?

Did the assassination attempt increase Trump's chances at winning in November?

Did Trump's pick of J.D. Vance help his odds?

Did the Trump-Biden debate in June help Trump's chances?

Did Biden's resignation from the election hand Trump a victory in November?

Do the Democrats have any chance of winning this election?

What is the Secret Service trying to hide about Trump's assassination attempt?

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor, Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

This past weekend we were mere inches away from a radically different America than the one we have today. This was the first time a president had been wounded by a would-be assassin since 1981, and the horrific event has many people questioning the competency and motives of the supposedly elite agents trusted with the president's life.

The director of the Secret Service apparently knew about the assassin's rooftop before the shooting—and did nothing.

Kimberly Cheatle has come under intense scrutiny these last couple of weeks, as Secret Service director she is responsible for the president's well-being, along with all security operations onsite. In a recent interview with ABC, Cheatle admitted that she was aware of the building where the assassin made his mark on American history. She even said that she was mindful of the potential risk but decided against securing the site due to "safety concerns" with the slope of the roof. This statement has called her competence into question. Clearly, the rooftop wasn't that unsafe if the 20-year-old shooter managed to access it.

Glenn pointed out recently that Cheatle seems to be unqualified for the job. Her previous position was senior director in global security at America's second-favorite soda tycoon, PepsiCo. While guarding soda pop and potato chips sounds like an important job to some, it doesn't seem like a position that would qualify you to protect the life of America's most important and controversial people. Even considering her lack of appropriate experience, this seems like a major oversight that even a layperson would have seen. Can we really chalk this up to incompetence?

Former Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

The Secret Service and DHS said they'd be transparent with the investigation...

Shortly after the attempted assassination, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees the Secret Service, launched an investigation into the shooting and the security protocols in place at the rally. The DHS promised full transparency during the investigation, but House Republicans don't feel that they've been living up to that promise. Republican members of the House Oversight Committee are frustrated with Director Cheatle after she seemingly dodged a meeting scheduled for Tuesday. This has resulted in calls for Cheatle to step down from her position.

Two FBI agents investigate the assassin's rooftop Jeff Swensen / Stringer | Getty Images

Why is the Secret Service being so elusive? Are they just trying to cover their blunder? We seem to be left with two unsettling options: either the government is even more incompetent than we'd ever believed, or there is more going on here than they want us to know.

Cheatle steps down

Following a horrendous testimony to the House Oversight Committee Director Cheatle finally stepped down from her position ten days after the assassination attempt. Cheatle failed to give any meaningful answer to the barrage of questions she faced from the committee. These questions, coming from both Republicans and Democrats, were often regarding basic information that Cheatle should have had hours after the shooting, yet Cheatle struggled with each and every one. Glenn pointed out that Director Cheatle's resignation should not signal the end of the investigation, the American people deserve to know what happened.

Glenn's Show Prep