The Dumbing Of America Continues
It’s the new political correctness – science is now considered too controversial for America. A movie about the most important scientist of the 19th century and one of the most important scientists ever has failed to find a U.S. distributor.
The film has sparked fierce debate on US Christian websites, with a typical comment dismissing evolution as “a silly theory with a serious lack of evidence to support it despite over a century of trying”.
Jeremy Thomas, the Oscar-winning producer of Creation, said he was astonished that such attitudes exist 150 years after On The Origin of Species was published.
“That’s what we’re up against. In 2009. It’s amazing,” he said.
“The film has no distributor in America. It has got a deal everywhere else in the world but in the US, and it’s because of what the film is about. People have been saying this is the best film they’ve seen all year, yet nobody in the US has picked it up.
“It is unbelievable to us that this is still a really hot potato in America. There’s still a great belief that He made the world in six days. It’s quite difficult for we in the UK to imagine religion in America. We live in a country which is no longer so religious. But in the US, outside of New York and LA, religion rules.
I’m not sure who has deemed this film too controversial. So, even films based on real historical figures should not be allowed to pollute other people’s minds. Seriously, what is happening in this country? Is our discourse now being controlled by angry, loud nuts?
Despite what some people want you to believe, evolution is not a scientific controversy. It’s the central principle of modern biology. Let me put this another way – modern advances in biology would not be possible without an understanding of the principles of evolution. Evolution is only a religious and political controversy – creationists can’t win through science, so they’re taking their case to politics. It won’t work – creationism isn’t science and the Bible is not a science textbook. The only thing the anti-science activists are hurting is American competitiveness.
For more information and creationists an.d their propaganda, this is the best place to start: The Index of Creationist Claims.
Tags: Science
The anti-science crowd is, imo, an extremely dangerous threat to the progress of our country. I can’t believe they can’t find a distributor for this film, yet the theaters are over-flowing with teenage soft porn flicks.
Exactly pandora! The Darwin movie is about the struggle with faith, and that’s a subject a lot of people struggle with. It also features Darwin’s wife, who was always a faithful Christian. I’m not sure what their problem is except that their faith is very weak and they’re afraid exposure to information might push them over the edge of something. It’s a quality movie with high quality actors.
UI
Not to negate the point you are making, but I think the producer protests too much. Most of the reviews in the European press have been at best luke-warm, some downright dismissive. So while I am sure the Christian right is not ready for a pro-Darwin movie, it’s also a convenient tactic for a producer who needs to be able to say, “I’d have a major hit on my hands if you religionists hadn’t refused to let people see the film.”
Steve,
I don’t necessarily disagree. I’ve heard it had good reviews but I do think a producer could use some negative comments on a discussion board as an excuse for why it’s not getting distribution. It’s supposedly opening the Toronto film festival so we’ll have to see what happens there.
But, Steve, if we actually had a standard for movies in this country your reasoning would apply. Even if this isn’t a great movie, the fact that it’s been turned down when our theaters are full of crap speaks volumes.
It is more than a convenient tactic. It is an excellent tactic that the christianists have used for years, such as their annual “War on Christmas” (which always seems to start earlier every year).
todays argument is that this Darwin movie can’t find a distributor because the movie industry is controlled by right wing christians?????
put down the crack pipe and step away from the keyboard.
First and foremost, if the church is being truly effective in blocking this from being picked up, then screw ’em, because they can’t legally block it. Additionally, then screw the industry and the producers for being tremendous cowards in peeing in their pants when faced up against the church.
I’d like to look more into Steve’s comment about the producer possibly being the master-marketing manipulator. Hey, if your topic slaps one of the highest-held beliefs of established religion in the face, what is the cheapest and most viral way to get marketing? Wag the religion dog feverishly.
I highly doubt…HIGHLY doubt religious groups successfully banded together and prevented this movie from going into distribution. Remember the Last Temptation of Christ? The church was FURIOUS it was distributed. They also were at one of their most unified points in recent history in standing against it. How well did that iron-wall work for them? It was full of rust holes, that’s for sure. What about the movie? It was TERRIBLE! It also was one of the lowest marketing-cost campaigns of major releases at the time? Can you figure out why? The Golden Compass freaked out some religious groups as well. Terribly misguided, but freaked them out. No effect, other than free press for the movie.
I will say again, I’d like to look much further into Steve’s comment, because that is what history has for us right now. Even the producer mentioned LA and NY are the exception. Where do the industry execs sit, for crying out loud? LA and NY! Personally, while I think religious groups would freak out over this movie, I think the producer exaggerates greatly, is a conniving coward, or is full of shit. He is clever, though, I will give him that.
As a Christian…a fairly free-thinking one at that…I am interested in seeing this movie. I’d probably have to wait for DVD or FiOS, but still am interested. However, I also think this bah-Christians is exaggerated and convenient.
Like UI said, let’s see how this rolls through Toronto.
“todays argument is that this Darwin movie can’t find a distributor because the movie industry is controlled by right wing christians”
Nope, that’s not it. Reading comp? You flunk.
The article clearly states that DISTRIBUTORS won’t carry the movie. They are not “controlling” anything, and aren’t studios. Try reading it again, dumbo.
I suspect any and all distribution problems for the film are monetary, as in “it’s a dog and we’ll lose are shirts”. As for Evoloution Deniers they cannot, by definition advance thier cause beyond thier base of “Believers” without inviting epic scorn and laughter. In short these Creationists (with or without “science” appended) are eternally libel to “The King Has No Cloths!”. Dangerous? They wish.
Not likely, wikwox, based on its strong reviews at the film festival. Such films typically get snapped up quickly.
More likely, IMHO, is that the filmmakers are trying to stoke controversy to get the movie some attention. I’ll be surprised if there isn’t a distributor within a week.
thanks for the chuckle geezer
The producers may be trying to gin up interest and controversy for their film, but it still begs the question of why this film has distribution pretty much everyplace else but here. While The Last Temptation of the Christ made established, conservative churches quiver in their boots — The Passion of the Christ ( a Really Bad Movie) got endorsements from many of them. We are also a world away from the time when The Last Temptation was released — the Summer of Spittle that was ginned up by corporate actors is probably part of the calculation. This may be great publicity, but it ignores the management headaches it gives the local movie house managers.
And if you remember that the chrisitianists who want to force their way on the question have no compunctions about taking people to court, I’m not sure that bah-christians isn’t too far off of the mark.
I actually think that if this movie sucks, it should not get a deal. Let’s face it, even movies about Darwin are subject to natural selection. In this case, “the market” is the ecosystem. Ironically, this discussion may be one of the movies adaptations that will help it thrive and eveade its predators (the anti-Darwin Christianists). Just like dinosaurs, the movie doesn’t have a right to survive. It has to find its way through a gauntlet of challenges.
Geek…aren’t you too busy to comment? 😉
Just trying to make my way through a Darwinian world.
I agree that the producers are probably trying to stir up controversy, but this would not work if the U.S. was not being perceived as being run by the noisy minority. In other words, the U.S. is seen abroad as being held captive by a religious zealots.
Lots of movies suck and they get a deal. Have you seen what is on offer at the local multiplex these days?
over 150 years of opportunity and not one single shred of evidence has appeared to refute the theory of evolution.
nice track record but not good enough for the Zeus lovers.
fake but accurate…
I think non-Americans make that assumption at their peril. Seriously.
Do you really think that a distributor gives a damn about the blowback on a controversial movie? They care about how many screens they will be able to show it on.
What if the real story here is that the producer hasn’t gotten a sufficiently large enough offer to distribute the film? Then we are talking about a price negotiation, not a lock-out.
I do agree that religion holds a ton of sway on policy, and that is wrong that it does. Religion is a personal choice that has wide ramifications on how a person leads his/her life. The operative here is that it is a personal choice; therefore, it should not be compelled upon others. I absolutely agree that the perception is out there about the US in general. Until I see what comes of this in Toronto, though, I will not waver in thinking that this guy is manipulating the crap out of a golden opportunity to lessen his own costs of marketing while increasing the scope of his opportunity. It’s a great tactical move to make, which is exactly why I am on board with Steve’s comment at this point. I am open to change my view, but only as the reaction to this film becomes more known and provable (noting that Steve put forward contradictions to the producer’s earlier claims).
On the bah-Christians thing, maybe it’s because I am more of the exception than the rule, but I don’t stop people from living their lives. If you are within the laws of the state, country, etc., then live-away to your content. On that, I reject the negative-label assigned to it. I am realizing that being part of the exception-sample that I am looking upward at a wall that reaches into the clouds in trying to deflect the label (in no short-part to the “rule” of the Christian population), but it does not mean I have to roll over and accept it as a characterization of me. By pointing it out once-or-twice, I am simply reminding anyone about the awareness of using blanket labels, after that, I let it go, given the broader understanding of the landscape.
They care about how many screens they will be able to show it on.
Indeed, but when the town hallers show up screaming about whatever they’ve been told to scream about, that is the locals’ problem. And they aren’t going to want it.
“Do you really think that a distributor gives a damn about the blowback on a controversial movie?”
Let’s ask Glenn Beck.
On a more serious note, LG, we’re not talking about a blockbuster Hollywood movie trying to gain more screens. If this is a typical small-scale or indie movie, they’re going to play mainly to art houses anyway.
Lots of movies suck and they get a deal. Have you seen what is on offer at the local multiplex these days?
Yes, and Saw XXVII will put people in the seats at the multiplex. A remake of Little Women… Not so much.
If this guy is pissed that he is getting an Art House price on his film and it is an Art House film, screw him.
Steve put forward contradictions to the producer’s earlier claims
Such as? This movie had a premiere this month in London and Toronto. As of today there aren’t many reviews period, much less European ones. And apparently plenty of distribution deals were made without waiting for the critics to weigh in.
Yes, and Saw XXVII will put people in the seats at the multiplex. A remake of Little Women… Not so much.
This is what art houses are for, and why some of us will pretty routinely take the drive to Philly to see movies.
Geezer – I agree. What the producer has said is that no one has made a deal yet. This doesn’t mean that there have been no offers. It is quite a leap to say that the just because he has premiered a movie, he should already have a distribution deal. A deal has terms and assumptions, and if they don’t match, no deal.
I read it 2 ways.. either the right wing lunatics are loud enough that distributors really fear a christian terrorist attack if they carry it, (maybe in 5 more years) OR its a publicity stunt to play on the idea that America is a dumb far right christian nation… as the right wing lunatics would want.
I find it very hard to believe that NO ONE will carry the movie. I also think the big names wont carry it because it is… explosionless. (i assume) Odds are, it will pick up fame in UK and Europe and far left leaning places in america as “the movie the Right doesn’t want you to see”. Play this movie backwards and you’ll hear “satan lives!!!”
Cassandra – I agree with you as well. I love Art Houses, but I have no idea what a distribution deal is like for one of these. The comparisons made so far have been the Last Temptation (which I liked, BTW) and Passion. Both showed on thousands of screens. We are talking about a film that will play on dozens of screens.
i like steve’s Assertion that this movie wont play here b/c it isn’t that good. No bad movies ever get picked up and played in the US
What is the crappy movie target audience? It is easy to make a crappy kids movie, because some kids will show up no matter what the reviews say. Same goes for teen slasher movies, just make a great trailer.
But the same may not be true of a movie that will open on 100 screens. Then again, Hedwig and the Angry Inch got picked up…
I don’t think this movie is a small arthouse film. It has some well-known actors, like Jennifer Connelly.
Smitty,
I certainly agree with live and let live. I think one’s personal beliefs are one’s personal beliefs. The problem is that some people won’t leave it at that and are trying to get their religion taught in school.
The Onion’s ultimate Darwin story:
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/evolutionists_flock_to_darwin
LOL, Geezer, that was hilarious.
We’ve seen part of the Darwin story in Master and Commander, and I don’t recall any uproar over that film. Maybe this film isn’t being picked up because it needs Russell Crowe.
It’s a miracle!
Very funny, Geezer…
“It has some well-known actors, like Jennifer Connelly”
There are plenty of well-known actors that do “art house” movies. And in the interest of fairness, Connelly is married to the lead of the movie, Paul Bettany.
Oooo….don’t go with the well known actors route…
(note, this is intended to be more funny than anything)
I can’t wait for the angry backlash when Judd Nelson and Lea Thompson’s blockbuster “Mayor Cupcake” doesn’t get the distribution it deserves!!!
“Behold the power and glory of the scientific method!”
LoL, Geez. Thanks for the laugh.
I wonder if Connelly will continue her movie nude-scene consecutive streak? Let’s hope so!
ATM
If I understand the industry, distribution rights typically are sold long before the film is finished and, thus, have nothing to do with how good or bad the film is.
The film has been produced by BBC films, which isn’t an inexperienced or small budget producer, by European standards. One can assume they were shopping for a U.S. distributor with some diligence.
In other words, while it may be a marketing ploy, it’s not a very good one, and it should have been used months ago, before the film was out and when there was still a chance to get an American distributor to promote the film while it is “fresh”. Now, even if a small distributor takes it, all regular theaters and even most art houses have their fall bookings in place…and then they hit the holidays, which are completely booked with hopeful-money-makers.
Distribution rights aren’t always snapped up before a film is done — picking up distribution deals is often a big part of why producers want to show at some of the major film festivals — Cannes, Sundance and Toronto may be the best known for that. But I think you are right, PM, that the Fall and Christmas bookings may be done and those bookings are often targeted to the big film prizes.
This film isn’t an obscure piece from some kid out of film school and was selected to open the Toronto Film Festival.
I’d pay to see an alternate-history movie where Darwin gets assassinated by a secret religious order and science goes forward without knowledge of evolution.
I think the Masons existed forever and created the galaxy and the planet and quite possibly, some of the people we have coincidentally been accusing of being non-humanly robotic-like. All of these so-called earthly caves were truly intended to be secret passages for members-only, but land-explorers, filled with their own, evil intent ruined the whole Masonic system. National Treasure LXXXIII (random number) will cover this expose, but only if it can pass the seemingly insurmountable task of making it into distribution. 😛
dv
I didn’t say the movie won’t be picked up and played because it isn’t good; there are, however, some less than wonderful notices circulating on it, and it would not be … unusual … for a producer to look for some other explanation.
cassandra,
For all the things you’ve ever said that I disagreed with, this one comment makes it all better for me
The Passion of the Christ ( a Really Bad Movie)
Not only bad, but nauseatingly bad and just as anti-semitic as its worst critics said.
Let’s step back here for just a minute and forget all the science/religion argumentation.
Ask yourself a more basic question — who would REALLY want to go see the movie? Who is the audience for it, and is it a big enough audience to make distributing it commercially viable?
Ayn Rand was a significant political philosopher — and I even agree with some of her philosophy — but I’ve got no interest in a Rand biopic. And how did the Kinsey movie do commercially — I really don’t recall? Is Darwin such an intriguing figure with a compelling, exciting life story that people would really want to watch a movie about his life? And it may be a great film (think Shadowlands about CS Lewis or Amazing Grace about William Wilberforce), but do Americans want to sit through another artsy film about another Brit rather than the latest blockbuster adventure film — showing that the taste (or lack thereof) of the American film-going public may be as much of an issue as anything else.