Charles Darwin film 'too controversial for religious America.'

**humanmachinery** · September-13-09, 05:53 PM

Creation, starring Paul Bettany, details Darwin's "struggle between faith and reason" as he wrote On The Origin of Species. It depicts him as a man who loses faith in God following the death of his beloved 10-year-old daughter, Annie.

The film was chosen to open the Toronto Film Festival and has its British premiere on Sunday. It has been sold in almost every territory around the world, from Australia to Scandinavia.

However, US distributors have resolutely passed on a film which will prove hugely divisive in a country where, according to a Gallup poll conducted in February, only 39 per cent of Americans believe in the theory of evolution.

Movieguide.org, an influential site which reviews films from a Christian perspective, described Darwin as the father of eugenics and denounced him as "a racist, a bigot and an 1800s naturalist whose legacy is mass murder". His "half-baked theory" directly influenced Adolf Hitler and led to "atrocities, crimes against humanity, cloning and genetic engineering", the site stated.

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.

"Charles Darwin is, I suppose, the hero of the film. But we tried to make the film in a very even-handed way. Darwin wasn't saying 'kill all religion', he never said such a thing, but he is a totem for people."

Creation was developed by BBC Films and the UK Film Council, and stars Bettany's real-life wife Jennifer Connelly as Darwin's deeply religious wife, Emma. It is based on the book, Annie's Box, by Darwin's great-great-grandson, Randal Keynes, and portrays the naturalist as a family man tormented by the death in 1851 of Annie, his favourite child. She is played in the film by 10-year-old newcomer Martha West, the daughter of The Wire star Dominic West.

Early reviews have raved about the film. The Hollywood Reporter said: "It would be a great shame if those with religious convictions spurned the film out of hand as they will find it even-handed and wise."

Mr Thomas, whose previous films include The Last Emperor and Merry Christmas Mr Lawrence, said he hoped the reviews would help to secure a distributor. In the UK, special screenings have been set up for Christian groups.

Hyperlink Tool says this is downright scary.

I don't even know what to say.

**Gistok** · September-13-09, 06:04 PM

The Freedom Fries crowd would have a field day protesting that film... their mantra would likely be something like... "we don't need no 'furriners' shoving this movie down our throat..."

Which sometimes makes the term "intelligent design" seen like an oxymoron...

**Jimaz** · September-13-09, 07:34 PM

Creation, the movie

**Mikeg** · September-13-09, 07:42 PM

Sounds like promotional hype to me, similar to the recent fake Christian protesters that were part of a marketing campaign for the "Dante's Inferno" EA video game. This film will find a US distributor, just as numerous other films have that were found to be offensive by the deeply religious.

BTW, that Gallup poll found that only 25% of Americans do not believe in the theory of evolution.

ccbatson · September-13-09, 11:26 PM

I say air the show...so much for pigeonholing conservatives.

I took a bit of a cheap shot there to be honest, as an Objectivist [[for the most part), I am not a big fan of blind faith in mysticism.

**elganned** · September-14-09, 07:26 AM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

I say air the show...so much for pigeonholing conservatives.

Another place where we agree. Darn, this is starting to scare me...

**gnome** · September-14-09, 08:09 AM

I went to the website you listed:
www.movieguide.org and tried to find the movie review for Creation. Every time I tried it, even using their Advance Search feature:

There were no results found for your search

At first I thought maybe you had to be a member to see their reviews, but that does not seem to be the case as I was able to find reviews for The Proposal and other current films.

In fact, the only references to negative content reviews of the film came from third-hand sources like the one you posted. I'm wondering if I haven't done proper research, and am hoping you could provide links to negative content reviews and actual evidence showing that a conspiracy exists.

Goodness, it couldn't be a marketing tactic to create pushback against a non-existent threat, could it?

**ndavies** · September-14-09, 08:18 AM

This is Bullshit. Maybe there's no US distributer because the movie sucks or the distributers don't think they could make any money with it.

Let's face it. This is the United States. If a distributer thought they could make money with it they wouldn't give a rats ass about the protesters. They would welcome the controversy. It would be a boatload of free PR. It would drive people to the theater just to see what the big deal was about.

This sounds like pure PR bullshit to me.

**Sstashmoo** · September-14-09, 08:36 AM

Quote: "I say air the show...so much for pigeonholing conservatives."

Sounding rather loose there Batts, one could even surmise "liberal"

Re: the fake outrage publicity stunt. People of faith in this country are well aware that religion is under attack and are well aware of how it will play out.

**elganned** · September-14-09, 10:26 AM

Originally Posted by ndavies

Let's face it. This is the United States. If a distributer thought they could make money with it they wouldn't give a rats ass about the protesters. They would welcome the controversy. It would be a boatload of free PR. It would drive people to the theater just to see what the big deal was about.

Though I have no opinion concerning this particular film, I agree with you in principle.

Witness Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ from 1988.

ccbatson · September-14-09, 07:40 PM

Would you consider Libertarians "liberal" elganned? That is the problem with pigeonholing.

**elganned** · September-14-09, 10:19 PM

No. I don't give them that much credit.

ccbatson · September-15-09, 04:26 PM

Over your head I suppose...Libertarians fall to the right of conservatives, as far away from liberals as you can get.

**elganned** · September-15-09, 04:49 PM

In your world view, perhaps. However, according to some of the Libertarians I've known, it can encompass some very "liberal" views.

ccbatson · September-16-09, 10:51 PM

Such as? The core of current liberals, or "progressives" as they like to call themselves, is to redistribute wealth and oppose individual liberty in the form of capitalism....anti libertarian.

**rb336** · September-17-09, 08:01 AM

actually, the first libertarians were anti-property rights.

the core beliefs of the current idiots, "conservatives" as they like to call themselves, are 1) to redistribute wealth [[I guess, in bats' and their views, when it is redistributed from the working people to the top, it is simply putting it where it belongs instead of in the hands of the rabble) and 2) to fight against science by pudhing ideology above objective truth [[with, of course, our dear batty a prime example of this)

**Detroitej72** · September-17-09, 08:41 PM

Originally Posted by rb336

the core beliefs of the current idiots, "conservatives" as they like to call themselves, are 1) to redistribute wealth [[I guess, in bats' and their views, when it is redistributed from the working people to the top, it is simply putting it where it belongs instead of in the hands of the rabble)

I'm sure they regret freeing the serfs, slaves and allowing women the right to vote as well!

ccbatson · September-17-09, 11:07 PM

If these so called conservatives are into corporate socialism, they aren't conservatives.

**Detroitej72** · September-17-09, 11:09 PM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

If these so called conservatives are into corporate socialism, they aren't conservatives.

Tell that to your party's last president.

ccbatson · September-17-09, 11:12 PM

I did, and will. More important is that the philosophic concepts behind this issue, namely socialism versus capitalism are not at all ambivalent. Clearly, socialism is evil, and capitalism virtuous.

**Detroitej72** · September-17-09, 11:14 PM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

Clearly, socialism is evil, and capitalism virtuous.

Not if your a Christian.

ccbatson · September-17-09, 11:19 PM

If you take religious doctrine literally...not a good idea btw.

**elganned** · September-18-09, 07:21 AM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

Clearly, socialism is evil, and capitalism virtuous.

Sounds like a religion.

**rb336** · September-18-09, 09:40 AM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

I did, and will. More important is that the philosophic concepts behind this issue, namely socialism versus capitalism are not at all ambivalent. Clearly, socialism is evil, and capitalism virtuous.

What a joke. what limited intelect told you that?
neither is inherently anything.

capitalism brought us, and continues to bring us, lovely things like child labor, company stores, robber barons, and many other evil things. it is not the system that is evil, it is the people at the top who get incredibly wealthy via the hard labor of others and continue to try to fatten their profit by reducing things like workplace safety, by shipping work over to countries where they can have babies making toxic toys for babies. if that is not evil, what is?

"socialism," which doesn't actually exist anywhere in the world in aything like a pure form, and never has [[whereas history is repleat with examples of capitalism running unchecked) has problems as well, but that is usually because it isn't a system controlled by the people, but by oppressive governments.

both of those are why a system like we had from the 40s through the 70s is clearly the best any peoples have ever had.

ccbatson · September-18-09, 04:32 PM

All of those alleged [[as many of them are mythic and propaganda) evils of capitalism are addressed and eliminated by the proper limited role of government in bringing forth and enforcing laws that have the distinct purpose of insuring that all contractual relationships are just.

The nature of the good versus evil argument boils down to the objective and simple concept that an individual has sovereignty over his/her own thoughts and all that they produce. Furthermore, that no person can lay claim to another person's sacred rights to his/her property for any reason.