Charles Darwin film 'too controversial for religious America'

[Jason Ross]

A British film about Charles Darwin has failed to find a US distributor because his theory of evolution is too controversial for American audiences, according to its producer.

[Nubian_Greene]

After seeing the plot in the trailer...its Painfully Ironic.

I want to watch!

[Hyskoa]

[southpark] dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb [/southpark]

[Randis]

s a d

[Keeviin]

A movie trailer without that really deep and annoying narrator voice? This will never do!

[Katfayheirti]

Oh those silly publishers! If they did release it here in the states, everyone would go to see it because it is so 'controversial.' They should just say that Darwin was a character made up by Dan Brown. They're missing out on a nice sum here.


Ugh, anyway on a related topic, I'm taking a class on prehistoric art and the early history of humans this semester and the professor felt that he needed to put a disclaimer in the syllabus and course description saying "WARNING: this class deals with HUMAN EVOLUTION. This is a lecture course, NOT A DEBATE. If you feel uncomfortable with the topic, please do not take this class. Thanks you." Apparently he's had too many students waste entire class periods arguing with him and he got fed up with it.

[hunchback]

pretty sad really, i mean the fact that he cant get a distributor.

contreversial for american audiences are you serious !!! wtf
why didnt he just say theres too many religious people in north america to make a profit > : (

got nothing to do with being controversial. darwins theory has been around for a long time and even religious people know that

looks like a good B movie, i love that actor too : D,

[Asatira]

I'm not surprised. It looks like we'll be missing out on a good bio flick which would probably do a lot to better explain what was going on when Darwin was developing his theory. That, and the focus seems to be on the personal story, his relationship with his wife and personal faith and what he saw as his path more than anything else. Like many other bio pic movies.

It may be a good but not exceptional film. May be worth a look.

[squidmonk3j]

A British film about Charles Darwin has failed to find a US distributor because his theory of evolution is too controversial for American audiences, according to its producer.

Advertising takes many forms.

[Qitsune]

why didnt he just say theres too many religious people in north america to make a profit > : (

Hey, not all of north America is the same, it did premiere in Toronto!!!! Even if it is picked up by a smaller distributor, I'm sure it will be picked up, (if it's not already done)

I'm not sure if that news beats the fact that Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort (the guy who says bananas are the proof god exists) are planning to give 50 000 copies of the Origin of species with a 50 pages intro explaining how Darwin is the cause for the Holocaust (I'm not even kidding.) Oh, and they plan to give them to university students.

[Aly Fell]

Well it looks like it might have a deal after all, and was produced by Mel Gibson's Icon Productions. Mel is a traditionalist Catholic... interesting partnership!

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/entertainm...-59246832.html

http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=10148

[bluefooted]

I'm not sure if that news beats the fact that Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort (the guy who says bananas are the proof god exists) are planning to give 50 000 copies of the Origin of species with a 50 pages intro explaining how Darwin is the cause for the Holocaust (I'm not even kidding.) Oh, and they plan to give them to university students.

These motherfuckers are the epitome of all that is wrong with the creationist 'movement': they're arrogant, they're liars, they're so dumb they don't even know how dumb they are. They know absolutely nothing about biology or evolution, and they're fucking proud of it.

Sorry for the rant - I just really don't like them. At least their banana video was fucking hilarious.

[Ryan K]

I don't understand, what's so controversial?

[Katfayheirti]

At least their banana video was fucking hilarious.

Wow. When I saw that banana vid a couple years ago, I thought it was a joke or parody. Apparently I've been living under a rock :< My belief in humanity has just been shattered.

[dashinvaine]

Well it looks like it might have a deal after all, and was produced by Mel Gibson's Icon Productions. Mel is a traditionalist Catholic... interesting partnership!

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/entertainm...-59246832.html

http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=10148

Roman Catholicism doesn't have a problem with the fact of Evolution (neither does the Church of England, which has moved on since the days of Soapy Sam). Creationism and Biblical Literalism are vices of the evangelical fringes of the Protestant movement- in the States, chiefly. It's lamentable that such factions have such influence in a nation founded on the principles of secular humanism.

[Jason Rainville]

I thought I made a topic about this earlier in the week, seems the internet ate it...

[Aly Fell]

Roman Catholicism doesn't have a problem with the fact of Evolution (neither does the Church of England, which has moved on since the days of Soapy Sam). Creationism and Biblical Literalism are vices of the evangelical fringes of the Protestant movement- in the States, chiefly. It's lamentable that such factions have such influence in a nation founded on the principles of secular humanism.

Indeed. I was merely making the point that Mel Gibson is an individual with strong Christian views. He is also a businessman. His perspective on Darwin/creationism is not known to me.

[dashinvaine]

It looks to be a good film. Bettany played a similar character in Master and Commander...

Bananas are indeed the atheist's nigtmare, by the way. (Point one at Richard Dawkins and watch the colour drain from his cheeks). Another little-known fact about bananas is that if you push your finger into one from the top (having peeled it) it splits into three equal segments. So it's a microcosm of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity- three in one.

[Dorkthrone]

I'm not sure if that news beats the fact that Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort (the guy who says bananas are the proof god exists) are planning to give 50 000 copies of the Origin of species with a 50 pages intro explaining how Darwin is the cause for the Holocaust (I'm not even kidding.) Oh, and they plan to give them to university students.

Wait....they're saying that Darwin caused the Holocaust?

So to them, something that had nothing to do with Hitler's line of thinking caused the Holocaust?

Makes sense.

[s.ketch]

A dramatized biographical movie about a historical figure is too controversial...

Yet Bruno can have a closeup, minute long meat spin and it's just funny. Movies, ones somewhat showing sympathy for Hitler and ones that show two guys shooting hundreds of rounds into his dead corpse are cool. You can also make movies of people getting mutilated, tortured, and murdered and still pull in a good profit.

But a pretty tame movie about Darwin is just too much for our palette?

[hippl5]

1:37 on the trailer. Possible sex scene? And it can't find a distributor?????

[Kiera]

°________O
those debates about creationism are something serious and big?
I always thought they were a tiny marginal group of ultra conservative religious fanatics, but not something that could influence the import of movies.

(sorry if I missed anything, I live in liberal Europe and I don't own a tv.
"You've killed god" lollolol, controversy)

[tobbA]

Bananas are indeed the atheist's nigtmare, by the way. (Point one at Richard Dawking and watch the colour drain from his cheeks). Another little known fact about bananas is that if you push your finger into one from the top (having peeled it) it splits into three equal segments. So it's a microcosm of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity- three in one.

Funny then that bananas in the wild look nothing like the ones we buy in stores...

[Cthogua]

Wait....they're saying that Darwin caused the Holocaust?

So to them, something that had nothing to do with Hitler's line of thinking caused the Holocaust?

Makes sense.

I assume what they're using for ammunition in that particular argument is the concept of "Social Darwinism" that sort of underpins the ideas of Militant Fascism. The problem is the idea that "only the strong survive" is a misunderstanding of natural selection. It's not the strongest, it's the most fit. As in the most appropriate thing for a particular situation. It's also talking about timescales, and organizational scales much larger than an individual. However the idea that one group is fundamentally better than another didn't suddenly spring up after Darwin proposed natural selection. In fact I would say that European arrogance, backed by Christianity is bathed in more blood than the Nazi's could ever even have dreamed of. Europeans trampled entire civilizations on the notion that they were bringing the truth and the light to the world. To this day there are still traces of the concept of Manifest Destiny in the actions of the United States. This has nothing to do with natural selection and everything to do with religiously inspired arrogance. The problem with claiming that you know, or even ARE the pinnacle of human achievement, or evolution, or whatever other poorly understood concept you're using to justify your elevation of your particular groups interests over the lives of other people...is that's only something that can be known in retrospect. It could very well even turn out that the development of large scale societies, urban development, and unrestrained capitalsim, while creating benefits for a small class of people living at the top was actually a maladaptive turn for our species and will lead to our own extinction, or at least to a catastrophic decline in human populations and the survivability of the human race on this planet. The problem is you'll never know until it's over.

[Aly Fell]

I assume what they're using for ammunition in that particular argument is the concept of "Social Darwinism" that sort of underpins the ideas of Militant Fascism. The problem is the idea that "only the strong survive" is a misunderstanding of natural selection. It's not the strongest, it's the most fit. As in the most appropriate thing for a particular situation. It's also talking about timescales, and organizational scales much larger than an individual. However the idea that one group is fundamentally better than another didn't suddenly spring up after Darwin proposed natural selection. In fact I would say that European arrogance, backed by Christianity is bathed in more blood than the Nazi's could ever even have dreamed of. Europeans trampled entire civilizations on the notion that they were bringing the truth and the light to the world. To this day there are still traces of the concept of Manifest Destiny in the actions of the United States. This has nothing to do with natural selection and everything to do with religiously inspired arrogance. The problem with claiming that you know, or even ARE the pinnacle of human achievement, or evolution, or whatever other poorly understood concept you're using to justify your elevation of groups interests over the lives of other people...is that's only something that can be known in retrospect. It could very well even turn out that the development of large scale societies, urban development, and unrestrained capitalsim, while creating benefits for a small class of people living at the top was actually a maladaptive turn for our species and will lead to our own extinction, or at least to a catastrophic decline in human populations and the survivability of the human race on this planet. The problem is you'll never know until it's over.

As much as it pains me to post this, you can read their introduction here, courtesy of RichardDawkins.net:

http://assets.livingwaters.com/pdf/OriginofSpecies.pdf

http://richarddawkins.net/article,43...-him---Facbook

[ikken]

Did anyone say "hype"?

[Kaycy is tanning]

A British film about Charles Darwin has failed to find a US distributor because his theory of evolution is too controversial for American audiences, according to its producer.

I doubt this is true. There are so many small distributors that if they wanted one they could get one.

I would have believed it if they said the film was blocked by a screening agency, but not being able to find a distributor is just a lie, maybe they didn't find a big enough one to their liking or want to hype this movie.

Not being able to find a distributor isn't something you would be proud of as a filmmaker either..but he just happens to blurt it out to every U.S. news agency..shrug much.

[dashinvaine]

Its fortunate that the Nazis were defeated and failed by their own standards. They perhaps failed to appreciate that empathy, mercy and decency were refinements produced by evolution (rather than being mere symproms of weakness), and beneficial things mysteriously linked to a culture's chance of enduring in the world.

[s.ketch]

Sweet. So when does the scientific community get to put a special introduction on the Christian bible?

[Kaycy is tanning]

Well it looks like it might have a deal after all, and was produced by Mel Gibson's Icon Productions. Mel is a traditionalist Catholic... interesting partnership!

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/entertainm...-59246832.html

http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=10148

Surprise, now the movie is all hyped and now they have a distributor..zzz.

The catholic church has long admitted evolution theory btw, they even offered an apology. This vehement rage against evolution theory happens nowhere in Europe, only the U.S. seems to have this issue, in Africa this doesn't happen either. Where I live (Europe), everyone I know who is a catholic also doesn't believe in creationism but in evolution.

edit: I flipped the two