No US distributor will pick up Charles Darwin movie

[JustKate]

I really don't think that's an accurate statistic at all. That so-called poll could have asked some very narrow questions, or someone could have interpreted the results to get a very low number for whatever reason. In any case, it's highly doubtful that 61% of Americans don't believe in evolution *at all*. From my own experience, I'd say that the vast majority of Americans believe in evolution *in one form or another*. I'm not getting too specific here on purpose.

I agree, B.J. I've seen raw data from some of these surveys, and it all comes down to how you phrase the question...and how you define "evolution." You can define it in a way that most people will say, "Sure - I believe that," and you can define it in such a way that lots of people will say, "No, I most certainly do NOT believe that."

I find it amazing too. I would've thought at least someone would've picked it up.

You know, I could have sworn - I would have bet money, and I'm not a betting woman - that I'd seen a trailer for this movie. I haven't seen it online, I know, so I can't imagine how I've seen a trailer if nobody's going to distribute it. Huh.

 

[M'Sharak]

Perhaps it's just a crappy movie -- regardless of ideology.

The preponderance of crappy movies that easily find distributors would seem to disagree with you.

I just don't understand how no one takes into account the track record of controversial (though this one shouldn't be) films in the US. People protesting your movie, and news coverage of that protesting, is free advertising, and it's consistently had the opposite effect from what the protesters desire - it drives up ticket sales. Distributors should be jumping at the chance to put out this movie and turn a nice profit on what should presumably be a very low budgeted film (and with the largely free advertising, even less of a marketing budget is needed).

Plus, taking on a movie with a controversial stance is a big boost come awards season, which in turn helps bring in even more money for other projects because more people check out nominated films.

Besides being cowardly not to distribute this film, it's bad business sense.

An interesting thing occurs to me about this. A Google search for one sentence from the article quoted in the OP -- this one:

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.

returns nearly 900 hits for news items, blogs, message board posts and even a user comment at IMDb, all containing the full article text, verbatim. It almost looks like a campaign to light a fire under a distributor who may have begun dragging their feet after receiving letters from a special-interest group, or perhaps like a clever viral marketing campaign to bag a new distributor.

 

[Cakes488]

So no studio wanted to touch The Passion of the Christ, and no studio wanted to pick up a Charles Darwin movie. What does that tell you?

Maybe a "Darwin vs. Predator" with the Wayans brothers dressed up as white women will make it a hot commodity.

LOL and the sad thing is that you know this would sell!

 

[ManOnTheWave]

Only 39% of Americans believe in evolution?!?! How is that possible?!

This also bothers me. Is that accurate? Has public education failed so dramatically? Or caved so drastically?

 

[Candlelight]

I hope it gets an oscar nod. That would be so funny.

Also, remember how people wanted The Davinci Code to be classed as 'fiction'? I wonder if some groups will push to do that with this movie...

 

[Mutai Sho-Rin]

Only 39% of Americans believe in evolution?!?! How is that possible?!

I really don't think that's an accurate statistic at all. That so-called poll could have asked some very narrow questions, or someone could have interpreted the results to get a very low number for whatever reason. In any case, it's highly doubtful that 61% of Americans don't believe in evolution *at all*. From my own experience, I'd say that the vast majority of Americans believe in evolution *in one form or another*. I'm not getting too specific here on purpose.

I agree with B.J.'s assessment. I would have to see the poll to know how biased it is. If the question was "Do you believe mankind evolved completely by accident?",you might only get 39%. I would also want to knoiw the polling demographics to see the biases in that direction as well. If you asked 1000 people coming out of Evanglical churches ane another 1000 out of Unitarian or other progressive congregations, the numbers would be wildly divergant.

 

[The Grim Ghost]

So no studio wanted to touch The Passion of the Christ, and no studio wanted to pick up a Charles Darwin movie. What does that tell you?

Maybe a "Darwin vs. Predator" with the Wayans brothers dressed up as white women will make it a hot commodity.

LOL and the sad thing is that you know this would sell!

PREDATOR: EVOLUTION

"Go evolve yourself...Back To Hell!!!"

 

[bluedana]

I hope it gets an oscar nod. That would be so funny.

Also, remember how people wanted The Davinci Code to be classed as 'fiction'? I wonder if some groups will push to do that with this movie...

The DaVinci Code was a fictional story . . .

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Also, remember how people wanted The Davinci Code to be classed as 'fiction'?

Well, despite what Dan Brown claimed in the novel's opening section, that's exactly what it IS. It's a fictional novel, just like any other. (And that's not even taking into account the many, many inaccuracies, such as Brown's belief that the Priory of Sion is real whereas we all know it was completely made up.) So I don't see what the big deal there is.

 

[Candlelight]

I hope it gets an oscar nod. That would be so funny.

Also, remember how people wanted The Davinci Code to be classed as 'fiction'? I wonder if some groups will push to do that with this movie...

The DaVinci Code was a fictional story . . .

Depends on what you believe.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

The DaVinci Code was a fictional story . . .

Depends on what you believe.

Yeah, well, there are people who believe that the XFL was good football (heck, I was one of those people ) but which is more likely?

 

[bluedana]

Are Robert Langdon or any of the other main characters real people? Was there a bizarre murder in the Louvre? If not, then it's a fictional story - whatever you believe about the historical theories contained in it.

 

[Middle Earther]

I think there's enough buzz about this movie, that it will probably be released in the US.

Roger Ebert is talking up this movie, so the interest is going to grow.

Eventually, when the conversation turns to a demand for this movie, then it will be released. It may be released later or on a more limited basis, but I believe it will be released.

 

[TheChronicOne]

I saw something on the TV about this... I don't recall what, but like the other person, it may have been the trailer. I think it was on during a news program or something though, so it might have been a news report of some kind on the movie.

 

[tharpdevenport]

Saw this on IMDB posted within the last 24 hours:

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

"While recently Creation, the movie about the life of Charles Darwin seemed too controversial to be shown in the United States, there are reports this afternoon that some are now interested distributing it. A deal is anticipated by the end of the week."

 

[JustKate]

I'm still just as certain as I can be that I saw part of a trailer for this movie - pretty recently, too. Odd. I seldom watch news (I prefer to read it), so I don't think it was that, but I just can't remember.

 

[RJDiogenes]

"Too controversial to show in the United States."

How can anybody fall for that?

 

[chrisspringob]

Here's the poll they're referring to:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/114544/darwin-birthday-believe-evolution.aspx

"Do you, personally, believe in the theory of evolution, do you not believe in evolution, or don't you have an opinion either way?"

believe in evolution 39%
do not believe in evolution 25%
no opinion either way 36%
no answer 1%

 

[Chimpy Chompy]

"Believe in evolution" is a bad way of phrasing the question. You don't believe in established theories, you accept\agree that they successfully explain natural phenomena.

Anyway I wonder if much of the the large "no opinion either way" block is people who are mostly ok with the theory of evolution, but have mistakenly come to think that to accept it you must be atheist.

 

[chrisspringob]

Anyway I wonder if much of the the large "no opinion either way" block is people who are mostly ok with the theory of evolution, but have mistakenly come to think that to accept it you must be atheist.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if many of those people are only barely aware of what "evolution" and "creationism" actually mean. (And really, that goes for people who gave all three of those answers.) They may just have a very fuzzy idea regarding the origin of humanity, and be aware that there's some controversy about it, but don't feel comfortable telling an interviewer that they believe one answer or another.

Really, most people do not think through scientific concepts, or spend much time dwelling on the origin of man. Maybe people you or I know do, but people posting on a Star Trek board are not the least bit representative of the population at large.