Paul Bettany plays Darwin in Creation, a story about the struggle between the love of Darwin's life and his love for biology.
This year, a British film starring famed actors Jennifer Connelly, Paul Bettany, and Jeremy Northam, which is already being called one of the best movies of the year, will not be coming to any theatre near you. The reason why? The subject matter of this film is the life of Charles Darwin and American movies theaters are too afraid of convservative evangelical backlash , so no theatre company in America has signed on to show the film Creation. Set to open on September 25 in the UK, the film is already receiving rave reviews at the Toronto Film Festival in Canada. In fact, the film has already been shown in film festivals across Europe and has been described by viewers as "absolutely brilliant."
The funny thing is, the film is not a straight story of Darwin's Theory of Evolution. Rather, it is about his struggle between his love of science and his love for his religious wife Emma, who was worried that his discoveries would undermine her religious faith. The film focuses on Darwin's struggles to get his research published as well as his absences from the woman he loves. In fact, you can say the film is really a love story. The film deals in flashbacks, going from the time of Darwin's courtship with Emma to the publishing of his theories and the untimely death of a favorite daughter, Anna, who's image haunted Darwin late in life.
Americans pride themselvse on their freedom of religion as well as their freedom of speech, often claiming to be devoid of censorship and bias. However, in America, a religious film like Passion of the Christ can become the highest grossing R-rated film at $370 million. Turn around and a PG rated move about Darwin won't even be released in theaters because of self-censorship and fear. This tale seems more like something out of Iranian theocracy than the supposedly democratic film industry of America.
Despite its R-rating and graphic violence, many children were taken to see The Passion of the Christ in American theatres.
In the interest of being fair and balanced, letting the people make up their minds, and the other principles on which democracy was founded, you'd think theaters would screen both films for audiences to watch, counting on those audiences to be intelligent enough to make a decision themselves. Perhaps this is merely gradeschool idealism. So far, the closest an American can get to the movie is driving to Canada or checking out the film's official site.
Of course, this isn't the first time something like this has happened in America. After all, censorship in the American film industry has been happening since the advent of the film industry itself. The fact that this sort of censorship is, for all intents and purposes, forbidden by the Constitution, hasn't stopped the Hollywood system from banning, erroneously rating, or not showing films that might cause public outrage or censure. Such film as A Birth of a Nation, Frankenstein, Monty Python's Life of Brian, The Last Temptation of Christ, Scarface, and others have at one time all been banned in America. Maybe it isn't entirely the fault of worried movie theater chains, but rather, maybe American film audiences need to learn how to better handle controversial subjects in film in order to compete with the growing international film industry.
For more info: on film censorship in America, check out this entry from the Law and Politics Book Review blog, this article on film censorship, and the GoogleBook version of Movie Censorship and American Culture by Francis G. Couvares.
Comments
Don't believe the hype. Controversies generate even bigger bucks. You think somebody doesn't want a piece of this? You're deluded. This movie WILL end up distributed here, and somebody will end up paying more for the rights than they would have without the controversy.
I think throwin in the censorship of Birth of a Nation with that of a Python film is a bit crass, given the former's horrendous subject matter. I don't believe censorship to be a good thing, but there's a good reason to ban certain films.
1. in no way is self censorship unconstitutional - indeed to deny private citizens or companies the right to self censor would come far closer to circumventing the firat ammendment. in the same way, you have the right not to say the pledge of alliegence. this is in no way to condone cennsorship in any form, particularly through cowardice, but the bill of rights is to prevent government, particularly ligislative, infringements on those freedoms it protects.
2. the subject of birth of a nation is not horrendous, so much as its implications, but its a pretty fair assesment that the censoring of material some find 'horrendous' is round about where fascism starts. i hate what you say but i'll defend to the death your right to say it. americans can be such retards...
As usual, the religious reich uses intimidation and the threat of violence, legal or physical to suppress anything that might not totally agree with their twisted beliefs.
Most of the problems of the world are, and always have been, caused by religion. Mankind will never truly be free untill the dark yoke of religion is lifted by the clear light of truth and reason.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!