Charles Darwin film 'too controversial for religious America

[Animavore]

Ah, I thought it was from Zilla's post...

Dancer in the Dark is a very moving film.

Its alright.

Trigger Warning!!!1! :

Mustn't let them see at train song bit.

[cowiz]

I like pie

[charlou]

I like pie spam

[cowiz]

I like pie spam

I like pie

And a good paddling too from a hot mama

[Bella Fortuna]

Ah, I thought it was from Zilla's post...

Dancer in the Dark is a very moving film.

Its alright.

Trigger Warning!!!1! :

Mustn't let them see at train song bit.

Trigger Warning!!!1! :

Of course not, dear. You ol' softie...

[Xamonas Chegwé]

DitD is great. I have a copy somewhere - must watch it again. Thanks for the reminder.

[Animavore]

Just finished it. Damn you Lars, you manipulative bastard.

Trigger Warning!!!1! :

What I don't get is that before I watched it there was some negative reviews. Mostly complaining about Von Triers "misogyny". Misogyny!? With his latest (and totally excellent) film Antichrist (just out on DVD) I an understand but not with this one. I think its just a bunch of feminists whinging because the women in his films tend to be victims )of circumstance, abuse, their psychology) rather than the strong, kick ass women they're used to seeing nowadays.
Anyway. I thought it was great. I love Bjork anyway. This is like Vespertine put to film.

[maiforpeace]

Clinton Huxley forgot to tell us he's in Creation.

EDIT:

I'm wondering what the outrage from the religious community was all about. This movie was very respectful of religion, in my opinion.

[Deep Sea Isopod]

I know of a few sites which stream this movie for free, but of course, I wouldn't watch any of them. I hope the authorities close them down.
And if the authorities ask where the links are, I shall provide them.

[Animavore]

I saw this yesterday. It was alright. A few liberties were taken with reality to make the film. The guy who played Hooker was too young, Huxley too old. Also I wasn't convinced by his crisis of conscience.

[Chinaski]

I saw this yesterday. It was alright. A few liberties were taken with reality to make the film. The guy who played Hooker was too young, Huxley too old. Also I wasn't convinced by his crisis of conscience.

What wasn't convincing about it? Publish his work and pay homage to his beliefs, or avoid risking destroying his wife's beliefs and whatnot.

[Animavore]

I saw this yesterday. It was alright. A few liberties were taken with reality to make the film. The guy who played Hooker was too young, Huxley too old. Also I wasn't convinced by his crisis of conscience.

What wasn't convincing about it? Publish his work and pay homage to his beliefs, or avoid risking destroying his wife's beliefs and whatnot.

It wasn't convincing. It must've been the execution of the film. It didn't seem to have any import. I wasn't convinced he was a man torn. I didn't believe it.

[Animavore]

Yeah. I have it now. I couldn't put my finger on it but I have it now.

They could've had more background information. They didn't make me feel like Darwin was living in a time when his views could mean total ruin. Showed him maybe having conversations with the Linnanean Society, used Hooker and especially Huxley more, a few scenes showing them argue to hammer home the era.
I didn't like this Darwin in a bubble. Without a back story it only makes sense to those already attuned with his life. Its like The Passion. You're just plopped into a small section of a much larger and rich whole.

[Chinaski]

I think they brought the point across quite well with the scene with his daughter and the teacher/reverend whatever, but yeah, it could've had more background info.

[Animavore]

Its not to say it was bad and it was quite touching (I didn't cry or anything though ). It just didn't quite make it for me. It was nearly there. I thought a mere extra 20 minutes on a quite short film could've done the trick.