Watching "Creation," the recent film about Darwin, his family, and his
writing, must be an experience rather oddly unique to myself. On the
one hand, as one of the strictest creationists I know, the philosophy
of the film is baffling. T. H. Huxley, "Darwin's Bulldog," who speaks
more strongly about the consequences of evolution for religion, is
clearly one of the biggest jerks in the entire story (played with
clear zest by Toby Jones). The reverend friend of the Darwin family
is both urbane and intelligent (if a bit crusty) and inclined to
punish children sadistically (played subtly by Jeremy Northam). The
various ideologies which come in for pillaging include
colonialism/imperialism, quack medicine (though I think they
overplayed this), religious intolerance, and violent atheism. I'm
rather confused. The theory of evolution is clearly fact for the
story's purposes, but coming from a century where it has basically won
the minds of most viewers, the evidence for it is not laid out in any
convincing manner, requiring the faith of the believers to connect the
dots of god/the director. The other half of me, the one that is constantly (and irritatingly)
analyzing style and skill, keeps cringing at the pointless use of
handheld camerawork, the rather unbelievable attention to avoiding
historical accuracy, the clumsy "important things are being said
importantly" dialogue, and the anvil-weighted ham-fisted metaphors. I think this is a film I can truly label "incoherent," though it does
provide a touching look at the impact of a child's death on a family.
writing, must be an experience rather oddly unique to myself. On the
one hand, as one of the strictest creationists I know, the philosophy
of the film is baffling. T. H. Huxley, "Darwin's Bulldog," who speaks
more strongly about the consequences of evolution for religion, is
clearly one of the biggest jerks in the entire story (played with
clear zest by Toby Jones). The reverend friend of the Darwin family
is both urbane and intelligent (if a bit crusty) and inclined to
punish children sadistically (played subtly by Jeremy Northam). The
various ideologies which come in for pillaging include
colonialism/imperialism, quack medicine (though I think they
overplayed this), religious intolerance, and violent atheism. I'm
rather confused. The theory of evolution is clearly fact for the
story's purposes, but coming from a century where it has basically won
the minds of most viewers, the evidence for it is not laid out in any
convincing manner, requiring the faith of the believers to connect the
dots of god/the director. The other half of me, the one that is constantly (and irritatingly)
analyzing style and skill, keeps cringing at the pointless use of
handheld camerawork, the rather unbelievable attention to avoiding
historical accuracy, the clumsy "important things are being said
importantly" dialogue, and the anvil-weighted ham-fisted metaphors. I think this is a film I can truly label "incoherent," though it does
provide a touching look at the impact of a child's death on a family.
No comments:
Post a Comment