Creation Movie Can’t Find Distributor September 14, 2009

Creation Movie Can’t Find Distributor

As you may have heard, the Creation movie about Charles Darwin’s life (starring Paul Bettany and Jennifer Connelly) is having trouble finding a distributor.

However, US distributors have resolutely passed on a film which will prove hugely divisive in a country where, according to a Gallup poll conducted in February, only 39 per cent of Americans believe in the theory of evolution.

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.

“That’s what we’re up against. In 2009. It’s amazing,” he said.

“The film has no distributor in America. It has got a deal everywhere else in the world but in the US, and it’s because of what the film is about. People have been saying this is the best film they’ve seen all year, yet nobody in the US has picked it up.

“It is unbelievable to us that this is still a really hot potato in America. There’s still a great belief that He made the world in six days. It’s quite difficult for we in the UK to imagine religion in America. We live in a country which is no longer so religious. But in the US, outside of New York and LA, religion rules.

Well, that’s embarrassing…

There’s one potential upside to this. A few years ago, I remember hearing about how Michael Moore had trouble distributing his movie Fahrenheit 9/11. When the movie was finally released, the story had become so huge and so many people were eager to see it, that it became the highest-grossing documentary movie of all time.

So maybe this harmless movie can ride the waves of fake controversy, find a distributor eager to capitalize on it as well, and it’ll do even better at the box office than it otherwise would.

(Thanks to everyone for the link!)

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • TJ

    You know, when religious people complain about something, I’m happy about it because it always brings even more attention to it than it would get otherwise. Keep complaining, guys! 🙂

  • medussa

    UN-effing-believable. I know and expect it to be an unpopular movie in the Bible Belt, but that they can’t even find a distributor willing to show it everywhere else? There are plenty of people who want to see this!

    The thought that I might not be able to see this because fundies want to bury their head in the sand makes me want to rant and rave.

  • Perhaps a distributor should pick it up and release it simultaneously with a quickly drafted second movie called “Creation Museum – the Ken Ham story”.

    Perhaps that would provide cover for the distributor in providing something for the creationists. “Creation museum” could show Adam and Eve petting Velociraptors and Ham’s spin on how fossils were buried and how canyons were carved out after the great flood… And how you are going to Hell if you don’t believe these things.

    That would be a nice contrast to the Darwin movie and put things in perspective.

  • It is being released in England. In fact it premiered yesterday and is on general release in 9 days. Come and visit civilization.

  • Daniel

    I’m not buying this story one bit. They can’t find a US distributor but Religulous could? The more likely reason they can’t find a distributor is that the movie is crap. Sounds to me like the producers are trying to stir up some controversy to make the movie seem more interesting than it is.

  • Karen

    I’m with Daniel on this. It all boils down to money. A distributor isn’t going to buy the rights to the film if they can’t, at the very least, recoup their costs. Once the producer stirs up enough interest and there is money to be made, then watch a bidding war for the distribution rights ensue!

  • Siamang

    You know, they CAN find a distributor.

    What they haven’t found is a distributor willing to pay what the filmmakers want.

    This is like saying you can’t find a buyer for your house. You CAN. Everyone can. But just not necessarily for how much you want.

    The film is getting middling reviews.

    The “evolution” angle is one interesting wrinkle, but let’s seriously face it: creationists don’t go to teacup movies about 19th century British naturalists. Non-college educated folks are not part of the market demographic for this film to begin with, regardless of it portraying the life of a naturalist.

    This is the kind of film that only plays in the big cities, not for the wide audiences in the sticks. I forsee a limited run in New York, LA, Chicago and Boston, and then see if they can build it from there.

    I’m calling false controversy here… one drummed up by the filmmakers to try and catch a more lucrative deal.

  • Sackbut

    Is there someplace we can email indicating interest in seeing the movie in theaters in the US?

    I have to agree, I can’t see why they wouldn’t be able to find a distributor. Religulous, Dogma, Doubt, The Da Vinci Code, and various other movies not well liked by the religious hierarchy, not to mention other movies that outraged the right-wing population, have shown in the US.

    Ah, well. I added it to my Netflix queue, in the event that it doesn’t show in theaters.

    Perhaps they are trying to drum up audience. Perhaps they are seeking people like me, who might have rented it later on, but now might make a concerted effort to see it in the theater.

  • No Brit

    Everybody knows The Americans are another species the british HATE with an unbridled passion.

    The british hate that The Americans are another species, so they’re trying to make them look like… get this… religious people. HAHAHAHA The brits are such poor losers. They invented Afrocentrism to fool the Africans into building their Israel, but that didn’t work. And they NEVER fooled The Americans from Day 0. Columbus couldn’t even do that!!

    The british are such dumb, poor and hateful religious liars, losers and cowards.

  • medussa

    @ No Brit: Huh? Where the frak did that come from?

  • Siamang

    Looks like no brit spammed the internet with that phrase.

    Google parts of that post. I’m guessing it’s some kind of a spambot test.

  • @No Brit spam bot, as a “Brit” I find myself disagreeing with your overly simplistic (almost automated) assessment of British feeling towards our American cousins. While it is a truism that we find the American obsession with religion something of an amusing pastime it would be counter intuitive to assume that we “hate” them for it. The idea that an entire nation peopled by many differing groups should all deserve the scorn of a distant nation is somewhat nonsensical to say the least.

    Your penultimate paragraph is most concerning. Even as a stream of consciousness, an expression of angst, a structure in feeling, it is poorly stated. What precisely are you attempting for convey? It would seem that we “Brits” lack the nomenclature in gibberish that you so eloquently possess.

    Your final sentence does seem to suggest that you are artificial in nature. normally such an outburst would be ignored but I feel that even though you do not exist as a corporeal entity but as a virtual one your charges need to be addressed. The claim of “dumb” may reasonably be levelled against a nation when comparing achievements in academia.

    The USA outnumbers the UK some 6 to 1 so it seems logical to suppose that the US would produce six times as many students of equivalent level. I wonder if you can tell me if this is the case? Perhaps you fear that exactly half our people fall below our own national average in terms of educational ability? Clearly this is a terrible disappointment. I’m sure we’ll do much better next year. 😉

    Perhaps we are less wealthy. The USA is certainly the wealthiest nation on the globe. You list first in the list of nations by gross domestic product while the UK is a humble sixth. Hardly poor in comparison but I grant that we are not as wealthy.

    As to the charge of hateful I find myself shocked and stunned by such a charge. By what possible grounds do you level so base an accusation? Perhaps our history of persecuting minority races or denying equal rights to homosexuals? No? We seem comparable to the US in that regard. Please clarify.

    As for religious liars I must scoff at your point for surely you are aware that the UK is one of the most secular and non-religious societies on the globe. Admittedly we have a nominal claim to a national religious faith but this is really for show. A minority of the population really believes in the outdated traditions of the Church of England. Most give it little weight in their lives.

    The final charges of losers and cowards really demand an explanation. What have we lost? An Empire? Indeed and a good thing too. Such outmoded and fundamentally obnoxious concepts deserve to fall by the wayside. How have we displayed out cowardice? Through surrendering to our enemies? By denying support to our allies? I believe that you are in error.

  • Sackbut

    Now there’s a bidding war

    It looks like they’ll get a US distributor after all.

    And it looks like the movie was financed by Mel “The Passion of the Christ” Gibson. Gack.

  • This can be a marketing strategy to gain controversy and in the end people are so curious to watch it.

  • Amy

    Apparently, NBC Bay Area doesn’t employ fact-checkers. After they published the story citing Gibson as “bankrolling” the film, I posted the correct info as a comment and they put up a retraction today:

    “The original article confused the film’s distributor, Icon Distribution, with Mel Gibson owed Icon Productions. The companies use the exact same logo and indeed Icon Distribution was once owned by Gibson. It is no longer. We regret the error.”

    Unfortunately, they fanned the fire of that rumor and their incorrect first post is being quoted everywhere now. Ugh.

error: Content is protected !!