March of the Conservatives: Penguin Film as Political Fodder
I mentioned before that I liked the movie Grizzly Man, and that I hadn't seen March of the Penguins because I had some reservations about what it suggested.
It turns out that some conservatives drew exactly the conclusions that I had feared, based on the reviews I've read.
On the conservative Web site WorldNetDaily.com, an opponent of abortion wrote that the movie "verified the beauty of life and the rightness of protecting it."
At a conference for young Republicans, the editor of National Review urged participants to see the movie because it promoted monogamy. A widely circulated Christian magazine said it made "a strong case for intelligent design."...
In part, the movie's appeal to conservatives may lie in its soft-pedaling of topics like evolution and global warming. The filmmakers say they did not consciously avoid those topics - indeed, they say they are strong believers in evolutionary theory - but they add that they wanted to create a film that would reach as many people as possible.
"It's obvious that global warming has an impact on the reproduction of the penguins," Luc Jacquet, the director, told National Geographic Online. "But much of public opinion appears insensitive to the dangers of global warming. We have to find other ways to communicate to people about it, not just lecture them."
That's gutless. Jacquet already has found another way to commuincate to people other than lecturing them. It's called making a movie. If the goal of his movie is to educate people about penguins, and people come away from the movie thinking they were designed that way rather than evolving to adapt to the conditions in which they lived, he's failed as a filmmaker.
I hope Roger Ebert has something to say about this.
Thanks to reader B for the tip.