WHEN we wrote Expelled from the USA discussing Creation, the new movie about Charles Darwin, we quoted an article in the UK’s Daily Telegraph which said:
A British film about Charles Darwin has failed to find a US distributor because his theory of evolution is too controversial for American audiences, according to its producer.
Now it appears that Ken Ham doesn’t agree. You know who Ken Ham is — he’s the impresario of imbecility, the authority on absurdity, the producer of poppycock, the tycoon of tomfoolery … well, we could go on quite a bit like that, but you get the general idea.
To be more specific, Ham is the creationist entrepreneur behind the infamous Creation Museum — which has become the North American Mecca for the mindless. Ham also operates the creationist website Answers in Genesis (AIG), an excellent source of spam commentary to be cut and pasted by internet trolls.
What does Ken Ham have to say about Creation? In the Christian Post we read ‘Creation’ Producer Called Out for ‘Too Controversial for Religious America’ Claim. Here are some excerpts, with bold added by us:
A prominent young earth creationist said recent claims by the producer of the movie ”Creation” are “nonsense” and simply part of an effort to create controversy and garner publicity.
Who would recognize nonsense better than the operator of a creationist theme park? Let’s read on:
In an interview with the London-based Telegraph ahead of last week’s European premiere of “Creation,” producer Jeremy Thomas had suggested that the debate over creation and evolution in America was what kept potential U.S. distributors of the Charles Darwin movie at bay.
Ken Ham, founder of Answers in Genesis and the Creation museum, however, believes Thomas’ claim is “nonsense.”
“If a movie is controversial, I’m sure it would be shown – as it would probably get good attendance and make money,” he commented Sunday. “And if the movie was anti-creation/anti-Christian, would that stop the movie industry taking it up? Not at all-to the contrary.”
It’s interesting that the Christian Post went to Ham as one who would have a newsworthy opinion on creationism, money-making, and showmanship. We continue:
To make his point, Ham noted anti-Christian and anti-creationism movies such as Bill Maher’s “Religulous” and “Inherit the Wind,” which were shown in theaters nationwide.
“In fact, it seems to me that if a film attacks Christianity and is well produced, the movie industry in America would jump at the opportunity to show it to the public,” he stated.
We hadn’t heard that the film attacks Christianity. Indeed, none of the movie’s numerous reviews have mentioned anything like that. But the very name of Darwin is anti-Christian to people like Ham, so his assumption is predictable — and wrong.
Ham suggested the reason why “Creation” has not picked up a U.S. distributor is because a film about the life of Charles Darwin may not do well in American theaters, though it might do well as a “docu-drama” on a television station such as the History Channel.
“I haven’t seen the movie, but I have read a number of reviews – and it seems to me from what I’ve read that it is not really an exciting movie. Some have even called it ‘boring,’” Ham stated.
We’re confused. How could a film about someone Ham considers to be history’s most evil scientist possibly be boring?
One last excerpt:
That said, Ham reported that he does hope to hear from supporters of his ministry in the United Kingdom regarding the movie when it hits theaters there this Friday. That is, however, if they do choose to spend money on such a movie.
Ham is probably hoping they’ll save their money for a visit to his creation museum. Why waste money on a movie about Darwin when you can give it to Ham and see something worthwhile — like exhibits of Adam & Eve living with dinosaurs?
Copyright © 2009. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.