BABloggee Patrick Pricken alerted me to a new movie coming out soon… where pareidolia is real.
It’s called "Henry Poole is Here", and it stars Luke Wilson as a sad sap whose life turns around when the face of Jesus appears on the side of his house. It looks like another in a long line of don’t-trust-reality-instead-put-your-faith-in-something kind of movies. I can already predict with some certainty that in the end there will be an ambiguous scene where you don’t really know if it’s Jesus, or if people use the stain as a catalyst to open up their own inner power.
Either way, feh.
I’d rather see a movie where some kid isn’t doing well in science class because his parents think the Universe is 6000 years old. Then he sees an online interview with Brian Cox about the Large Hadron Collider and is inspired to make it his life’s work to understand why gravity works. In the end, he does, and finds out that the Universe is filled to overflowing with the wonder and beauty of nature.
I’ll be waiting a long time for that movie.
April 30th, 2008 at 9:02 am
Yeah, Phil, the good news is that once this dream movie of yours comes out, you won’t have to wait in line to get in the theater. You’ll also have an array of seats to choose from, no waiting at the concession stand, and no one will ruin the movie by talking through it.
It’s almost enough to get me to go see it, too.
Almost.
Allllllllmost.
But not quite.
cpb
April 30th, 2008 at 9:12 am
I’d like to see a movie where Luke Wilson eats a Guatemalan insanity pepper and starts seeing faces in everything, after which Jesus starts singing Pink Floyd and the dragons come out of the tree leaves. . . .
But I’d pay to see your movie too.
April 30th, 2008 at 9:13 am
It isn’t quite your movie, but Rocket Boys is a good film about some kid growing up in a squalid coal mining town who is inspired by the Sputnik launch to become a rocket scientist, in spite of the strong disapproval of his father.
No religion angle, but certainly an anti-intellectual angle, and it has the multiple benefits of not only ending well, but being true.
April 30th, 2008 at 9:18 am
Chris, isn’t that what they said about religion-themed movies before Mel Gibson made “Passion”?
April 30th, 2008 at 9:19 am
Oh know! Someone made a movie about something that isn’t real? How dare they?
Sorry, this topic isn’t worth the cyberspace it’s taking up. Removing the RSS feeder has to happen.
April 30th, 2008 at 9:26 am
BTW Brian Cox’ talk on Cern has been posted on www.ted.com. A great talk on a great subject and TED is a great site too! : )
April 30th, 2008 at 9:37 am
I was going to post here that I was willing to take a wait and see approach to this movie (I heard about it being shown at the Sundance festival)… that perhaps it might actually dive into the discussion about how “lost” people will find hope wherever they can get it, but sometimes a water stain is just a water stain, and in the end, you must actually DO something to make something of your life and turn your fortunes around. I was hoping that might be the case…
And then I found this article on the movie:
LINK
And now I’m going to have to agree with Phil… feh!
Here’s the kicker quote, or description of the movie’s plot, from that article:
Oye.
It’s the same old pro-faith, anti-skeptic garbage shown time and time again in Hollywood:
Skepitc = Cynic = Depressed curmedgeon = faithless hethen = sad and lonely.
Faithful = hopeful = happy = wonderful life!
Again, feh.
Based on what I’ve read so far, the film does leave the ending ambiguous anough to give the viewer the impression that he can “choose for himself” whether to believe or not believe. I wil likely see this move when it comes out, for the purposes of reviewing it, and at that time I’ll let you know if the film really does leave it up to the viewer, or tries to strongly coerce the viewer one way or the other.
We’ll see.
April 30th, 2008 at 9:41 am
This is sad, because Luke Wilson was in one of the funniest, most original movies of the last few years: Idiocracy. Now he’s making crap.
Feh
April 30th, 2008 at 10:08 am
Mind y’all, I’m not saying the movie in and of itself will be bad, just that the premise is pretty tired and I wish (heh, wish) movies were made that didn’t trumpet faith so much. Still, it might still be funny and all that. Luke Wilson is pretty good, and this character appears to be one he’s good at playing.
April 30th, 2008 at 10:20 am
Henry Poole? Wait a sec - wasn’t that the other astronaut in the ‘Discovery’ ship headed out to Jupiter with Dave Bowman in ‘2001 : A Space Odyssey’ .. or was that Fred?
He was the one killed by HAL in both book and movie and was also the hero (revived from deep space death by super-tech civilisation) in Arthur C.Clarke’s final book in the Space Odyssey series - 3001.
Faith will always win more popularity contests than skepticism - that’s just human nature for you.
People (esp. it seems in the US culture) plain well find something endearing about stupidity and wishful thinking / hopeful belief but also something threatening or disappointing about skeptical or critical thinking.
April 30th, 2008 at 10:25 am
The BA day-dreamed :
“I’d rather see a movie where some kid isn’t doing well in science class because his parents think the Universe is 6000 years old. Then he sees an online interview with Brian Cox about the Large Hadron Collider and is inspired to make it his life’s work to understand why gravity works. In the end, he does, and finds out that the Universe is filled to overflowing with the wonder and beauty of nature.
I’ll be waiting a long time for that movie.”
Yes you will. & then there’ll be the twist - just as the kid isgetting fully inspiredand awed the CERN experiment will beturned on and …
…. BBBBLLLLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMM!!!
The planet (& possibly unverse) will be destroyed by the LHC / evil scientists!
(Sorry I couldn’t resist it. Yes I love science too but sorry I do also fear some of its more dangerous applications - the LHC supercollider among them. I’d rather they didn’t turn it on - not on this planet anyhow ..)
April 30th, 2008 at 10:29 am
Oh Know!(Heh) Someone made a comment that isn’t about anything but their private hissy fit! How dare he/she/it!
It’s not even worth the time it took to read. Ignoring stupid comments, it’s just got to happen!
April 30th, 2008 at 10:40 am
Wrote # aiabx on 30 Apr 2008 at 9:13 am :
“It isn’t quite your movie, but Rocket Boys is a good film about some kid growing up in a squalid coal mining town who is inspired by the Sputnik launch to become a rocket scientist, in spite of the strong disapproval of his father. No religion angle, but certainly an anti-intellectual angle, and it has the multiple benefits of not only ending well, but being true.”
I think I saw the same movie but it was called ‘October Skies’ instead.
Pretty sure it sounds the same.
& to correct my earlier unedited post :
… & then there’ll be the twist in the end of the BA’s movie script :
Just as that kid is getting fully inspired and awed, the CERN experiment will be turned on and …
…. KABOOOM!!!
The planet (& possibly unverse) will be destroyed by the LHC / evil scientists!
(Sorry I couldn’t resist it. Yes I love science too but sorry I do also fear some of its more dangerous applications - the LHC supercollider among them. I’d rather they didn’t turn it on - not on this planet anyhow ..)
***
Honestly, people like what they call “feelgood” movies / books / entertainment generally & to too many people, science just doesn’t make e’m ..well feel good. For some reason we humans do _want_ to believe .. in the Supernatural or infairy stories or in people being good or whatever..
Science often comes across as cold and threatening /intimidating and “feel bad” Why that should be so is another question but it does seem to be the case.
There are exceptions though and Carl Sagan, Isaac Asimov and a TV sitcom about doctors called ‘Scrubs’ spring to mind in that category although even ‘Scrubs’ had its elemnstof fel-good &medicla miracles at times ..
Amercian culture more than most in the world seems biased against intellectuals & science & rational thinking - this strike sme as avery bad thing and anything you can do tochange that is a step in the right direction but also a drop in the ocean.
Still keep up the good fight - those drops do add up!
——–
It also makes it very worrying that America has the world’s largest WMD’s stockpile including the most nuclear weapons ..
PS. Can I just add my name to those who’ve requested that you still review here the “Expelled” [Sub-titled :From the dysentery plagued bowels of the Kreationist Klan] movie (painful as I’m sure that’ll be ) & also this one ..
April 30th, 2008 at 10:45 am
“I’d rather see a movie where …”
I was going to make that movie, but I’m cancelling those plans. Everyone would just say I ripped off the idea from BAB.
April 30th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Said # Neil on 30 Apr 2008 at 10:29 am
“Oh Know!(Heh) Someone made a comment that isn’t about anything but their private hissy fit! How dare he/she/it! It’s not even worth the time it took to read. Ignoring stupid comments, it’s just got to happen!”
Huh? You referring to me? I hope not ..
I can tell you now its no hissing or fitting just discussion.
Isn’t it okay to discuss thoughts online? Ain’t that what the blog is for?
Or maybe, Neil, I should just ignore your comment as stupid ..?
After all its a free world …
… Sorta.
April 30th, 2008 at 10:54 am
StevoR =
I think Neil was satirically mimicing an earlier post from J Jones… I don’t think that it was at all directed at you…
CE
April 30th, 2008 at 10:55 am
Suggested # bjornart on 30 Apr 2008 at 10:45 am :
“[quote] “I’d rather see a movie where …” [/unquote]
(Really how do you get bold, italics, underline, quote tabs etc .. here? Anyone? Please? - ed.)
I was going to make that movie, but I’m cancelling those plans. Everyone would just say I ripped off the idea from BAB.”
Okay I’ll stay quiet about it for you!
Or .. Hey .. Why don’t you talk it over with the BA & collaborate in creating that movie! After all you [italics]are [/unitalics] a movie producer / director aren’t you?
April 30th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Clarified # Celtic_Evolution on 30 Apr 2008 at 10:54 am :
“StevoR = I think Neil was satirically mimicing an earlier post from J Jones… I don’t think that it was at all directed at you… CE”
Ah, okay now I think I’ve seen the post you mean.
That’s cool then - I just saw Neil’s post appearing right below mine so feared he was having a go at me .. that’s all.
Cheers for that, CE.
April 30th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Convert, heathens. The church of the Frisbee requires your pareidolia!
You can see the works all around you!
Frisbeetarianism, n. the belief that, after death, the soul flies up onto the roof and gets stuck there.
April 30th, 2008 at 11:11 am
Recalled # Taz (Tasweigan Aussie by any chance?) on 30 Apr 2008 at 9:18 am :
“Chris, isn’t that what they said about religion-themed movies before Mel Gibson made “Passion”?”
Maybe “The Passion” specifically for the whole filming in Aramaic thing but hardly religion-themed movies I’d think given the way Charleton Heston starred in the Bible movies of old -Ten Commandments (his Moses one?) & Ben Hur to name just a couple.
Personally, my all-time fave religion-themed one was Monty Python’s ‘Life of Brian’ .. a Classic!
—————————-
Man-in-Crowd : If its not a personal question are you a Virgin?
Brian’s Mother : Not a personal question! Not a personal question! How
much more personal can you get??!
Crowd : (nodding & murmurming ) Yeah, she is, must be ..
——–
Brian : You don’t have to follow me! You don’t have to follow anybody! You’re all individuals!
Crowd chanting together : Yes! We’re all individuals!
Solitary voice from the crowd (right after the chant() : I’m not!
———-
Brian’s Mother : EEEEEEEEE’s NOT the Messiah! Eeeees a very naughty boy!
April 30th, 2008 at 11:17 am
Oh & ‘Dogma’ (made by the folks who made Clarks & Silent Bob & starring Jesus’s black brother & some very nasty killer angels) was a pretty classic comic-religious one too.
This one in question though..? Well I think I’ll most likley give it a miss. Actually given my grim financial situation, I’ll really almost definitely
(99.99999 % ) give it a miss.
BTW. Did the BA review “The Passion” Gibson’s version wasn’t too bad as I recall. Lots of gore … not a bad horror flick.
April 30th, 2008 at 11:18 am
Bah. Sounds like a mix between a thriller and a chick flick.
April 30th, 2008 at 11:23 am
Around here where I live there’s a fairly active community of indie microcinema filmmakers. I’ve hung out on their bulletin boards, and one thing I’ve noticed is that what they talk about amongst themselves is the process of making movies. They almost never engage in conversation regarding the deep meanings of their films. The stories which they choose to commit to the screen are, interestingly, just excuses for making movies. That’s the gist of it; what interests filmmakers is the process of filmmaking itself. This is their worldview. It’s what they know. To them the essential reality is the shooting of scenes.
So it comes as no big surprise that most filmmakers are not only clueless about science and the fruits it bears, but they’re also pretty disinterested in being less clueless. It’s all beside the point. They want to make movies, and they want audiences to see & love them. That’s the name of the game. It’s rather analogous to being a professional politician.
But here’s something of interest: on Lawrence Krauss’s website there’s an old interview transcription in which he expressed interest in someday directing a movie. Now there’s a fascinating possibility. Perhaps someone should hand him a script.
April 30th, 2008 at 11:40 am
StevoR, That was Frank Poole if I remember right.
April 30th, 2008 at 11:41 am
aiabx and StevoR: The movie is “October Sky”, which is an anagram of “Rocket Boys” which in turn is the name of the book on which the movie was based.
And yeah, it’s a good movie. Lots of ’splody attempts to make rockets, ultimately leading to becoming a real rocket engineer! Woo-hoo!
April 30th, 2008 at 11:49 am
Well, nobody ever went broke underestimating the intellect of movie goers.
Except maybe Ben Stein–at last count, Expelled has grossed only $5.4 million. No word on how much it cost–but I’m guessing it hasn’t reached the break-even point yet.
Mindless feel-good entertainment will, on the whole, do much better so Henry’s Pool Stain, or whatever it’s called will make some bucks.
As far as religious movies making mega money: Mel’s quasi-historical Jesus Chainsaw Massacre, was I think, a fluke. Gibson’s Fundamentalist base, coupled with his love of senseless, ultra bloody action movies, coincided to appeal to a large group of latter day Christian martyr wanna-bes and those raised on the impossibly bloody action flicks of late.
Now I’ve PO’ed some of the readers, I should clarify: I see most of the religious right as being people with a siege mentality. They see themselves as being attacked by all sorts of evil and worldliness. Seeing the graphic suffering in The Passion, no doubt, inspired many to keep up their fight against the rest of the world, and if they become martyrs to the one true religion, then so be it.
April 30th, 2008 at 11:55 am
StevoR-sorry, I should have made clear to whom I was responding. I always get a kick when someone bothers to comment that a post wasn’t worth reading, threatens to stop reading, etc. without bothering to make a real point themselves.
I’ve been tired of the “just have faith” theme since Tinkerbell. The constant demonization of science and skepticality gets on my last nerve as well. It’s become so prevalent in movies that I only watch a few new ones each year. I can’t remember the last time I watched a movie where science was a force for good and living in reality was portrayed as an acceptable option. Don’t get me wrong, I’m really a pretty light-hearted guy, and I love an imaginative story. I even loved Bruce Almighty. But if I really needed two hours of silly stories encouraging faith, I would just go to a church instead of a movie theater.
I do like Luke Wilson-I guess I’ll have to get someone else to watch it first, or maybe rent it later. This subject could make a great comedy, if there were enough satire mixed with the miracles. We’ll see…
April 30th, 2008 at 11:58 am
D’oh. It was October Sky, I had the book title clogging up my brain.
April 30th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
StevoR:
Since you asked, some HTML tags do work here. Examples:
<i>italic text</i> = italic text
<em>emphasized text</em> = emphasized text
<b>italic text</b> = bold text
<blockquote>blockquoted text</blockquote> =
That’s not comprehensive, but you get the idea.
April 30th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
That is,
<b>bold text</b> = bold text
April 30th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
A movie that I haven’t seen that has a religious background, despite being obviously satirical? HORRIBLE.
I thought scientists weren’t supposed to be the ignorant ones.
April 30th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
I’d just like to see an end to the “eek! sciences will kills us all!” type of films. I’m looking at *you* “I Am Legend”.
Seriously, I almost turned it off early on when they revealed the plague was caused by scientists repurposing the measles virus to cure cancer.
I’m sure the folks actually working with reprogramming virii were *real* thrilled with that. They’ve actually used a mutated adenovirus to kill cancer cells.
April 30th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
Oh no!
Now Luke Wilson is EVIL!
We should be making snarky comments about him on a daily basis, right?
April 30th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Why is there this need to falsly praise science and damn religion? Science is about facts and proof and those are its merits.
I like science fiction too, but really there is no such thing. If it is fiction then it isn’t science. Any movie about understanding gravity would be just as silly as this one.
The truth is that my 2 favorite movies are Contact and Ben Hur. Both are equally fictional, but that is just my opinion.
April 30th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
StevoR - Of course there were religion-themed movies before “Passion of the Christ”, and quite successful ones at that. But as your examples show, it had been awhile. So when “Passion” came out many people claimed it proved the populace was hungry for religious movies, but evil Hollywood refused to make them, (because they’re all godless liberals, of course). Frankly I always thought the argument was absurd. Hollywood will produce anything it thinks will make money.
April 30th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
“How to invent statements no-one made and claim them as fact to make a point no-one is arguing”… a new paperback soon to be released by david D…
April 30th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
Hey CE:
Sorry–I wasn’t inventing statements or claiming anything as fact.
But at least one comment expressed, um, disappointment with Mr. Wilson:
If we keep with the logic of branding as “evil” things that have to do with faith or religion (as this movie is), then is it such a stretch to label Mr. Wilson as such? It just seems an easy conclusion to draw–and I didn’t have to invent any statements or facts, okay?
April 30th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
And I would at least release it first in hardcover.
April 30th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Blake Staceyon wrote:
“I’d like to see a movie where Luke Wilson eats a Guatemalan insanity pepper and starts seeing faces in everything, after which Jesus starts singing Pink Floyd and the dragons come out of the tree leaves. . . .
But I’d pay to see your movie too.”
Why not have star in a bio on the life of Terence McKenna?
April 30th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
@ david D
Just point point out to me that post where anyone said that “Luke Wilson was evil” and I’ll concede the point. Otherwise… yeah… you made it up.
And you used that line to preface your next line… that we are advocating, in this post, making snarky comments about anyone on a daily basis… you invented that, too…
I stand by my original comments.
April 30th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Oh, and to answer your question, david D… yeah… it’s quite a stretch to equate saying someone made a “crappy” film to calling them “evil”. Nice try.
April 30th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Jeesh…
A blogger who is well known for promoting skepticism and making fun of woo-pushers writes a mildly negative post about a movie that looks to be full of woo, and makes the plea once again for some imaginitive promotion of reality(or at least occasional appreciation of it.) I know, I too am truly shocked…
Somehow there are still Sensitive Sallies that are so delicate that this action is perceived as an attack on religion, or fairness, or…well what exactly IS the problem anyway? Colic?
I love a good work of imagination, even if it is far outside the bounds of reality. That’s part of the purpose of fiction, to explore the open territory of imagination. But how many thousands of times do people need to be washed over in the warm glow of cheap celluloid faith? Bouyed by Hollywood Hope?
Phil isn’t the only one who is sick to death of wishy-washy feel good stories where “faith” or “hope” is always played up as some poor man’s cure-all. The movie does look to be a little satirical on the religion part. There might actually be some humor involved, and that’s great! But I got to the line “But hope never gave up on Henry” and realized that it’s probably just the same old pablum. All you have to do is hope, see, and all your problems vanish and you get the hot single mom next door, too!
Some of us just want a bite of substance with our sugar wafers from time to time. I know it’s a lot to ask, but we can still hope, right?
Anyway, Idiocracy was worth a ton of floating hope, so I will hold no grudge even if this is the biggest turd since “Signs.” If you really need some hope from the screen, rent The Shawshank Redemption and watch it again. Now that movie is about some serious hope. Hope that leaves you shivering yet triumphant, rather than bored and diabetic.
April 30th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
I’m with you, Phil. I’m tired of all the movies and TV shows that all claim “you just need faith” or “just believe”. Just use your brain or give it to someone else who will.
April 30th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
CE–I never claimed that anyone here said that Luke Wilson was evil–I said it; it was my opinion, that’s all. I’m pretty sure that it’s okay to express opinions here.
And if you haven’t noticed, this blog makes snarky comments about people every day, whether you advocate it or not. Point out to me, CE, where I said you were advocating anything.
Lastly, many people believe that “Expelled” is a “crappy” film, and many of them here equated that film’s “crappiness” with “evil.” Not really a stretch at all.
I, too, stand by my original comment.
April 30th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
Speaking of pareidolia and Jesus…. the following story links to a woman who got an ultrasound during pregnancy to view the fetus and got to see Jesus too.
April 30th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
Oops forgot to post the link for the ultrasound pareidolia…
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,353230,00.html
April 30th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
I made a story about an alien in disguise in New York City who introduces the children to the wonders of the universe that lie beyond the light pollution. Plus, Spider-Man makes a cameo! ‘d like to see it as a movie.
April 30th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
Re:davidD and Celtic Evolution
Interesting. Sort of. I’m in a mood, so I’ll jump in as well.
davidD: “If we keep with the logic of branding as “evil” things that have to do with faith or religion (as this movie is), then is it such a stretch to label Mr. Wilson as such? It just seems an easy conclusion to draw–and I didn’t have to invent any statements or facts, okay?”
I would take your other statements at face value, but you give it up right there. You might want to back away from that royal “we.” YOU are the only one making such statements and YOU are doing all the branding and stretching. I assumed(like CE) that your first comment was backhanded, intended to be a parody of whatever it is you think you see here. Is that incorrect? Perhaps it was just stupid.
You then go on to the masterpiece I’ve quoted above. No, you’re not inventing statements. But you are inventing dubious premises, attributing them to some mysterious “we” and then setting long-jump records to reach your insulting and laughable conclusions.
Yes, there are many skeptics who read this blog. Yes, some of us, myself included have very low opinions of the supposed benefits of religion and faith and those who promote them as beneficial. Almost all of us, I would venture, have even lower opinions of folks like Ben Stein and the makers of Expelled, and all others who, out of greed, ignorance and/or malice prey on the gullible and manufacture vicious lies that are intended to stop rational discourse and promote evidence-free emotionalism and dogma over science and rational inquiry. This does not translate to slandering every passing actor in every cheesy movie about the wonders of hope, or branding as “evil” everything to do with religion. You are making leaps that would turn Carl Lewis green with envy. You are deliberately exaggerating the responses to these issues so that you can parody your fluffy little strawman and feel like a great wit. Well done!
Well, this little billy goat has had enough. I suggest placing your illogic on a high speed trajectory headed toward the nearest black hole in your vicinity.
April 30th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
Neil–
Wow. The royal “we?” Are you serious? Sometimes, you know, the word is used to refer to a collective group–in this case, the “we” referred to commenters on this blog, esp. those engaging in a conversation about this movie. ANd you got a royal “we” out of that? How far was that long jump?
My first comment was back-handed (to use your term), and yes, intended as a parody of the things I have seen here on a frequent basis. If it was stupid, that is your opinion. And I was simply expressing MY opinion, in the form of a parody. Do you have a problem with someone expressing an opinion? Just asking. . .
Well, I haven’t found too many posts here (either from BA or the BAbloggers) that are, shall we say, favorable to faith/religious ideas. Now, I understand this is BA’s blog, and I have come to some understanding of who BA is, so I don’t expect to find posts like that. And maybe you are right, that not “every” comment (YOU used the term slander, not me) here about religion or the “wonders of hope” gets knocked as evil. But I can’t recall ANY that didn’t. And let’s not forget that nobody has actually even seen the movie yet.
As if I’m the only one behaving like this. Have you seen the kind of responses to the “Expelled” movie expressed here?
Isn’t that kind of what this blog is about, esp. when it crosses over into the political territory? Isn’t that kind of what bloggers do?
I appreciate your comments, and your opinion. Respeck, as Ali G would say–know what I mean?
April 30th, 2008 at 8:59 pm
I was watching South Park recently. Imagination Land had just been attacked by terrorists and an emergency meeting of a council of 9, the imaginary leaders of Imagination Land, is called. The leaders include Zeus, Morpheus, Wonder Woman, Popeye and, hilariously, Jesus.
No comment except Manbearpig.
April 30th, 2008 at 9:43 pm
Respeck, agreed.
Sorry if I seem a bit harsh. Opinions are opinions and bloggers have plenty of them. I welcome them all for consideration and I love a lively forum. But I don’t see quite the unified front you seem to see.
Almost every political post on this blog gets plenty of different
responses. You were not alone in criticizing this post. Commenters
regularly criticize the apparent majority position here, and that is great.
However, you were satirically using a group “we” for a position that I really don’t see. Plenty of science buffs and skeptics have a serious problem with Stein and the Expelled crowd, for reasons that are very well documented all over the skeptical end of the blogosphere. If “evil” is to be taken as a real concept, I think it can be applied fairly to their actions, even if only a small, limp, but loudmouthed kind of evil.
“We” were also mildly criticizing what appears to be another silly Hollywood attempt at cheesy “faith based” inspiration. I for one hope I’m wrong. I hope it’s a brilliant satire about a man who grows past childish superstition and accepts responsibility for his own happiness…but I doubt it. Call me skeptical.
Either way, the two posts, the two opinions, are not the same. Even if I think that both are results of a gullible culture, that is hardly the same thing, not by a long shot. Nobody but you went there. You were satirizing your own invented position and calling it “we.” Not appreciated, at least not by “me.” You then backtracked, and disowned your parody, saying it was just “your” opinion. So which is it: A real opinion, or an attempt at discrediting what you seem to think is “our” opinion? Either way you are welcome to it, but please be prepared to own it, and maybe even explain it.
By the way, you seem to bring up Expelled a lot, considering that it is a separate issue. If you really want some perspective from people who have a a lot more axe to grind on this subject, check out Pharyngula.
When people spout bald-faced lies just so they can misrepresent one’s position, it tends to get under one’s skin.
April 30th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
Quiet_Desperation
I’d just like to see an end to the “eek! sciences
will kills us all!” type of films. I’m looking at *you*
“I Am Legend”.
And Looking and looking and looking. That movie is a textbook example of how Hollywood will milk dang near anything to death.
“I am Legend” was a powerful novel back in 1954 when it came out. End of the world books and movies were popular in the middle of the Cold War. Mindless zombies/vampires were great substitues for godless commies.
Then Vincent Price made a movie version “Last Man On Earth,” a pretty faithful version of the book. Still lots of cold war analogies.
Then Moses–er–Charleton Heston got his chance to grimace at and machine gun down hordes of whitewashed cult-like vampire/zombies led by Anthony Zerbe. In that one, the the enemy seemed to be hippies and/or mindless enemies of America.
I haven’t bothered with the Will Smith version yet. I cannot imagine the movie saying anything new the third time around. And call me old fashioned, but CG and special effects are a poor substitute for a good story and competent acting.
May 1st, 2008 at 8:12 am
Neil–
Thanks–i dig the respeck–booyakasha!
I didn’t think my snarky little post would have still been an ongoing topic here. It was meant as a way of pointing out the reaction to the movie Expelled–yes I was criticizing what I feel is an extremely heated response to a genuinely crappy movie. I think that the opinion of MANY (not all) bloggers here is virulently anti-religion, and it is not something I am pulling out of thin air. So, i will own both my opinion and my lame attempt at being critical of MANY of the opinions here.
And yes, I have seen the Pharyngula site; the bloggers and comments there make this place look like the teddy bear picnic. I understand PZ’s complaint, being a specific target and all. Still, a lot of energy seems to be spent on this hateration.
Well, on to the next topic . . .
Respeck!
May 1st, 2008 at 10:29 am
David D
I agree.
The worst end-of-the-world science fiction movie has to be “An Inconvienient Truth”. The main actor did such a wooden acting job.
May 1st, 2008 at 3:35 pm
I Am Legend is actually pretty good. Will Smith can actually act (yeah, I know, it’s sort of a surprise, but he has since at least Pursuit of Happiness) but it is, still, essentially the same story.
As for technofear, blame Mary Shelley. She more or less established the mad scientist meme, and the World Wars proved that the technology the mad scientists make can kill a lot of Joe Blows. So it goes, sadly. Still, there’s a more pivotal reason why no one will make a Technology and Science Save The Day! movie: it’d be dry, unless it got turned into a technoswords-and-sorcery story where the main character has to get the MacGuffin Machine to the Plot Dilemma in order to Save The World, and even then the character is secondary to the MacGuffin Machine.
I’m looking at you, Alastair Reynolds.
I guess the question is “how can we package it so it sells, without looking like The Iron Dream?”
May 1st, 2008 at 3:37 pm
argh, tag closure error.
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:36 pm
Honestly …. it’s a movie, a fiction movie. Seems like your over-reacting.
May 3rd, 2008 at 7:00 am
Testing …
Yep. That’s the one - thanks! Frank, Harry .. same diff ..well almost!
Ah, yes! That’s the one I meant! I did’nt know it was based on a book … but I guess I should have. All the best movies usually are!
Checking my Collins Internet-linked Dictionary of Astronomy (Market House Books, 2006) I find the original Sputnik was launched on 4th October 1957 too making the anagram title apt again.
Neil Apology accepted. No worries. I was just a bit confused there for a while .. Actually I’m often confused but ..hey that’s life.
Thanks again & really hoping this works now. 
Jim Shaver Many thanks! I’ve been puzzling on how to do all that bold, italics, quotes stuff for ages. So that’s what they mean by HTML eh? Sorry I’m pretty average with computers I must confess.
Finally, thinking religious & / or scientific movies :
(Or is philosophical a better word?)
What about ‘Contact’ which had both science & religion?
Or for that matter Space odyssey :2001 … which has the strange pyschedelic semi-religious (?) ending plus heaps of science?
& what was the one with the sleeping sickness patients based on the Oliver Sach’s bok (?) The Awakening or something?
&, of course, ‘A Beautiful Mind’ which I’ll admit I haven’t seen?
Personally I didn’t mind any of Gibson’s movies really - I loved ‘Braveheart’!