The new movie about Charles Darwin, starring (former neighbors!) Paul Bettany and Jennifer Connelly, is having trouble finding a US distributor because it’s “controversial.”

I don’t even have words for how stupid this is. I mean, I guess there’s the old, “If you don’t want to see it, don’t go to the movie.” I don’t like Megan Fox or horror movies, so Jennifer’s Body will not be getting my $12.50. See how easy that was, Science Haters? But we could even dial it down a bit and say it’s just a story about a man who had a crisis of faith when his daughter died.

Or, you know, we could point out that saying “Evolution is just a theory” is the same as saying George W. Bush was just a government official.

But whatever. We’re apparently willing to accept giant fighting robots in movie theaters but not a movie based on a story about one of the most important scientific discoveries ever. Fine, Middle America. Deprive me of seeing this movie. Only makes me want to see it more.

Here’s the trailer:

I am apparently only good at posts full of links lately.

+ Gawker prepares for Watchman by looking at photos of New York in 1985.

+ I’ll have you know that I am a geek, thankyouverymuch.

+ Speaking of geekery, Jezebel ponders when it became uncool to be smart, citing a woman who won a quiz show in the UK.

+ The Girl Scouts are trying to modernize. Which is awesome. Although my life is sadly lacking in Girl Scout Cookies.

+ If you thought Monday was snowy, check out these photos from the blizzard of 1888. I’d guess we got almost a foot in my corner of Brooklyn on Monday, enough to inspire people to go cross-country skiing in prospect park.

I suck at this blogging thing, eh?

Well, some news and notes:

1. Uma Thurman and Jesse L. Martin have joined the cast of the new Muppet Christmas movie, which is especially notable as it’s been filming in my corner of Brooklyn. I, in fact, walked through the set last week when they were filming on 8th Ave in Park Slope conveniently between work and my apartment.

2. Gawker had an interesting round-up on Friday of scientific explanations for why people vote Republican.

Speaking of politics, I am going to try my darnedest to liveblog or at least write extensive commentary on the debates.

3. Did you know that the very first baseball park to charge admission was right here in Brooklyn? And now, thanks to the new Yankee and Shea Stadiums (or “Citifield,” whatevs) we New Yorkers get to pay through our noses for baseball. So much for America’s pastime.

more animals

+ Hollywood’s 5 saddest attempts at feminism.

+ Related: Masculinity and Disney movies.

+ Fashion at my alma mater. I’m sure glad I graduated before that words-on-the-ass-of-your-sweatpants trend started. Or, maybe what I really need are some of these. Hot, right?

+ I’m kidding.

+ McCain Shenanigans Watch: McCain pulled out of an interview on CNN because Campbell Brown actually, you know, did her job by asking some tough questions.

+ Cool skyscraper photography.

+ Some baseball card fun: The 23rd card in a set of 22.

+ Grease in Lego.

+ Newspapers in my home state may be folding. (Quote: “Soon Jersey residents will have to go back to getting all their news from Springsteen lyrics and Kevin Smith movies.”)

+ Knit historical tyrants.

+ This tool that analyzes browser history is 95% certain I am female.

+ We haven’t done a Polygamist Watch in a while. Check out these photos in the Times about the women of FLDS. Also, practices are being defended in court. Also, Warren Jeffs got indicted.

+ When Batman was gay.

+ Corollary: How awesome was The Dark Knight? I know, right?

+ This will make you happy:

A follow up to yesterday’s post:

Some people think Anthony Lane’s review of the SATC movie in the New Yorker is sexist. Some don’t. All I know is that the caricature drawing that accompanies the review is heinous.

I saw the Sex and the City movie on Friday with a group of girlfriends, as is de rigueur. I had read a bunch of spoilers before I knew for sure I’d be seeing the movie, so there weren’t a lot of surprises.

I’ll say it. I’m a 20-something in New York. I’m supposed to gripe about how unrealistic and shallow the show is. I’ve also seen every episode and even written about the show before. I figure they live in a fantasy version of New York. I suspend my disbelief and focus on the characters.

So the movie. It was better than I had expected, although it’s way too long and thin on plot. It’s basically 2.5 hours of fashion porn, with some angst thrown in for good measure. I could complain about specific things I didn’t like, but I won’t spoil you. It’s materialistic and gratuitous and totally focused on men, but still, below everything, it’s a show about four women friends. (The conflict between Miranda and Carrie that develops is the most poignant and heartbreaking, as far as I’m concerned. The stuff involving Steve and Mr. Big? We’ve seen it before.)

Anyway, that’s not really the point of posting. I want to talk about the many millions of dollars the movie made. Suddenly Hollywood, which has been pretty phallocentric recently, is all What what what? Women like movies?!

That there’s an audience for movies with female characters should not be a hard thing to fathom. I don’t know that I’d go as far as the above-linked New York article goes; I saw Iron Man and Indiana Jones in theaters, too, because I like an action flick starring a good-looking man as much as the next girl, and I don’t think Carrie Bradshaw is a superhero.

It occurs to me that what we saw with the huge box office for the SATC movie is several things: 1) Women friends went together, testifying to the strength of female friendships. (The theater where I saw the movie was pretty much all groups of female friends or couples.) 2) There have been so few movies starring women lately, and finally there is one so women are going to see it in droves. 3) It speaks to the power of women as consumers, and it’s interesting that they’ve been ignored for so long.

I suppose only time will tell if this will herald in a new era of female-centric movies. Would Hollywood dare discriminate against a demographic that is eager to give them money?

Last night, I went with my mom to see The Dhamma Brothers, a documentary about a program to teach Vipassana meditation to inmates at a maximum-security prison in Alabama. She reviews the movie here and I don’t have a whole lot to add beyond that the movie’s main point, or what I took away from it at any rate, is that the US prison system is totally FUBAR and that it’s worth a look at possible alternative rehabilitation programs, even (or maybe especially) when they fly in the face of tradition or what’s been tried before. Teaching a Buddhist meditation method should not be controversial, even if it is being taught in the Bible Belt.

I thought a bit while watching the film about the goal of prisons. One of the subjects of the documentary commented that the prison is pretty much just a warehouse for men who have done bad things. So, is the goal of our penitentiary system to segregate criminals from the rest of the general population? And if that is the only goal, what do we owe the prisoners? I would argue humane conditions and hopefully freedom from violence, but what do we do beyond that? I don’t know the answer. If the goal of the prison system is to rehabilitate, what is the purpose of life sentences without parole, or of the death penalty for that matter? If the goal of the prison system is to punish, what punishments are appropriate? I appreciate prison as a means of deterrence, also; don’t do crime because you will end up here. So prison should be bad to a certain extent, but is being locked up punishment enough? (Probably yes, thought I’m sure people will argue the point.)

This all has very little to do with the film, which doesn’t seem to take a stance beyond, “This particular prison is Alabama is really violent and this program got some dudes to mellow out a little bit so now there is slightly less violence. Success!” Well, that sells the movie short a little bit, I think it has a larger message than that, but that’s really about the sum of it.

Quick links:

1. I love vintage advertising, but this is one of those things that makes me glad it’s not the 50s anymore: outrageously sexist advertising from yesteryear.

2. Tweety, Donald, Daisy, and Mickey Mouse have been called as witnesses in a for real court case in Italy. When asked for comment, Donald’s whole head turned red, and he hopped on one foot and waved his fist while making unintelligable sounds.

3. Harry Potter Daniel Randcliffe and his “other wand” are coming to Broadway.

4. Speaking of Broadway, sixty years ago Monday marked the very first time Marlon Brando shouted STELLA!!.