…and this is a 
Darwin movie in the works?
Category: Entertainment
Posted on: September 5, 2008 9:49 AM, by PZ Myers
There's a new movie being developed on the life of Charles Darwin that actually has the potential to be good. It's based on Randal Keyne's book, Annie's Box(amzn/b&n/abe/pwll), which is an excellent source that humanizes the man well. It also has a good cast so far, although, seriously, Jennifer Connelly is way too hot to play Emma Darwin — they're going to have to dress her down quite a bit.
Husband and wife Paul Bettany and Jennifer Connelly have been cast as a married couple in an upcoming film titled Creation (previously known as Origin). The film tells the life story of Charles Darwin, the English naturalist who essentially came up with the idea of evolution. This biopic is being directed by Jon Amiel, of Entrapment and The Core, and has script penned by John Collee, of Master and Commander and Happy Feet. Bettany will play Darwin, while Connelly will play his wife Emma, which is a good fit considering they're married in real life, too. Also part of the cast are Jeremy Northam, Toby Jones and Benedict Cumberbatch, however the role of of daughter Annie has yet to be announced.
Oscar winning producer Jeremy Thomas, who is developing the film, explains that "John Collee's compelling script tells the remarkable story behind Darwin's revolutionary theory and the foundation of a book that changed the world." He adds, "we think of Darwin as an old man with a gray beard. The reality of our story is very different." Creation will portray Darwin as a man torn between his love for his deeply religious wife and his own growing belief in a world where God has no place. The scientist finds himself caught in a struggle between faith and reason, love and truth. Collee's script is based on the book "Annie's Box" written by Randal Keynes. Shooting starts at the end of September in England.
I shall await its completion with anticipation. It better not be a wall stain.
Comments
Posted by: The Chemist | September 5, 2008 9:56 AM
Amiel of The Core.
Uh-oh.
Posted by: Matt Heath | September 5, 2008 9:59 AM
"Creation": That's kind of procovative title, no? I think it's a good title though. It's stepping up and saying "(Give or take details) THIS is how creatures were made."
Posted by: PZ Myers | September 5, 2008 10:00 AM
Yeah, that's a downer. But this movie will not be that much about the science, but about Charles and Emma and Annie. I suppose he could screw that up if he gives Jennifer Connelly a nude scene...
Posted by: Kel | September 5, 2008 10:03 AM
Picture sounds promising.
Onion article is very LOL.
Posted by: Tony Sidaway | September 5, 2008 10:07 AM
What, no hot sex-in-the-shower scene?
Posted by: The Chemist | September 5, 2008 10:08 AM
This is still my most favorite Darwin movie to date.
That never gets old!
Posted by: (((Billy))) The Atheist | September 5, 2008 10:11 AM
Anyone care to take odds on whether the script incledes the ficticious deathbed scene in which Darwing 'becomes Christian and renounces evolution?' One of my fundy friends is convinced that Darwin was saved on his deathbed and decided that the joke had gone too far.
Posted by: Kel | September 5, 2008 10:13 AM
I love that video TheChemist.
Yeah he's the Dick to the Dawk to the PhD,
he's smarter than you he's got a science degree!
The Dick to the Dawk to the PhD,
he's still smarter than you he studied biology!
It's funny because it's true!
Posted by: Fire Ant | September 5, 2008 10:15 AM
Didn't Bettany play a Darwin-type ship's naturalist in "Master and Commander?"
Posted by: Scott | September 5, 2008 10:19 AM
Fire Ant: Yes, he did.
I hope the movie is better than it sounds. All four of the movies mentioned sucked.
Posted by: Aaron | September 5, 2008 10:22 AM
I was excited till I read this:
Oy.
So they'll have a Science Consultant (a REAL one this time? Not some drunkard that fell asleep during a 9th grade geology class?) on board, right?
If not, I can only imagine the potential for bastardization.... Amiel would probably incorrectly show evolution as the organism level (i.e. a finch suddenly growing a new beak after flying to a new island) if left to his own devices... *sigh*
Posted by: Matt Heath | September 5, 2008 10:24 AM
Billy: I'd put those odds pretty low unless they want a fight with the author whose book they are adapting (a direct descendant of Darwin). Plus this movie is never going to be a blockbuster; it's going to be watched by smallish audience who proably care about honesty in these things. It wouldn't benefit by pandering.
Posted by: JStein | September 5, 2008 10:25 AM
Ummm... this looks bad.
As has been pointed out, it seems like the captain of this ship has been drunk at the wheel many times before and, as much as I like Jennifer Connelley as an actress, unless we see her naked in this movie (highly doubtful) it may have trouble getting a draw.
Also, I think that the title change is worth noting. "Origin" to "Creation" kind of bothers me a little.
Posted by: LisaJ | September 5, 2008 10:26 AM
Oh, exciting! But yeah, having this movie linked to The Core really brings down my confidence level that this will be a good film. I watched The Core on one of my first dates with my now husband. It was just an awful movie, and the abounding phallic symbols made the whole experience incredibly awkward.
Loved the Darwin stained wall link... that's hilarious.
Posted by: Darth Wader | September 5, 2008 10:28 AM
Could be worse, could be Michael Bay....
"I didn't know The Beagle exploded"
Posted by: ajay | September 5, 2008 10:30 AM
Paul Verhoeven!
Posted by: beeline | September 5, 2008 10:32 AM
I love that Wall Stain article - so perverse. This bit especially made me laugh:
Now, you know which words to swap in there for instant amusement...
Posted by: (((Billy))) The Atheist | September 5, 2008 10:33 AM
Matt: Good to hear. I cringe everytime an 'historical' movie is made, no matter the subject. The need for directors and writers to please the audience by having a 'feel good' ending, or a magic catharsis, or some other plot device to keep it 'interesting' has always annoyed me. Then again, I'm easily annoyed when it comes to historical movies -- anachronisms and 'neatening up' the slop that is real history seems almost unavoidable.
I am a public historian (labour and industrial history). It is difficult not to dumb down or spice up an historic narrative, to create an 'ah-ha' moment in which everything changes. Yes, these moments exist (Johansen and Lucy, for example), but most of history is messy.
I hope the movie is good, and I hope that it is at least reasonably historically accurate. And now I have ANOTHER book on my already-too-long must read list.
Posted by: Darwin's Dagger | September 5, 2008 10:34 AM
Oh, let Jennifer Connelly stay hot. It's a prime example of reproductive fitness.
Posted by: Andrés Diplotti | September 5, 2008 10:35 AM
"Darwin, you fool! You have caused the finches to evolve into bloodthirsty monsters! Now we'll have to bring the American Army to kill them in slow motion!"
Posted by: catta | September 5, 2008 10:37 AM
If it's anything like the Mark Steel lecture on Darwin (if you haven't heard of Mark Steel, check YouTube), I'm all for it. I tend to cringe about really bad distortions too, but if the biography gets people excited and lets them look at historical icons in a new way, it's all good. (Er, as long as the excitement isn't about something entirely fabricated of course).
Posted by: patrickhenry | September 5, 2008 10:38 AM
I spotted this yesterday and blogged it then, beating PZ. Hah! One of the sources I quoted said this:
It certainly sounds like the setup for a "happy" ending with Lady Hope at his bedside to resolve the poor man's conflicts.
Posted by: Quiet_Desperation | September 5, 2008 10:38 AM
It was just an awful movie, and the abounding phallic symbols made the whole experience incredibly awkward.
Sometimes an unobtainium powered planetary core driller is just an unobtainium powered planetary core driller.
Posted by: extatyzoma | September 5, 2008 10:40 AM
cool.
jeremy northam is pretty good in period stuff.
Posted by: Hedgefundguy | September 5, 2008 10:41 AM
How about a cameo with PZ and Richard Dawkins?!
Posted by: Richard Harris | September 5, 2008 10:42 AM
Is there something like a Charles Darwin Estate that can approve the film-making so that it doesn't distort the truth about his life? Those idiots who believe in a god or gods would like to discredit the great man, I'm sure, & this could be a way for them to do that.
Posted by: SteveM | September 5, 2008 10:42 AM
Sometimes an unobtainium powered planetary core driller is just an unobtainium powered planetary core driller.
And if I recall the movie correctly, they actually talked about "unobtainium" as if it was a real material without any irony.
Posted by: catta | September 5, 2008 10:44 AM
If it's anything like the Mark Steel lecture on Darwin (if you haven't heard of Mark Steel, check YouTube), I'm all for it. I tend to cringe about really bad distortions too, but if the biography gets people excited and lets them look at historical icons in a new way, it's all good. (Er, as long as the excitement isn't about something entirely fabricated of course).
Posted by: Quiet_Desperation | September 5, 2008 10:46 AM
Ain't It Cool News had the leaked screenplay a while back. I didn't know the crew of The Beagle had to repeatedly fight off a giant squid, and I thought the katana fight between Darwin and the Bishop of Oxford on the lip of a volcano was a bit much.
Posted by: Terry Small | September 5, 2008 10:48 AM
Fire Ant @ #9 beat me too it.
I like M&C, and Bettany's character in it. I think it's amusing that he's cast into the actual Darwin role now, haha.
Posted by: Horwood Beer-Master | September 5, 2008 10:48 AM
I've read "Fossils, Finches and Fuegians" by Richard Keynes, but not "Annie's Box", is it any good?
Which 'Keynes' was it that appeared on Richard Dawkins recent telly programme, I can't remember off the top of my head?
Posted by: Richard Harris | September 5, 2008 10:48 AM
"unobtainium" as if it was a real material without any irony
So it's not a ferric alloy than!
Posted by: Darth Wader | September 5, 2008 11:00 AM
This was making me wonder, why are atheists in the media usually portrayed as cynical, depressed, humorless jerks? The only exception I can think of is from Contact. Almost every atheist I know, including myself is the polar opposite of what is shown in the movies.
Posted by: Holbach | September 5, 2008 11:03 AM
I'm willing to bet the producers tune the anti-religion crap down a bit so as not to "offend" the fundies. Here's a chance to really present the real Darwin without the excised references, especially when he finally renounced religion on the anguished death of his beloved Annie.
And heck, I'll gladly play the role of Darwin's bulldog and good friend, Thomas Henry Huxley. I think I can handle that role with authenticity and relish! Hey, give a call if you can't come up with someone to play thais decisive role!
And The Chemist @ 6: Yeah, I love that as one of my favorites too!
Posted by: Bill Dauphin | September 5, 2008 11:07 AM
He he, he said "happy ending"... what? Oh, sorry. Been reading too much naughty stuff in other threads, I guess! ;^)
Sure that wasn't just a very broad wink at the audience? Sometimes the lack of irony is the irony.
But no, I'm probably giving them way too much credit, eh?
Posted by: Cronan | September 5, 2008 11:07 AM
They should get Uwe Boll in to direct.
Posted by: Slaughter | September 5, 2008 11:16 AM
Jennifer Connelly, huh? Didn't Emma Darwin favor cleavage-baring gowns?
Posted by: Aaron | September 5, 2008 11:23 AM
That made me snort.
So did the guy talking about the Katana fight with the Bishop on the lip of the Volcano. Brilliant.
I hope I love this movie more than Pearl Harbor sucked.
Posted by: The Clown | September 5, 2008 11:24 AM
"Creation will portray Darwin as a man torn between his love for his deeply religious wife and his own growing belief in a world where God has no place."
That is probably the problem .... 'deeply religious' and 'a world where God has no place' ... a false dichotomy with only two extremes to pick from. Extremes are often sketchy positions to defend.
Posted by: Whateverman | September 5, 2008 11:25 AM
Having enjoyed the episode on Newton, I recently purchased Nova's "Genius" DVD box set. The Darwin DVD struck me as too "theatrical" as I was hoping for more factual information (rather than narrative). But it's still worth owning.
I'm curious about this upcoming movie as well - I hope it avoids the Oliver Stone paradim of historical movie making.
Posted by: wÒÓ† | September 5, 2008 11:30 AM
(.)(.)
Posted by: patrickhenry | September 5, 2008 11:34 AM
I wonder how they'll handle the famous mutiny on the Beagle, when Darwin had to put down a vicious creationist crew who had learned of the "Darwinist" purpose of their voyage?
Posted by: The Chemist | September 5, 2008 11:35 AM
Darth Wader at #15
Best. Comment. Ever.
Posted by: Johnny Vector | September 5, 2008 11:39 AM
Unobtanium is so 1990. The new magical material is Wonderflonium. Stops time. Check it out. Peace.
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | September 5, 2008 11:41 AM
Bill Shatner as Fitzroy?
Posted by: Richard Harris | September 5, 2008 11:44 AM
The Beagle exploded? Just wait until PETA hears about this!
Actually, Could be worse, could be Michael Bay.... "I didn't know The Beagle exploded",/em>
That's lost on me - please explain the joke.
Posted by: Darth Wader | September 5, 2008 11:46 AM
Bill Shatner as Fitzroy?There's something on the mast!.....Something!
Posted by: Faithful Reader | September 5, 2008 11:52 AM
"Benedict Cumberbatch"!--- ah, this Dickensian name is what keeps me an Anglophile.
Posted by: Matt7895 | September 5, 2008 11:52 AM
I don't like the title.
Good choice of actor playing Darwin, though. Paul Bettany is an atheist.
Posted by: catta | September 5, 2008 11:52 AM
Darth Wader, re: post 33... you might want to look up Mark Steel then, really. :) He's cynical, certainly, but he's a comedian. A good one, too. Sadly, I suspect that the fact he's also an outspoken journalist means that his series wouldn't fly in the US, though. His lectures are a great introduction on a number of topics for people who have a general "not interested"/"too hard to understand" attitude.
(Oh, and the portrayal of God in the Darwin lecture is pure genius...)
Posted by: catta | September 5, 2008 11:54 AM
In my post above, insert "socialist" before "journalist". Though simply outspoken journalists are anathema too, of course. ;)
Posted by: SteveM | September 5, 2008 11:59 AM
They should get Uwe Boll in to direct.
He only does video game adaptations. I expect to hear he's signed on to do the movie version of Spore.
Bay is famous for just about everything in his movies exploding. He even does a commercial satirizing himself and his fondness for explosions.
Posted by: Darth Wader | September 5, 2008 12:01 PM
Catta, I was mainly referring to fictional athiests, such as Dr. House. They are always portrayed as miserable. I should have clarified in the original comment.
Posted by: Tony Sidaway | September 5, 2008 12:02 PM
(((Billy))) The Atheist | September 5, 2008 10:11 AM, #7
Anyone care to take odds on whether the script incledes the ficticious deathbed scene in which Darwing 'becomes Christian and renounces evolution?'
This seems unlikely if Randall Keynes is involved in any way. He could withhold the filming rights to the book.
Posted by: xebecs | September 5, 2008 12:17 PM
Scott said:
Thou shalt not dis Master & Commander. It was a fine movie that made a valiant effort to distill into a few hours the essence my 20 favorite books. (The discriminating Patrick O'Brian reader will recognize the source of my user name.)
Posted by: peterte | September 5, 2008 12:19 PM
I've been praying for a movie like this...
Posted by: Qwerty | September 5, 2008 12:29 PM
Holy shrine for Darwin! The wall stain! Holy do-do Batman, give that wall a coat of paint! Yikes, no wonder some creobots think Darwinism is a religion if there are nuts who believe this wall stain is somehow a vision of Darwin!
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | September 5, 2008 12:32 PM
Qwerty: The Onion.
Posted by: Darth Wader | September 5, 2008 12:33 PM
Qwerty, we're not a regular onion reader are we?
Posted by: Jerry Clough | September 5, 2008 12:34 PM
Shame Randall Keynes's son Skandar is too young for the Darwin role. It would be neat to have a 5th generation Darwin, playing his great-great-great-grandfather. Mind you his appearance in the Narnia novels might put some off!
Posted by: Matt Heath | September 5, 2008 12:34 PM
Qwerty: The Onion is a satire site. Or am I missing some meta-joke in your post?
Posted by: Maldoror | September 5, 2008 12:40 PM
Does anyone else take issue with this?: "the English naturalist who essentially came up with the idea of evolution." Saying "essentially came up with the idea" makes it sound like he made it up. Wouldn't "discovered" be a better word choice?
Posted by: Deepsix | September 5, 2008 12:40 PM
Clearly, this is a sign from Darwin that everyone should see this movie once it's out:
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/evolutionists_flock_to_darwin
I kept expecting to see PZ's name in the article, but he apparently hasn't made the pilgrimage yet.
Posted by: co | September 5, 2008 12:41 PM
I don't know how House is supposed to be miserable. He's an ass, certainly, but a damned effective one, and seems to take great pleasure in figuring things out (and smiling knowingly at the STD-afflicted hooker playing Mary in Christmas pageants).
Posted by: Bill Dauphin | September 5, 2008 12:47 PM
House's atheism is coincidental to his misanthropic misery, not causative. That is, the show does not (IMHO) cop a "House is an atheist and look how miserable it makes him" attitude.
BTW, isn't the new season starting soon? My DVR will let me know....
Posted by: ChrisGose | September 5, 2008 12:50 PM
Paul Bettany did a fantastic job in Master and Commander of portraying a 19th century scientist.
There is even mention of Darwin in that movie.
So there is a lot of promise already.
Posted by: karen marie | September 5, 2008 12:51 PM
there's a poll up at wallstreetjournal for people to grade mccain's speechifying last night: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/09/04/how-would-you-grade-john-mccains-speech/)
Posted by: karen marie | September 5, 2008 12:52 PM
well, it's not the wallstreetjournal, it's washingtonwire -- i clicked on a link at WSJ and assumed (erroneously) that it was to a WSJ "story."
what the hey ho, huh? go grade mccain!
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/09/04/how-would-you-grade-john-mccains-speech/)
Posted by: Qwerty | September 5, 2008 12:57 PM
OMG, I've been Onioned! I didn't see this was the Onion and thought it was real until I read comment #2. Oh, well, duh, duh, duhhhhhh. I guess I had too many drinks while playing Bingo last night. (Alas, I didn't win.)
Posted by: SteveM | September 5, 2008 12:57 PM
Maldoror@62,
Yes it is a sloppy way of saying it, but, he didn't really come up with the idea of "evolution" either. It was reasonably accepted that animals and plants evolved, but no one had a reasonable mechanism and no one thought it applied to humans. Darwin's contribution was the theory of descent with variation and natural selection as a method of driving evolution. In that sense, I think he did not discover it, he really did "make it up" based on the evidence he collected on his voyage.
Posted by: Matt Heath | September 5, 2008 12:58 PM
I think part of the reason why you don't see many nice, cheerful atheists in fiction is to do with the fact the fiction writers don't put in details that aren't going have a narrative function. There are plenty of likable, happy-go-lucky characters in movies and TV that MIGHT be atheists but it doesn't come up. So you know about atheism if a) God is lost or found due to some important event or b) (as in House) anti-religiousness adds an extra layer of tension with the other characters or c) other stuff like that.
Posted by: Ken | September 5, 2008 1:03 PM
The BBC did a grand job years ago (1978)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0216517/
...with Sir Robert Stephens guesting as Bishop Wilberforce.
Andrew Burt's performance as Fitzroy was wonderful and Malcolm Stoddard even managed to look like Darwin.
Posted by: Patricia | September 5, 2008 1:18 PM
Oh dear, the good Rev. hopes gawd will smite Darwinists.
Posted by: DavidONE | September 5, 2008 1:19 PM
Judging by her Google Images (safe=off), the director won't have much trouble getting her out of her kit. The phrase "drop of a hat" springs to mind. New working title: Darwin - The Heat and the Passion
Bettany: great actor.
Amiel: shite director responsible for one of my least favourite films of all time - Entrapment.
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | September 5, 2008 1:20 PM
I'm guessing they changed the title to avoid actual or perceived copyright problems with Irving Stone's biographical novel The Origin (1980)
By the way, I've owned this book for a long time and haven't yet read it--is it any good?
Posted by: The Chemist | September 5, 2008 1:21 PM
@Richard Harris,
This commercial will explain the joke quite nicely.
Posted by: Jag | September 5, 2008 1:22 PM
ChrisGose,
Didn't he also play John Nash's imaginary friend in Beautiful Mind ?
Jennifer Connelly also starred in that film.
Good flick.
Posted by: Nicole | September 5, 2008 1:26 PM
"Amiel of The Core.
Uh-oh."
My thoughts exactly, TheChemist
Posted by: Patrick Quigley | September 5, 2008 1:33 PM
You have gone off the deep end. A nude scene with Jennifer Connelly would improve any movie.
Posted by: SteveM | September 5, 2008 2:01 PM
75:
Titles are not copyrighted. But they might just wanted to avoid confusion.
Posted by: PeteC | September 5, 2008 2:01 PM
ChrisGose@66 -- I don't remember an explicit mention of Darwin, which would be quite strange since Darwin was either unborn or an infant during the events depicted in the movie M&C:TFSOTW. The doctor character does make some Darwin-like observations, though.
I hope they include some of the more interesting descriptions from Voyage of the Beagle. Bolas-hunting might be too animal-unfriendly though.
Xebecs, I'm just starting that series now (on #2) and I must say it is capital!
Posted by: Longtime Lurker | September 5, 2008 2:05 PM
OMG, I've been Onioned! I didn't see this was the Onion and thought it was real until I read comment #2.
Don't feel bad, Qwerty, we're living in the post-satirical world!
Isn't there a law that Helena Bonham Carter has to be in any period-piece?
Posted by: Der Bruno Stroszek | September 5, 2008 2:29 PM
Bonham Carter renounced period pieces a while back, I think, because she thought she was becoming too identified with them. Kate Winslet, however, is happy to act as your go-to girl for anything involving frilly bonnets, and is also usually naked.
The Amiel criticism is fair game considering some of the rubbish he's directed recently, but I still have a place in my heart for him because he directed the original TV version of The Singing Detective. Wouldn't it be lovely if he regained that sort of form one day?
Posted by: Bryan | September 5, 2008 2:34 PM
"and has script penned by John Collee, of Master and Commander and Happy Feet"
Is that a good thing? M&C was good, but Happy Feet was pure, unadulterated crap.
Posted by: Valhar2000 | September 5, 2008 2:40 PM
I see what you are getting at, but she can actually act, you know? It would be a pity if Amiel ignored that.
Posted by: Joe Felsenstein | September 5, 2008 2:57 PM
Wow. I'm particularly looking forward to the parts where they discuss Buffon, Lamarc, Darwin's grandpa, Geoffory Saint Hilaire, Patrick Matthew, Edward Blyth, and Robert Chambers, and their writings on evolution (or on natural selection). Maybe even Wallace.
Oh wait. You mean they're going to say everyone before Darwin believed only in Special Creation? And this will help answer the anti-evolution debaters who relentlessly try to paint evolutionary biologists as cultists ("Darwinists") who can't consider anything except the words of the Great Man? Oh, I see, they're going to concentrate mostly on the issue of religious belief, giving the impression that anyone who is religious must, to be self-consistent, become a creationist.
I'm also looking forward to the extensive scenes where Darwin spends years works on taxonomy of barnacles.
Posted by: windy | September 5, 2008 3:13 PM
Montage!!!
Posted by: Sili | September 5, 2008 3:40 PM
Oh - Chaucer! I thought he looked familiar!
Mmmmh - scrumptious ...
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | September 5, 2008 3:44 PM
Huh. Thanks--I didn't know that.Posted by: Maldoror | September 5, 2008 4:28 PM
The Squire in The Seventh Seal is probably the best example I've seen of a happy, confident, and honorable atheist.
I would also say Bunuel films feature a positive portrayal of an atheist worldview, not necessarily because of the characters (who are usually satirical), but because the films show the mark of an artist content to laugh at the absurdities of humankind. The same could be said, to a lesser extent, of Monty Python movies.
Posted by: Dlux | September 5, 2008 4:30 PM
Will there be a scene where Mel Gibson gets ruthlessly flogged and nailed through the wrists in close-up slow motion? Not relevant to Darwin's life, but something I'd like to see nonetheless.
Posted by: The Chemist | September 5, 2008 5:10 PM
Steve M. said,
"Titles are not copyrighted."
Wow, really? I guess that makes sense, while I can't recall any specific examples I remember having seen two vastly different books that shared a title on several occasions.
Either that or my memory is fooling me.
Posted by: Zach Miller | September 5, 2008 5:26 PM
Sadly for all the Jennifer Connelly fans out there (including me), our girl has lost entirely too much weight and, thus, curves since having her baby. This mean that, unfortunately, she will not have to "dressed down."
*sigh*
Posted by: James F | September 5, 2008 5:30 PM
One thing's for sure, it'll do better than Expelled.
Posted by: JoJo | September 5, 2008 5:30 PM
Darwin was born February 12, 1809, the same day that Abraham Lincoln was born.
Posted by: RobertMcX | September 5, 2008 6:10 PM
So we can talk about the looks and nudity and sez of an actress but not a politician?
Posted by: Steviepinhead | September 5, 2008 8:01 PM
Chalk me up as another diehard Patrick O'Brian fan who thought the movie version of Master and Commander was a right decent flick.
Though a shipboard naturalist -- and particularly one investigating that part of that ocean -- is bound to draw comparisons with Darwin, the character played by Bettany in the movie owes (in the series of books, and in his naturalist aspect, since the character also acts as spy and surgeon -- yeah, yeah, I know this gets confusing!) far more to the real naturalist Sir Joseph Banks, who accompanied Captain Cook and became a patron of science.
The life of Mr. Banks is also well worth investigating.
With regard to titles not being copyrightable, one that's been recycled numerous times now is "Bones of Contention." Everything from creationist crap to fairly good accounts of human origins has been issued under that title...