Home / Culture and Society / Science and Technology / March Of The (Conservative) Penguins?

March Of The (Conservative) Penguins?

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Hmm, just last week I posted my reviews of March Of The Penguins and Bowling for Columbine and was commenting about the dearth of quality documentaries made by conservatives.

Now I picked up today’s New York Times and read in an article that some conservatives are hailing March of the Penguins as a statement against evolution and a good conservative film. An excerpt:

“March of the Penguins”, the conservative film critic and radio host Michael Medved said in an interview, is “the motion picture this summer that most passionately affirms traditional norms like monogamy, sacrifice and child rearing.”

Speaking of audiences who feel that movies ignore or belittle such themes, he added: “This is the first movie they’ve enjoyed since The Passion of the Christ. This is The Passion of the Penguins.”

Just a few problems with that, the article continues:

Not all conservatives find the movie a rebuke to Darwin’s theory. “If an Intelligent Designer designed nature,” the columnist George F. Will asked recently, “why did it decide to make breeding so tedious for those penguins?”

The American distributors of the film, Warner Independent Pictures and National Geographic Feature Films, insist that the movie is simply a tale about penguins and that any attempt to divine a deeper meaning is misguided. “We did not have discussions of what should be in from a social, cultural or political perspective at all,” said Adam Leipzig, president of National Geographic Feature Films. “We just wanted to make sure that it was accurate.”

Or as Laura Kim, a vice president of Warner Independent, put it: “You know what? They’re just birds.”

But then maybe the conservative movement remains confused and in a tizzy in the wake of Katrina and Bush’ poor handling of it.

But even the toughest critic has to admit this new title for Bush is a bit harsh.


Powered by

About Scott Butki

Scott Butki was a newspaper reporter for more than 10 years before making a career change into education... then into special education. He has been doing special education work for about five years He lives in Austin. He reads at least 50 books a year and has about 15 author interviews each year and, yes, unlike tv hosts he actually reads each one. He is an in-house media critic, a recovering Tetris addict and a proud uncle. He has written articles on practically all topics from zoos to apples and almost everything in between.
  • RJ

    I really want to see this movie, but no one I know is interested in going with me… :-/

  • I really liked the movie but if it’s a movie about evolution than I’m Charles Darwin.

  • More like the “March of the Mighty Elephants” stomping on the feeble smelly ugly donkies.

  • Nice email address.

  • What I want to know is this: Aren’t
    penguins a matriachal society? If so,
    and since the religious right is speaking so fondly of them, does that mean they are going to start being for women leaders, let alone womens rights?

  • Penguins are PATHETIC neo-socialists! They reject all those who love reason, freedom, and truth.

    That is all.

  • “does that mean they are going to start being for women leaders, let alone womens rights?”

    Four words: Condilezza Rice, next president

  • This says about all we need to know about Anthony Camilla Grande’s intelligence:

    “Four words: Condilezza (sic) Rice, next president”

    That is all.

  • Bob, thank you: This is the funniest thing I’ve read all day –

    Comment 6 posted by Bob A. Booey on September 15, 2005 02:22 AM:
    Penguins are PATHETIC neo-socialists! They reject all those who love reason, freedom, and truth.

    That is all.

  • I posted at my blog more good reasons why this is NOT truly a movie conservatives would endorse, if they thought
    about it