ALLEGED, a bizarre look at the Scopes Monkey Trial, heads straight for DVD

Posing as a romantic drama that just happens to take place during the famous 1925 Scopes "Monkey" Trial pitting Darwin's theory of evolution against Christian fundamentalist thought, ALLEGED hopes to be a stealth missile in the current war between Bible-thumping creationists and those who favor the theory of evolution. Yes, evolution is a scientific theory. And The Bible? Oh, that's the word of god. Case closed. Late in this remarkably un-illuminating movie, a character implies that science is not to be trusted because it keeps changing. This statement receives knowing smiles all 'round because, after all, god's word can never change. Change -- hello! -- is why we grow. And learn. Or would we rather be back using the outhouse, pre-penicillin?

Before we get into what makes Alleged so paltry and sleazy, let's talk about the good things -- the "look" of the film: production design (Marthe Pineau), costumes (Joseph A. Porro) and cinematography (John Samaras). The film is always interesting to watch from a "pretty" standpoint. And that's it for the good stuff. Director (and sometimes actor) Tom Hines (at right) does a serviceable job with a screenplay credited to a quartet (Charlie Jordan Brookins and Leo Severino for the story, Fred Foote and Brian Godawa for the screenplay). But because the whole thing is so paint-by-numbers (with those numbers upside down and backward, at that), the movie falls flat.

The romantic story involves Charlie and Rose (played by Nathan West and Ashley Johnson), both reporters. She's goodness personified, he's ambitious, hoping to use the trial as a stepping stone to landing a job at a larger newspaper. That newspaper just might be The Baltimore Sun, whose editor H. L. Mencken (Colm Meaney) is in town for the trial. It's in the combination of Mencken/Meaney that the movie reaches its nadir. Mencken was probably not a very nice man, but he was a good writer. Much of his stuff holds up particularly well, but you'd never know it from this film, in which the character is given nothing worth hearing to say and consequently Meaney (below) comes off as simply mean, contemptuous and contemptible.

Everyone else connected to Darwin's theory is pretty sleazy, too. Dirty tricks abound, including the forced sterilization of a poor little girl because, well, that's part of Darwin's theory (huh?). All those who favor the "word of god," of course, could not be nicer folk. And the manner in which the movie handles the racism of the day is, uh, well...  Funny, but that racism doesn't even seem to exist. But how could it? Not where good, god-fearing Christians reside.

Also in the starrier-than-you-might-imagine cast are Brian Dennehy (above) as defense attorney Clarence Darrow and Fred Dalton Thompson (below) as prosecutor William Jennings Bryan. Darrow's characterization come closest to being genuinely full-bodied, and Dennehy is fine, as usual. Thompson is good, as well, but what audiences will make of this pair of dueling titans is up for grabs.

Alleged wants us to understand that this is all that the "theory" of evolution actually is: alleged, with no real, proven truth to it. (As though The Bible is any less "alleged"!) Creationists, to whom the movie is most clearly directed, will understand the "nuances" at work, but everyone else -- which is by far the more numerous audience -- is likely to be confused, annoyed and finally bored.

Is this what that trial and its surrounding happenings were actually like? Hardly. Seeing an alternate reality or a different view of the usual picture can be bracing -- particularly in a satire or black comedy (Alleged does not come close to managing either of these styles, nor was this the movie's intention). But stack the deck to the point that it is here, and one of the other card players -- angry that the "fix" is in -- is likely to pull out a six-shooter and pump you full of lead. Consider this review that bit of gunplay.

Alleged, from Image Entertainment, "streets" on DVD and Blu-ray this Tuesday, November 8, for sale or rental. (Well, you can SAVE it to your Netflix queue, whatever that means in these days of Netflix's non-ordering of so many new movies....)

The Amiel/Bettany/Connelly CREATION: Darwin delivers, at least halfway.

There is so much that is so good in CREATION -- the new film about Charles Darwin, his friends, family and work -- directed by Jon Amiel (shown just below), with a screenplay by John Collee (from the Darwin biography by the man's great, great grandson Randal Keynes), that it pains me to find, finally, its parts far better than its whole. Those parts -- certain indelible scenes -- often work so well, however, that I cannot but recommend that you see this film. Much of it is simply wonderful, eye-opening movie-making.

To my mind one of history's most important scientists for pulling the rug from under much religious "theory," Darwin himself was not particularly happy about this, as the movie makes clear. Married to a devout woman whom he dearly loved, he would no doubt have had things otherwise. Some of the film's early scenes are filled with smart discussion of science versus religion, between characters such as Joseph Hooker (a smooth Benedict Cumberbatch, below left), Thomas Huxley (an acerbic Toby Jones), the stern and somewhat pompous family friend Reverend Innes (an ever-so-slow-burning Jeremy Northham, below, center right) and Darwin himself (played very well by Paul Bettany (below, with legs stretched out, who pretty much runs his acting gamut here). That devout wife is essayed by Jennifer Connelly (below, right), but she is saddled with the nudge/drudge role, which curtails both her charm and beauty.  I wish the filmmakers had given her more to do/say/think, though she does have a nice penultimate scene.

Amiel's film concentrates most on the family relationships, particularly that of the Darwins and their daughter Annie, played quite well by newcomer Martha West (shown below left, with Connelly), who sports a wiser-than-her-years attitude that, for a change, does not curdle the viewer's goodwill. Because of his wife's devotion to religion, Darwin turns to Annie as his confidante and (in some ways) his adviser, and when illness strikes the child, his life and hers unravel.

One of the strengths of Creation comes in showing us that, as far ahead of the curve was Darwin, just as far behind it were many of the medical practices of the day -- some of which are shown in all their brutality and ugliness. Another wonderful section of the film deals with the orangutan Jenny (below), the scientific subject whom Darwin grows close to -- and (by reading and hearing about her) so does Annie. Some of the scenes involving this animal are breath-
takingly moving, especially given how true to the time period they look and feel.

Midway along, however, and from there through the finale, the movie begins to repeat itself, seeming to dawdle over Annie's illness (do we need to hear her ask for the orangutan story one more time?). The director deserves credit for his (and his cinematographer Jess Hall's) splendid work in placing the camera in such a way -- in the family scenes as well as the scenes with Jenny -- that it seems to caress its subjects with an exceptional warmth and love.  (This is a "family" movie in a much better sense of the word than are most Disney films.)  Your reviewer, however, wished for more of the intelligence and religion-versus-science fire that lit up those early scenes. 

Unlike The Young Victoria, another "historical" film currently in theaters with little more on its mind than history as pageant/
entertainment, and royals coming of age and falling in love (and it succeeds quite well in these objectives, by the way), Creation is about much more important stuff and is as timely now as when the events it pictures transpired.  That it works as well as it does is commendable; that it doesn't go the rest of the way is a shame. I wonder if the filmmakers were so worried that they decided to concentrate more on Darwin's family and Annie's sickness than on his work?  Fundamentalist thinkers will not embrace him either way, so it's too bad an opportunity has been missed.

Still, the filmmaker's final shot is richly moving and meaningful, combining, as the movie has managed frequently over its hundred-odd minutes, fantasy and reality.  It's subtle, too: Rather than allowing us to see the scene from the front, we view it from the rear, as Darwin moves ahead.  Even then, it is only at the final moment that we see whose hand he is holding.  Ah, but we recognize the clothing.

Creation, distributed by Newmarket Films (this is perhaps its penance for foisting upon us the torture-porn feature The Passion of the Christ and making lots of money from it), opens this Friday, January 22, in New York City at the Clearview First & 62nd Cinema and at the Landmark Sunshine Cinema.  Other venues nationwide should follow simultaneously -- or soon after.