Marketing towards America's Christian anti-intellectualism anti-science crusade

[Omen]

http://www.examiner.com/article/new-animated-pirate-movie-renamed-to-downplay-darwin-science-angle

The jist of the article is that the title of a movie was changed to make it more friendly to a target audience.  Now, marketing wise that isn't out of the ordinary, since I'm sure it occurs for virtually everything.  However, the issue with this is that the title is changed to appeal to a demographic that feels so threatened by science as to predictably respond with hostility to even the mention of certain words.  In this case omitting science and mentions of darwin in the trailer.  It is a kind of bizarre social commentary on the poor state of American education and Christian intellectualism ( or more accurately anti-intellectualism )

*Wasn't sure where to post this, science seemed like the best category considering what it addresses.

Yesterday (4/27/12) a new animated film, The Pirates! Band of Misfits opened in theaters all across the US. It's a rousing claymation cartoon by Aardman Animation in partnership with Sony Pictures and it features the voices of Hugh Grant, Salma Hayek, Jeremy Piven, Imelda Staunton and David Tennant. Fans of the Wallace & Gromit cartoons will readily recognize Aardman's claymation style and uniquely British humor as soon as they see the film's trailer but there's one thing they won't learn from it:

That it had a different name when it debuted in the UK last month.

British audiences saw the film under the name The Pirates! In An Adventure With Scientists and, if you look at the British trailer in the video at left, you'll see something entirely different from what's in the one American audiences will see. Why? Well here's an explanation from James Clayton's column in Den of Geek! (a UK-based website for games, TV, movie and comic reviews):

"Considering market factors, perhaps the title is too 'English eccentric' for mainstream North American tastes and Band of Misfits more sellable to mainstream tastes in places that don't revere Aardman as a beloved national institution. By downplaying the presence of a plasticine Charles Darwin (voiced by David Tennant) in the film's marketing, the studio probably figures it has more of a chance of getting box office numbers in the Bible belt. The mere mention of ‘Science’ or ‘Charles Darwin’ is enough to make some extreme Creationists flip out, call forth hellfire and brimstone and lynch a chimpanzee by the highway."

Oh yeah. That might have something to do with it. A synopsis of the plot (from Wikipedia) lends credence to Clayton's hypothesis:

    A crew of amateur pirates, under the direction of the ambitious, but equally inexpert Pirate Captain, try to plunder ships so that the Pirate Captain can accomplish his dream of winning the Pirate of the Year Award and outsmart his longtime rivals, Black Bellamy and Cutlass Liz. After various failed raids on useless ships - including a plague boat, a nudist boat, and a ghost ship - they hijack the Beagle and encounter Charles Darwin, who informs them that Polly, the supposed parrot of the pirate crew, is actually the last living dodo. The pirates go with Darwin and his trained chimpanzee, Mr. Bobo, to London to show Polly to the Royal Society. Their plan is a success, but the pirates (who are disguised as scientists) are unmasked by Queen Victoria, who hates pirates...

There's more to the story than that but I don't want to spoil it for you (Wikipedia feels no such compunction and you can read the whole synopsis there). Besides, I want you to go see the picture. It's not just that most reviews are good or that I am a big fan of Wallace & Gromit, Chicken Run and other Aardman claymations; it's that mainstream film-makers who aren't afraid of Charles Darwin's name or fun, science-positive plots deserve a little support... even if the film-makers are afraid to let Americans know about it.

If you enjoy my articles, you can click on "subscribe" at the top of the page and you'll receive notice when new ones are published.

[Quesi]

Wow.  I'm speechless.

I see a lot of kids' movies.  I've got a 5 year old. 

I've seen the coming attractions for this movie for quite a while.  I had NO IDEA that the story ended up Beagle and had adventures with Darwin. 

The marketing has indeed been very targeted. 

[ParkingPlaces]

This is wrong in every way. When the lowest common denominator has no idea what a denominator is, it should be disregarded.

[Omen]

I've seen the coming attractions for this movie for quite a while.  I had NO IDEA that the story ended up Beagle and had adventures with Darwin. 

The marketing has indeed been very targeted.

The movie sounds more appealing to me now that I know this

[magicmiles]

One day I really must make the effort to get across to the other side of the Pacific. Americaa truly does seem to have some interesting cultural divisions.

So differnt to here, where it doesn't matter what part of the country you're in, you can't go into a clothing store to buy clothes for your pre-teen daughter without wading through racks and racks of shirts with 'tramp' or something equally onnoxious written on it.

[dloubet]

The movie is fun. And Darwin is charmingly disreputable.

[jaimehlers]

I dunno.  Seems to me that getting the Darwin angle in "under the radar" might actually be a good thing.  Or at least not a bad thing.

[Frank]

There was a talk about this on the radio over here. I can't say anymore or I'll have screwtape on my case.

[nogodsforme]

One day I really must make the effort to get across to the other side of the Pacific. Americaa truly does seem to have some interesting cultural divisions.

So differnt to here, where it doesn't matter what part of the country you're in, you can't go into a clothing store to buy clothes for your pre-teen daughter without wading through racks and racks of shirts with 'tramp' or something equally onnoxious written on it.

We have all those slutty fashions for teens as well. Bought by the same kids whose parents would protest a cartoon that dared mention Darwin or evolution. Just like the regions of the US that are the most conservatively religious have the highest internet porn use, prison populations, teen pregnancies and divorce rates. It seems that Victorian conservative attitudes still go quite well with Victorian hypocrisy.

[Nam]

I enjoyed the movie; I don't care the angle.

-Nam