Well, a "G" rating would make some not take the movie seriously, so PG isn't too bad, regardless the reasons.
You seem to be right there, Alan. I am told that "G" is a "kiss of death" rating. Some other good news:The screener who contacted us with our rating assignment went out of his way to mention that both he, and several of his colleagues, had found "The Principle" to be one of the most interesting movies they had screened all year.And these guys see them all ;-)
Rick,Congrats on getting your movie rated!Also, I wanted you to know I appreciate when I get online and see your name in comboxes across the net defending the movie against the naysayers. Your willingness to get down into the trenches and fight is amazing!
Thanks, Sancte Alphonsus!One of the things I think is going to be pretty amazing when the film is released, is just how large an audience is waiting for it, not on the basis of any promotional expenditure (we haven't done that yet), but exactly on the basis of having engaged the question in the trenches ;-)Thanks for your support and prayers!
Since the subject matter is so tendentious to some, is there any way that the Board of Education, the Justice Department, the Supreme Court, the ACLU, the National Academy of Sciences, the AAAS, even the POTUS himself in the next 5 weeks could yet issue an injunction, have the film banned or its distribution circumscribed, and if so on what grounds eg 'public cinematic documentary misrepresentation of established science is not in the national interest and overrides free speech'?
Gee, I don't know, Ron, it sounds like...sort of *fascism* to me, doesn't it?Do you really think your fellow citizens are so far gone they would go ahead and trash the First Amendment over a freakin' documentary film?I think you are in for a really, really big surprise ;-)
The First Amendment only prohibits Congress from making laws limiting free speech. Technically, the president or Supreme Court could try to censor the film.
Neither the Executive nor the legislative branches have the slightest constitutional power to make any law affecting freedom of speech.It is quite true that Godel correctly identified the legislative- specifically the Supreme Court- as the Achilles heel in the US Constitution.But one must deal with the world in all its beauty and horror.
Since Young Earth Creationism strikes at the tail of atheism, but Geocentrism strikes at its very head, I would be surprised if Satanic forces do not somehow muster a surprise last-minute left-field attempt to thwart the film's opening on time. As Hubble himself behooved his disciples: "The idea of a central Earth cannot be disproved, but it is UNWELCOME and would only be accepted as a LAST RESORT in order to save the phenomena. Therefore we DISREGARD this possibility. The unwelcome position of a favored location must be AVOIDED AT ALL COSTS, a favored position being INTOLERABLE"!
It is already happening, Ron. Has been for some time.The attacks now are much more subtle, and indicative of the realization that the initial assault has backfired magnificently.Please pray for us.We are definitely up against very powerful opposition.
What about a screening at the Holy See? Any chance of an interview on EWTN's programmes? The World Over? Fr Mitch Pacwa's programme? Have you asked Fr Spitzer to review? Have you asked Cardinal Burke or any other Cardinal to view it? What about an interview by Alex Jones?
No screening at the Holy See is contemplated. The Pope, after all, just asserted in a public statement that the sun is the center of the universe, and to deny this would be "scientifically incorrect" (!!!)EWTN employs a libeler by the name of Mark Shea.Does anyone on earth still take them seriously?Fr. Spitzer has bben informed by us of the existence of a paper by Wetterlich which renders his approach in "Cosmic Origins" problematic at least.He did not reply.
No matter what the Pope says, it would still be great coverage for the film, for it to be formally launched to the Holy See. No matter how EWTN strives to avoid anything controversial to the secular world, it would still be good to reach its still-considerable audience. I'm disappointed that Fr Spitzer's intellectual honesty would not compel him to investigate the material upon which the film is based. Get the film out to as great an audience as possible, in spite of the attitudes of the Media players. You can use them to the good even if they attempt to abuse the film, and the evidence it presents.
What was the "paper by Wetterlich"? thanks
It is Wetterich, not Wetterlich, and this is the highly amusing and philosophically important paper:http://arxiv.org/pdf/1303.6878.pdfIt is the ultimate confirmation that, in the end, we can have no solid proof about reality from physics.Only metaphysics and theology can save us from the Looking Glass through which physics is prepared to go, in order to escape the implications of the data in their telescopes.