Alleged

The production is beautiful. So squeaky-clean. So much emphasis on a love story taking precedence over a moment of history. For all its anti-evolution talk, it never makes any valid points against it, but does bring up important issues such as eugenics. Perhaps the pseudo-Disney approach, lush music, soft-focus cameras, oh-so-traditionally old-fashioned production values are a disguise for religious propaganda. But the worst revisionism is not any attempt to derail the force of evolution and progress in education. The worst revisionism is the utterly false picture of an oh-so-happy South in which the races mixed easily and freely in social and work situations. The Black nurse shows no fear of the White clients or employers, and even speaks up to some. The female lead has mixed-race half-sister. No racial tension to speak of. That is a scurrilous portrait to paint of the oh-so-hate-filled South. If these undercurrents are associated with these very fine production values, that is the worst of all.

This accurate portrayal of the Scopes Monkey trial stars Brian Dennehy (Rambo) as Clarence Darrow, John Scopes' attorney whom the ACLU eventually fired, Fred Thompson (Law & Order) as William Jennings Bryan, the widely beloved prosecutor, Colm Meaney (Star Trek) as the Baltimore Sun's H.L. Mencken, and love interests Ashley Johnson (The Help, The Avengers, and The Last of Us) and Nathan West, and the adorable Khori Faison as the step sister targeted for sterilization. What a great movie, Alleged, accurate to the history and trial transcript of the Scopes Monkey Trial, unlike Hollywood's previous Inherit the Wind attempt. Also, it presents what Hollywood and evolutionists intentionally leave out of their popular renditions, that the textbook that was being defended by the ACLU, Hunter's Civic Biology, portrayed Blacks and Jews and other racial minorities (like Khori's character) as closer to apes as compared to those of European descent. Also, the historicity of the sets, the train scenes, were all spot on!

"Alleged" is extremely one-sided against evolution. I kept waiting for the other side of the argument. With William Jennings Bryan and Clarence Darrow, there's a perfect opportunity to show both sides. But, it just wasn't there. I was disappointed to see Brian Dennehy, whom I usually love, in such a narrowly written role of a major historical figure. Did he really need the work? You gradually realized that the film wasn't a portrayal of events and characters, but just one-sided propaganda. It certainly was not "Inherit the Wind". Even if you disagree with the depiction in "Inherit the Wind", at least come up with a credible story. The makers of "Alleged" didn't bother.

If you research "Inherit the Wind," you'll find it was never intended to be an accurate depiction of the Scopes' trial, but a dark fantasy warning against extreme views. In the process, it has come to represent an extreme view of its own, grossly unlike the real people and trial. This film should be viewed by everyone who has seen Inherit the Wind, especially those who thought it was anything like an accurate, historical representation. Does this film present only one side? yes, it does, but it doesn't distort the truth the way the more famous drama does. Does it show Mencken as a cynical cuss out to make big news? Well, he was, and so were many other reporters of the time. Does it show people supporting forced sterilization and other forms of eugenics? Well, they did, right on up to Supreme Court justices, and they did so on the grounds of evolutionary beliefs. The book that Scopes taught from promoted eugenics as a proper application of knowledge of evolution. Does it downplay the "evidences for evolution" that were entered into the record? Well, a number of those turned out to be misinterpretations and one (Piltdown Man) turned out to be an outright fraud! It does also show that the majority of scientists were in favor of teaching evolution, and that a number of theologians and leading clergymen stood with them. Those who have poorly rated this movie clearly have done so because they hate the idea that their twisted one-sided production has been matched by the other side, perhaps equally one-sided but far closer to the truth, with a lighter tone and a happier ending.