document_title: Beauty and the Beast (2017 film)

question_text: who plays the dad in the new beauty and the beast

text: Beauty and the Beast (2017 film)

text: Plot[edit]

text: In Rococo-era France, an enchantress disguised as an old beggar woman arrives at a castle during a ball and offers the host, a coldhearted prince, a rose for shelter. When he refuses, she transforms him into a beast and his servants into household objects, and erases the castle, the prince and his servants from the memories of their loved ones. She casts a spell on the rose and warns the prince that the curse will never lift unless he learns to love another, and earn their love in return, before the last petal falls.

text: Some years later, in the small town of Villeneuve, Belle dreams of adventure and brushes off advances from Gaston, an arrogant former soldier. Lost in the forest, Belle's father Maurice seeks refuge in the Beast's castle, but the Beast imprisons him for stealing a rose from his garden as a birthday gift to Belle. Belle ventures out in search for him, and finds him locked in the castle dungeon. The Beast agrees to let her take Maurice's place.

text: Belle befriends the castle's servants, who invite her to a spectacular dinner. When she wanders into the forbidden west wing and finds the rose, the Beast, enraged, scares her into the woods. She is ambushed by a pack of wolves, but the Beast rescues her, and is injured in the process. As Belle nurses his wounds, a friendship develops between them. The Beast shows Belle a gift from the enchantress, a book that transports readers wherever they want. Belle uses it to visit her childhood home in Paris, where she discovers a plague doctor mask and realizes that she and her father were forced to leave her mother's deathbed when her mother succumbed to the plague.

text: In Villeneuve, Gaston sees rescuing Belle as an opportunity to win her hand in marriage, and agrees to help Maurice. When Maurice learns of his ulterior motive and rejects him, Gaston abandons him to the wolves. Maurice is rescued by the hermit Agathe, but when he tells the townsfolk of Gaston's crime but is unable to provide solid evidence, Gaston convinces them to send Maurice to an insane asylum.

text: After sharing a romantic dance with the Beast, Belle discovers her father's predicament using a magic mirror. The Beast releases her to save Maurice, giving her the mirror to remember him with. At Villeneuve, Belle proves Maurice's sanity by revealing the Beast in the mirror to the townsfolk. Realizing that Belle loves the Beast, Gaston claims she has been charmed by dark magic, and has her thrown into the asylum carriage with her father. He rallies the villagers to follow him to the castle to slay the Beast before he curses the whole village. Maurice and Belle escape, and Belle rushes back to the castle.

text: During the battle, Gaston abandons his companion LeFou, who then sides with the servants to fend off the villagers. Gaston attacks the Beast in his tower, who is too depressed to fight back, but regains his spirit upon seeing Belle return. He overpowers Gaston, but spares his life before reuniting with Belle. However, Gaston fatally shoots the Beast from a bridge, but it collapses when the castle crumbles, and he falls to his death. The Beast dies as the last petal falls, and the servants become inanimate. When Belle tearfully professes her love to him, Agathe reveals herself as the enchantress and undoes the curse, repairing the crumbling castle, and restoring the Beast's and servants' human forms and the villagers' memories. The Prince and Belle host a ball for the kingdom, where they dance happily.

text: Cast[edit]

text:
Emma Watson as Belle, a young benevolent bibliophile woman who develops feelings for the Beast and begins to see the humanity within him.

Daisy Duczmal portrays an infant Belle.

Dan Stevens as Beast, a cold-hearted prince who is transformed into a beast and forced to earn back his humanity by learning to truly love and be loved in return.[11][12]

Adam Mitchell[1] portrays the younger version of the prince.

Luke Evans as Gaston, a narcissistic and arrogant hunter and veteran of the French Royal Army who is willing to go as far as it takes to have Belle as his trophy wife.
Kevin Kline as Maurice, Belle's protective widowed father.[13]

Jolyon Coy portrays the young Maurice.

Josh Gad as LeFou, Gaston's flamboyant and long-suffering sidekick who bolsters his friend's ego but gets very little in return.[14]
Ewan McGregor as Lumière, the Beast's charismatic bouteiller who has been transformed into a candelabra.[15]
Stanley Tucci as Maestro Cadenza, the neurotic court composer and Madame de Garderobe's husband who has been transformed into a harpsichord.[16]
Audra McDonald as Madame de Garderobe, a world-renowned opera singer and Cadenza's wife who has been transformed into a wardrobe.[17]
Gugu Mbatha-Raw as Plumette, one of the castle maids and Lumière's lover who has been transformed into a feather duster.[18]
Ian McKellen as Cogsworth, the Beast's gruff but loyal majordomo and the head of the household staff who has been transformed into a mantel clock.[19]
Emma Thompson as Mrs. Potts, the castle's motherly head housekeeper who has been transformed into a teapot.[13]
Hattie Morahan as Agathe, an impoverished hermit and resident of Villeneuve who, in reality, is the enchantress responsible for cursing the Prince.[20] Morahan also narrates the prologue.

Rita Davies portrays the enchantress in her beggar woman form. The film was released posthumously after Davies' death.

Nathan Mack as Chip, Mrs. Potts' plucky son who has been transformed into a teacup.[21]
Adrian Schiller as Monsieur D'Arque, the sly warden of the local asylum who is bribed by Gaston to have Maurice institutionalized.[20]
Gerard Horan as Monsieur Jean Potts, an absent-minded potter and resident of Villeneuve who is later revealed to be Mrs. Potts' husband and Chip's father.
Haydn Gwynne as Clothilde, a fishmonger and resident of Villeneuve who is later revealed to be Cogsworth's wife.
Michael Jibson as the Tavern Keeper, the owner and keeper of Villeneuve's local tavern where Gaston and the village residents drink.
Ray Fearon as Père Robert, Villeneuve's local chaplain who encourages Belle to borrow the books in the chapel's meager library.
Sophie Reid, Rafaëlle Cohen, and Carla Nella as the Village Lasses, a trio of women who fawn over Gaston and have a jealousy for Belle.
Jimmy Johnston, Dean Street, and Alexis Loizon as Tom, Dick, and Stanley, a trio of men who serve as Gaston's henchmen.
Zoe Rainey as Belle's mother, Maurice's late wife who contracted the plague and died when Belle was an infant.
Clive Rowe as Cuisinier, the castle's head chef who has been transformed into a stove.
Gizmo as Frou-Frou, Maestro Cadenza's and Madame de Garderobe's pet Yorkshire Terrier who has been transformed into a footstool.
Thomas Padden as Chapeau, the prince's valet who has been transformed into a coat rack.
Tom Turner[2] as The King, the prince's father who, following his wife's death, raised his son to be just as selfish and arrogant as he was.
Harriet Jones as The Queen, the prince's mother who died of an illness when he was a child.
Dale Branston as Villeneuve's residential baker.
Chris Andrew Mellon as Nasty Headmaster, the unnamed headmaster of an all boys school in Villeneuve that disapproves of Belle teaching a young girl how to read.
Vivian Parry as the Village Lass' mother, an unnamed seamstress.

text: Cast notes[edit]

text: ^ In the initial theatrical release, Mitchell was miscredited as Rudi Gooman in the cast, but listed under his real name in the soundtrack credits.[22]

text: ^ In the initial theatrical release, Turner is miscredited as Henry Garrett in the cast.[22]

text: Stephen Merchant also appeared in the film as Monsieur Toilette, a servant who was turned into a toilet. This character was cut from the film, but is featured in the deleted scenes.[23]

text: Production[edit]

text: Development[edit]

text: Previously, Disney had begun work on a film adaptation of the 1994 Broadway musical.[24][25] However, in a 2011 interview, composer Alan Menken stated the planned film version of the Beauty and the Beast stage musical "was canned".[26]

text: By April 2014, Walt Disney Pictures had already begun developing a new live-action version and remake of Beauty and the Beast after making other live-action fantasy films such as Alice in Wonderland, Maleficent, Cinderella and The Jungle Book.[27] In June 2014, Bill Condon was signed to direct the film from a script by Evan Spiliotopoulos.[28] Later in September of that same year, Stephen Chbosky (who had previously directed Watson in The Perks of Being a Wallflower) was hired to re-write the script.[29]

text: Before Condon was hired to direct the film, Disney approached him with a proposal to remake the film in a more radical way as Universal Studios had remade Snow White and the Huntsman (2012). Condon later explained that "after Frozen opened, the studio saw that there was this big international audience for an old-school-musical approach. But initially, they said, 'We're interested in a musical to a degree, but only half full of songs.' My interest was taking that film and doing it in this new medium—live-action—as a full-on musical movie. So I backed out for a minute, and they came back and said, 'No, no, no, we get it, let's pursue it that way.'"[30] Walt Disney Pictures president of production Sean Bailey credited Walt Disney Studios chairman Alan F. Horn with the decision to make the film as a musical: "We worked on this for five or six years, and for 18 months to two years, Beauty was a serious dramatic project, and the scripts were written to reflect that. It wasn't a musical at that time. But we just couldn't get it to click and it was Alan Horn who championed the idea of owning the Disney of it all. We realized there was a competitive advantage in the songs. What is wrong with making adults feel like kids again?"[31]

text: Casting[edit]

text: In January 2015, Emma Watson announced that she would be starring as Belle, the female lead.[32] She was the first choice of Walt Disney Studios chairman Alan F. Horn, as he had previously overseen Warner Bros. which released the eight Harry Potter films that co-starred Watson as Hermione Granger.[31] Two months later, Luke Evans and Dan Stevens were revealed to be in talks to play Gaston and the Beast respectively,[33][34] and Watson confirmed their casting the following day through tweets.[11][35] The rest of the principal cast, including Josh Gad, Emma Thompson, Kevin Kline, Audra McDonald, Ian McKellen, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Ewan McGregor and Stanley Tucci were announced between March and April to play LeFou, Mrs. Potts, Maurice, Madame de Garderobe, Cogsworth, Plumette, Lumière and Cadenza, respectively.[14][13][17][19][18][15][16][36]

text: Susan Egan, who originated the role of Belle on Broadway, commented on the casting of Watson as "perfect".[37] Paige O'Hara voiced Belle in the original animated film and its sequels, offered to help Watson with her singing lessons.[38]

text: According to The Hollywood Reporter, Emma Watson was reportedly paid $3 million upfront, together with an agreement that her final take-home pay could rise as high as $15 million if the film generated gross box office income similar to Maleficent's $759 million worldwide gross.[39]

text: Filming[edit]

text: Principal photography on the film began at Shepperton Studios in Surrey, United Kingdom, on May 18, 2015.[13][40][41] Filming with the principal actors concluded on August 21.[42][43] Six days later, co-producer Jack Morrissey confirmed that the film had officially wrapped production.[44]

text: The Beast was portrayed with a “more traditional motion capture puppeteering for the body and the physical orientation", where actor Dan Stevens was "in a forty-pound gray suit on stilts for much of the film". The facial capture for the Beast was done separately in order to "communicate the subtleties of the human face" and "[capture the] thought that occurs to him" which gets "through [to] the eyes, which are the last human element in the Beast.” The castle servants who are transformed into household objects were created with CGI animation.[6]

text: Before the release of the film, Bill Condon refilmed one certain sequence in the "Days of the Sun" number, due to confusion among test audiences caused by actress Harriet Jones, who looked similar to Hattie Morahan, who portrayed Agathe. In the original version of the scene, it was Jones's character, the Prince's mother, who sings the first verse of the song, with Rudi Goodman playing the young Prince and Henry Garrett playing his father; but in the reshot version of the scene, the singing part is given to the Prince (now played by Adam Mitchell). The King was also recast to Tom Turner, although Harriet Jones was still the Queen, albeit with dark hair. Both Goodman and Garrett's names were mistakenly featured in the original theatrical release's credits, but was later corrected in home releases.[22]

text: Music[edit]

text: When released in 1991, Beauty and the Beast, marked a turning point for Walt Disney Pictures by appealing to millions of fans with its Oscar-winning musical score by lyricist Howard Ashman and composer Alan Menken. In Bill Condon's opinion, that original score was the key reason he agreed to direct a live-action version of the movie. "That score had more to reveal", he says, "You look at the songs and there's not a clunker in the group. In fact, Frank Rich described it as the best Broadway musical of 1991. The animated version was already darker and more modern than the previous Disney fairytales. Take that vision, put it into a new medium, make it a radical reinvention, something not just for the stage because it's not just being literal, now other elements come into play. It's not just having real actors do it".[45]

text: Condon initially prepared on only drawing inspiration from the original film, but he also planned to include most of the songs composed by Alan Menken, Howard Ashman and Tim Rice from the Broadway musical, with the intention of making the film as a "straight-forward, live-action, large-budget movie musical".[46] Menken returned to score the film's music, which features songs from the original film by him and Howard Ashman, plus new material written by Menken and Tim Rice.[47] Menken said the film will not include songs that were written for the Broadway musical and instead, created four new songs.[48] However, an instrumental version of the song "Home", which was written for the musical, is used during the scene where Belle first enters her room in the castle.[49]

text: On January 19, 2017, it was confirmed by both Disney and Céline Dion—singer of the original 1991 "Beauty and the Beast" duet song, with singer Peabo Bryson—that Dion would be performing one of the new original songs "How Does a Moment Last Forever" to play over the end titles.[50] She originally had doubts about whether or not to record the song due to the recent death of her husband and manager René Angélil, who had previously helped her secure the 1991 pop duet. While ultimately accepting the opportunity, she said: "[The] first Beauty and the Beast decision was made with my husband. Now I'm making decisions on my own. It's a little bit harder. I couldn't say yes right away, because I felt like I was kind of cheating in a way". She eventually felt compelled to record the song because of the impact Beauty and the Beast has had on her career. According to Dion, "I was at the beginning of my career, it put me on the map, it put me where I am today". Also, Josh Groban was announced to be performing the new original song "Evermore" on January 26, 2017.[51][52][53][54]

text: The 2017 film features a remake of the 1991 original song recorded as a duet by Ariana Grande and John Legend.[55][56] Grande and Legend's updated version of the title song is faithful to the original, Grammy-winning duet, performed by Céline Dion and Peabo Bryson for the 1991 Disney film.[57] Disney debuted the music video for Ariana Grande and John Legend's interpretation of the title song on Freeform television network on March 5, 2017, and it has since been viewed over 100 million views on the Vevo video-hosting service.[58]

text: Emma Thompson also performed a rendition of the title song, which was performed by Angela Lansbury in the original 1991 animated film.[58]

text: Release[edit]

text: On March 16, 2015, Disney announced the film would be released in 3D on March 17, 2017.[13] The first official presentation of the film took place at Disney's three-day D23 Expo in August 2015.[59]

text: The world premiere of Beauty and the Beast took place at Spencer House in London, United Kingdom on February 23, 2017;[60] and the film later premiered at the El Capitan Theatre in Hollywood, California, on March 2, 2017. The stream was broadcast onto YouTube.

text: A sing along version of the film released in over 1,200 US theaters nationwide on April 7, 2017.[61] The United Kingdom received the same version on April 21, 2017.[citation needed]

text: The film was re-released in New York and Los Angeles for a one-week engagement starting December 1, 2017. The move is an awards push as awards season heats up.[62]

text: Marketing[edit]

text: Disney spent around $140 million to market the film worldwide.[63] Following an announcement on May 22, 2016,[64] Disney premiered the first official teaser trailer on Good Morning America the next day.[65] In its first 24 hours, the teaser trailer reached 91.8 million views, which topped the number of views seen in that amount of time in history, including for the teasers for other films distributed by Disney such as Avengers: Age of Ultron, Star Wars: The Force Awakens and Captain America: Civil War.[66] This record has since been broken by Thor: Ragnarok and It.[67] The first official teaser poster was released on July 7, 2016.[68] On November 2, 2016, Entertainment Weekly debuted the first official image on the cover of their magazine for the week along with nine new photos as well.[69][70] One week later, Emma Watson and Disney debuted a new poster for the film.[71] On November 14, 2016, the first theatrical trailer was released again on Good Morning America.[72] The trailer reached 127.6 million views in its first 24 hours, setting a new record as the trailer with the most views in one day, beating out Fifty Shades Darker.[73] This record has since been broken again by The Fate of the Furious.[74] A TV spot with Watson singing was shown during the 74th Golden Globe Awards.[75] Disney released the final trailer on January 30, 2017.[76]

text: Home media[edit]

text: Beauty and the Beast was released on Blu-ray, DVD and Digital HD on June 6, 2017.[77] The film debuted at No. 1 on the NPD VideoScan overall disc sales chart, with all other titles in the top 20, collectively, selling only 40% as many units as Beauty and the Beast.[78] The movie regained the top spot on the national home video sales charts during its third week of release.[79] The movie became available on Netflix on September 19, 2017.

text: Reception[edit]

text: Box office[edit]

text: This section may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: Needs to be heavily trimmed down. Please help improve this section if you can. (November 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: Beauty and the Beast grossed $504 million in the United States and Canada and $759.5 million in other territories for a worldwide gross of $1.263 billion.[a] With a production budget of $160 million, it is the second-most expensive musical ever made; only Hello, Dolly! (1969) with a budget of $25 million ($165 million in 2016 dollars) cost more.[4] In just ten days, it became the highest-grossing live-action musical of all time, beating the nine-year-old record held by Mamma Mia!. It is currently the second-biggest musical ever overall, behind Disney's Frozen (2013).[81] Worldwide, the film proved to be a global phenomenon, earning a total of $357 million over its four-day opening weekend from 56 markets. Critics said the film was playing like superhero movies amongst women. It was the second biggest March global opening, behind only Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, the thirteenth-biggest worldwide opening ever and the seventh-biggest for Disney.[82] This includes $21 million from IMAX plays on 1,026 screens, a new record for an IMAX PG title.[83] It surpassed the entire lifetime total of the original film in just six days.[84][85]

text: Beauty and the Beast is the 300th digitally remastered release in IMAX company's history, which began with the re-release of Apollo 13 in 2002. Its robust global debut helped push the company past $6 billion for the first time,[86] and led to analysts believing that the film had a shot of passing $1 billion worldwide from theatrical earnings.[87][88][89][90] On April 12, it passed the $1 billion threshold, becoming the first film of 2017, the fourteenth Disney film, and the twenty-ninth film overall to pass the mark. It became the first film since Rogue One (also a Disney property) in December 2016 to make over a billion dollars, and did so on its twenty-ninth day of release.[91][92][93] It is currently the highest-grossing film of 2017,[94] the highest-grossing March release,[95] the highest-grossing remake of all-time,[96] and the fifth-biggest Disney film.[97] Even after inflation adjusted, it is still ahead of the $425 million gross ($760 million in 2017 dollars) of the original film.[96]

text: North America[edit]

text: In the United States and Canada, Beauty and the Beast topped Fandango's pre-sales and became the fastest-selling family film in the company's history, topping the studio's own animated film Finding Dory released the previous year. Early tracking had the film grossing around $100 million in its opening weekend, with some publications predicting it could reach $130 million.[98][99][100] By the time the film's release was 10 days away, analysts raised projections to as high as $150 million.[101][102] It earned $16.3 million from Thursday previews night, marking the biggest of 2017 (breaking Logan's record), the biggest ever for a Disney live-action film (breaking Maleficent's record), the second biggest ever for both a G or PG-rated film (behind the sixth Harry Potter film Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince which also starred Watson), and the third biggest ever in the month of March (behind Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and The Hunger Games).[103] An estimated 41% of the gross came from IMAX, 3D and premium large format screenings which began at 6 pm, while the rest—59%—came from regular 2D shows which began at 7 p.m.[104] The numbers were considered more impressive given that the film played during a school week.[105]

text: On its opening day, the film made $63.8 million from 4,210 theaters across 9,200 screens, marking the third biggest in the month of March, trailing behind Batman v Superman ($81.5 million) and The Hunger Games ($67 million).[106][107] It was also the biggest opening day ever for a film that wasn't PG-13, displacing the $58 million opening Wednesday of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. Its opening day alone (which includes Thursday's previews) almost matched the entire opening weekend of previous Disney live-action films, Maleficent ($69.4 million) and Cinderella ($67.9 million).[108] Unlike all previous four Disney live-action films witnessing a hike on their second day, Saturday, Beauty and the Beast actually fell 2%, but nevertheless, the dip was paltry, and the grosses are so much bigger compared to the other titles.[86] Earning a total of $174.8 million on its opening weekend, it defied all expectations and went on to set numerous notable records.[109] This includes the biggest opening of the year as well as the biggest for the month of March and pre-summer/spring opening, beating Batman v Superman,[110][111] the biggest start ever for a PG title (also for a family film), surpassing Finding Dory,[112] the biggest debut of all time for a female-fueled film, ahead of The Hunger Games: Catching Fire,[113] the biggest for a Disney live-action adaptation, ahead of Alice in Wonderland[113] and the biggest musical debut ever, supplanting Pitch Perfect 2. Furthermore, it is also Watson's highest-opening, beating Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2 same with Emma Thompson, director Bill Condon's biggest debut ever ahead of The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 2 and the biggest outside of summer, save for Star Wars: The Force Awakens, not accounting for inflation.[109]

text: It became the forty-third film to debut with over $100 million and the fifteenth film to open above $150 million. Its three-day opening alone surpassed the entire original North American run of the first film ($146 million; before the 3D re-release), instantly becoming the second-biggest film of the year, behind Logan ($184 million), and also the second-highest-grossing musical, behind Grease's $188 million cumulative gross in 1978.[114] Seventy percent of the total ticket sales came from 2D showings signifying that people who don't go to theaters frequently came out in bulk to watch the film. About 26% of the remaining tickets were for 3D. IMAX accounted for 7% ($12.5 million) of the total weekend's gross, setting a new record for a PG title, ahead of Alice in Wonderland ($12.1 million) while PLF repped 11% of the box office.[86] Seventy percent of the film's opening day demographic was female, dropping to 60% through the weekend.[113] According polling service PostTrak, about 84 percent of American parents who saw the film on its opening day said they would "definitely" recommend it for families.[115][116] The film's opening was credited to positive word of mouth from audiences, good reviews from critics, effective marketing which sold the title not just as a family film but also as a romantic drama, the cast's star power (especially Emma Watson), lack of competition, being the first family film since The Lego Batman Movie a month earlier, nostalgia, and the success and ubiquity of the first film and Disney's brand.[115][117]

text: On Monday, its fourth day of release, the film fell precipitously by 72% earning $13.5 million. The steep fall was due to a limited marketplace where only 11% K-12 and 15% colleges were off per ComScore. Nevertheless, it is the second-biggest March Monday, behind Batman v Superman ($15 million).[118] This was followed by the biggest March and pre-summer Tuesday with $17.8 million, a 32% increase from its previous day. The same day, the film passed $200 million in ticket sales.[119] It earned $228.6 million in the first week of release, the sixth-biggest seven-day gross of all time.[120] In its second weekend, the film continued to maintain the top positioning and fell gradually by 48% earning another $90.4 million to register the fourth-biggest second weekend of all time, and the third-biggest for Disney.[121] In terms of percentage drop, its 48% decline is the third-smallest drop for any film opening above $125 million (behind Finding Dory and The Force Awakens).[81] The hold was notable considering how the film was able to fend off three new wide releases: Power Rangers, Life, and CHiPs.[122] As a result, it passed the $300 million threshold becoming the first film of 2017 the pass said mark.[123] The film grossed $45.4 million in its third weekend, finally being overtaken for the top spot by newcomer The Boss Baby ($50.2 million).[124] On April 4, 2017, its nineteenth day of release, it passed the $400 million threshold becoming the first film of 2017 to do so.[125] By its fourth weekend, the film began was playing in 3,969 cinemas, a fall of 241 theaters from its previous weekend. Of those, approximately 1,200 cinemas were sing-along versions. It earned $26.3 million (-48%) and retained second place. By comparison, previous Disney films Moana (−8%) and Frozen (−2%) both witnessed mild percentage declines the weekend their sing-alone versions were released.[126] Its seventh weekend of release was in contemporaneous with another Emma Watson-starring new film The Circle.[127] That weekend, The Circle was number four, while Beauty and the Beast was at number six.[128] By May 28, the film had earned over $500 million in ticket sales becoming the first film of 2017 (until it was later surpassed by Star Wars: The Last Jedi),[129][130] the third female-fueled film (after The Force Awakens and Rogue One: A Star Wars Story followed by Wonder Woman and The Last Jedi) and the eighth overall film in cinematic history to pass the mark.[131][132][133][134]

text: It has already become the biggest March release, dethroning The Hunger Games (2012),[135] the biggest musical film (both animated and live-action),[136] as well as the biggest film of 2017 (alongside The Last Jedi).[137]

text: Outside North America[edit]

text: Internationally, the film began playing on Thursday, March 16, 2017. Through Sunday, March 19, it had a total international opening of $182.3 million from 55 markets, 44 of which were major territories, far exceeding initial estimations of $100 million and opened at No. 1 in virtually all markets except Vietnam, Turkey, and India. Its launch is the second-biggest for the month of March, behind Batman v Superman ($256.5 million). In IMAX, it recorded the biggest debut for a PG title (although it carried varying certificate amongst different markets) with $8.5 million from 649 screens, the second-biggest for a PG title behind The Jungle Book.[138] In its second weekend, it fell just by 35% earning another $120.6 million and maintaining its first position hold. It added major markets like France and Australia.[139] It topped the international box office for three consecutive weekends[140] before finally being dethroned by Ghost in the Shell and The Boss Baby in its fourth weekend. Despite the fall, the film helped Disney push past the $1 billion thresold internationally for the first time in 2017.[141][93]

text: It scored the biggest opening day of the year in Hong Kong and the Philippines, the biggest March Thursday in Italy ($1 million, also the biggest Disney Thursday debut), the biggest March opening day in Austria, and the second-biggest in Germany ($1.1 million), Disney's biggest March in Denmark, the biggest Disney live-action debut in China ($12.6 million), the UK ($6.2 million), Mexico ($2.4 million) and Brazil ($1.8 million) and the third-biggest in South Korea with $1.2 million, behind only Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End and Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides.[142][143] In terms of opening weekend, the largest debut came from China ($44.8 million), followed by the UK ($24.3 million), Korea ($11.8 million), Mexico ($11.8 million), Australia ($11.1 million), Brazil ($11 million), Germany ($10.7 million), France ($8.4 million), Italy ($7.6 million), Philippines ($6.3 million), Russia ($6 million) and Spain ($5.8 million).[138][139]

text: In the United Kingdom and Ireland, the film recorded the biggest opening ever for a PG-rated film, the biggest Disney live-action opening of all time, the biggest March opening weekend, the biggest opening for a musical (ahead of 2012's Les Misérables), the number one opening of 2017 to date and the fifth-biggest-ever overall with £19.7 million ($24.5 million) from 639 theatres and almost twice that of The Jungle Book (£9.9 million).[144] This included the second-biggest Saturday ever (£7.9 million), only behind Star Wars: The Force Awakens.[145] It witnessed a decline in its second weekend, earning £12.33 million ($15.4 million). Though the film was falling at a faster rate than The Jungle Book, it had already surpassed the said film and its second weekend is the third-biggest ever (behind the two James Bond films Skyfall (2012) and Spectre).[146][139] In India, despite facing heavy competitions from four new Hindi releases, two Tamils films and a Malayalam and a Punjabi release, the film managed to take an occupancy of 15% on its opening day, an impressive feat despite tremendous competitions.[147][148][149] It earned around ₹1.5 crore (US$240,000) nett on its opening day from an estimated 600 screens which is more than the three Hindi releases—Machine, Trapped, and Aa Gaya Hero—combined.[150] Disney reported a total of ₹9.26 crore (US$1.5 million) gross for its opening weekend there. It was ahead of all new releases and second overall behind Bollywood film Badrinath Ki Dulhania.[151][152][153] In Russia, despite receiving a restrictive 16 rating, the film managed to deliver a very successful opening with $6 million.[154]

text: In China, expectations were high for the film. The release date was announced on January 24, giving Disney and local distributor China Film Group Corporation ample time—around two months—to market the film nationwide. The release date was strategically chosen to coincide with White Day. Preliminary reports suggested that it could open to $40–60 million in its opening weekend. Largely driven by young women, its opening day pre-sales outpaced that of The Jungle Book.[155] The original film was, however, never widely popular in the country.[156] Although China has occasionally blocked gay-themed content from streaming video services, in this case, Chinese censors decided to leave the gay scene intact. According to local box office tracker Ent Group, the film grossed an estimated $12.1 million on its opening day (Friday), representing 70% of the total receipts. Including previews, it made a total of $14.5 million from 100,000 screenings, which is 43% of all screenings in the country.[157] It climbed to $18.5 million on Saturday (102,700 showings) for a three-day total of $42.6 million, securing 60% of the total marketplace. Disney on the other hand reported a different figure of $44.8 million.[158][159] Either ways, it recorded the second-biggest opening for a Disney live-action film,[156] with $3.4 million coming from 386 IMAX screens.[138] Japan—a huge Disney market—served as the film's final market and opened there on April 21.[139] It debuted with a better-than-expected $12.5 million on its opening weekend helping the film push past the $1.1 billion threshold. An estimated $1.1 million came from IMAX screenings, the fourth-biggest ever in the country.[160][161] The two-day gross was $9.7 million, outstripping Frozen's previous record of $9.5 million.[162] Due to positive reviews, good word-of-mouth and benefitting from the Golden Week, the film saw a 9% increase on its second weekend. The hold was strong enough to fend off newcomer The Fate of the Furious from securing the top spot. The total there is now over $98 million after seven weekends[163][164][165] and is the biggest film release of the year and, overall, the eleventh-biggest of all time.[166] It topped the box office there for eight consecutive weekends.[167][168]

text: The only markets where the film did not top the weekend charts were Vietnam (behind Kong: Skull Island), Turkey (with two local movies and Logan ahead) and India (where Badrinath Ki Dulhania retained No. 1).[138] It topped the box office for four straight weekends in Germany, Korea, Austria, Finland, Poland, Portugal, Brazil, Venezuela, Bolivia, Switzerland and the UK (exclusive of previews).[141][169] In the Philippines, it emerged as the most successful commercial film of all time—both local and foreign—with over $13.5 million.[170] In just five weeks, the film became one of the top 10 highest-grossing film of all time in the United Kingdom and Ireland, ahead of all but one Harry Potter film (Deathly Hallows – Part 2) and all three The Lord of the Rings movies (which also starred Ian McKellen).[171] It is currently the eighth-biggest grosser with £70.1 million ($90 million), overtaking Mamma Mia! to become the biggest musical production ever there.[160][172] The biggest international earning markets following the UK are Japan ($108 million), China ($85.8 million), Brazil ($41.5 million), Korea ($37.5 million), and Australia ($35 million).[167] In Europe alone, the cumulative total is $267 million to become the second-highest-grossing film in the past year (behind Rogue One: A Star Wars Story).[160][163][173]

text: Critical response[edit]

text: Beauty and the Beast received generally positive reviews, with praise for the faithfulness to the original film with a few elements of the Broadway musical version, the cast's performances, visuals, Jacqueline Durran's costume design, production design, Alan Menken's musical score and songs, though the designs of the Beast and the servants' household object forms received mixed reviews.[9][10] On review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 71% based on 308 reviews, with an average rating of 6.6/10. The site's critical consensus reads, "With an enchanting cast, beautifully crafted songs, and a painterly eye for detail, Beauty and the Beast offers a faithful yet fresh retelling that honors its beloved source material."[174] On Metacritic, the film has a score of 65 out of 100, based on 47 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews".[175] In CinemaScore polls, audiences gave the film an average grade of "A" on an A+ to F scale.[176][177]

text: Leslie Felperin of The Hollywood Reporter wrote: "It's a Michelin-triple-starred master class in patisserie skills that transforms the cinematic equivalent of a sugar rush into a kind of crystal-meth-like narcotic high that lasts about two hours." Felperin also praised the performances of Watson and Kline as well the special effects, costume designs and the sets while commended the inclusion of Gad's character of LeFou as the first LGBT character in Disney.[178] Owen Gleiberman of Variety, in his positive review of the film, wrote: "It's a lovingly crafted movie, and in many ways a good one, but before that it's an enraptured piece of old-is-new nostalgia." Gleiberman compared Steven's character of the Beast to a royal version of the titular character in The Elephant Man and the 1946 version of the Beast in Jean Cocteau's original adaptation.[179] A. O. Scott of The New York Times praised the performances of both Watson and Stevens, and wrote: "It looks good, moves gracefully and leaves a clean and invigorating aftertaste. I almost didn't recognize the flavor: I think the name for it is joy."[180]

text: Likewise, The Washington Post's Ann Hornaday complimented Watson's performance, describing it as "alert and solemn" while noting her singing ability as "serviceable enough to get the job done".[181] Richard Roeper of Chicago Sun-Times awarded the film three and a half stars, lauded the performances of Watson and Thompson which he drew a comparison to Paige O'Hara's and Angela Lansbury's performances in the 1991 animated version while appreciating the performances of the other cast and also pointing out on its usage of the combination of motion capture and CGI technology as a big advantage which he stated: "Almost overwhelmingly lavish, beautifully staged and performed with exquisite timing and grace by the outstanding cast".[182] Mike Ryan of Uproxx praised the cast, production design and the new songs while noting the film doesn't try anything different, saying: "There's certainly nothing that new about this version of Beauty and the Beast (well, except it isn't a cartoon anymore), but it's a good recreation of a classic animated film that should leave most die-hards satisfied."[183] In her A- review, Nancy Churnin of The Dallas Morning News praised the film's emotional and thematic depth, remarking: "There's an emotional authenticity in director Bill Condon's live-action Beauty and the Beast film that helps you rediscover Disney's beloved 1991 animated film and 1994 stage show in fresh, stirring ways."[184] James Berardinelli of ReelViews described the 2017 version as "enthralling".[185]

text: Brian Truitt of USA Today commended the performances of Evans, Gad, McGregor and Thompson alongside Condon's affinity with musicals, the production design, visual effects featured in some of the song numbers including new songs made by the composers Alan Menken and Tim Rice, particularly Evermore which he described the new song with a potential for an Academy Award for Best Original Song.[186] Peter Travers of Rolling Stone rated the film three out of four stars which he deemed it as an "exhilarating gift" while he remarked that "Beauty and the Beast does justice to Disney's animated classic, even if some of the magic is M.I.A (Missing in Action)".[187] Stephanie Zacharek of Time magazine gave a positive review with a description as "Wild, Vivid and Crazy-Beautiful" as she wrote "Nearly everything about Beauty and the Beast is larger than life, to the point that watching it can be a little overwhelming." and added that "it’s loaded with feeling, almost like a brash interpretive dance expressing the passion and elation little girls (and some boys, too) must have felt upon seeing the earlier version."[188] The San Francisco Chronicle's Mick LaSalle struck an affirmative tone, calling it one of the joys of 2017, stating that "Beauty and the Beast creates an air of enchantment from its first moments, one that lingers and builds and takes on qualities of warmth and generosity as it goes along" while referring the film as "beautiful" and also praised the film for its emotional and psychological tone as well Steven's motion capture performance.[189]

text: Tim Robey of The Daily Telegraph gave the film four stars out of five and wrote that "It dazzles on this chocolate box of a picture that feels almost greedy yet to make this film work, down to a sugar-rush finale to grasp the nettle and make an out-an-out, bells-and-whistles musical" while he praised the performances of Watson, McKellen, Thompson, McGregor, Evans and Gad.[190] Mark Hughes of Forbes also similarly praised the film which he wrote that "it could revive the story in a faithful but entirely new and unique way elevating the material beyond expectations, establishing itself as a cinematic equal to the original" and also complimented the importance of undertaking a renowned yet problematic masterpiece as well addressing changes in the elements of the story while acknowledging the film's effectiveness in resonating to the audiences.[191] Stephen Whitty of the New York Daily News called it "this year's best new old musical" and "the most magical thing of all" while describing Watson's performance of Belle as "breakthrough".[192]

text: Several critics regarded the film as inferior to its 1991 animated predecessor. David Sims of The Atlantic wrote that the 2017 film "feels particularly egregious, in part, because it’s so slavishly devoted to the original; every time it falls short of its predecessor (which is quite often), it’s hard not to notice".[193] Michael Phillips of the Chicago Tribune said that the 2017 film "takes our knowledge and our interest in the material for granted. It zips from one number to another, throwing a ton of frenetically edited eye candy at the screen, charmlessly." Phillips wrote that the film featured some "less conspicuously talented" performers who are "stuck doing karaoke, or motion-capture work of middling quality", though he praised Kline's performance as the "best, sweetest thing in the movie; he brings a sense of calm, droll authority".[194] Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian praised Watson's performance and wrote that the film was "lit in that fascinatingly artificial honey-glow light, and it runs smoothly on rails—the kind of rails that bring in and out the stage sets for the lucrative Broadway touring version." In the same newspaper, Wendy Ide criticized the film as "ornate to the point of desperation" in its attempt to emulate the animated film.[195][196]

text: Chris Nashawaty of Entertainment Weekly gave the film a B-, writing that while the film looks "exceptionally great", he said the new songs were "not transporting". He felt the film needed more life and depth, but praised Watson's and Steven's performances as the "film’s stronger elements".[197] Dana Schwartz of The New York Observer felt that some of the characters, such as Gaston and the Beast, had been watered down from the 1991 film, and that the additional backstory elements failed to "advance the plot or theme in any meaningful way" while adding considerable bloat. Schwartz considered the singing of the cast to be adequate but felt that their voices should have been dubbed over, especially for the complex songs.[198]

text: Accolades[edit]

text: The film was expected[by whom?] to receive several nominations at the 75th Golden Globe Awards, but was not nominated.[199]

text:
Award
Date of ceremony
Category
Recipient(s) and nominee(s)
Result
Ref.

MTV Movie & TV Awards
May 7, 2017
Movie of the Year
Beauty and the Beast
Won
[200]

Best Actor in a Movie
Emma Watson
Won

Best Kiss
Emma Watson and Dan Stevens
Nominated

Best Duo
Josh Gad and Luke Evans
Nominated

Golden Trailer Awards
June 6, 2017
Best Animation/Family
Beauty and the Beast
Nominated
[201]

Best Original Score
Nominated

Best Animation/Family TV Spot
Nominated

Best Fantasy Adventure TV Spot
Nominated

Teen Choice Awards
August 13, 2017
Choice Movie: Fantasy
Beauty and the Beast
Won
[202]
[203]

Choice Movie: Fantasy Actor
Dan Stevens
Nominated

Choice Movie: Fantasy Actress
Emma Watson
Won

Choice Movie Villain
Luke Evans
Won

Choice Movie Ship
Emma Watson and Dan Stevens
Won

Choice Liplock
Won

Choice Scene Stealer
Josh Gad
Nominated

Choice Hissy Fit
Luke Evans
Nominated

Dan Stevens
Nominated

Hollywood Film Awards
November 5, 2017
Costume Design Award
Jacqueline Durran[b]
Won
[204]

Make-Up & Hair Styling Award
Jenny Shircore
Won

Hollywood Post Alliance (HPA)
November 16, 2017
Outstanding Color Grading – Feature Film
Stefan Sonnenfeld
Nominated
[205]
[206]

Outstanding Visual Effects – Feature Film
Kyle McCulloch, Glen Pratt, Richard Hoover, Dale Newton, Neil Weatherley, and Framestore
Nominated

Hollywood Music in Media Awards
Best Original Song – Animated Film
"How Does a Moment Last Forever" - Alan Menken and Tim Rice
Nominated
[207]
[208]

Best Original Song – Sci-Fi, Fantasy, Horror Film
Won

"Evermore" – Alan Menken and Tim Rice
Nominated

Best Soundtrack Album
Beauty and the Beast
Nominated

Washington D.C. Area Film Critics Association
December 8, 2017
Best Motion Capture Performance
Dan Stevens
Nominated
[209]

Best Production Design
Sarah Greenwood and Katie Spencer
Nominated

San Diego Film Critics Society
December 11, 2017
Nominated
[210]
[211]

Best Visual Effects
Beauty and the Beast
Runner-up[c]

Best Costume Design
Jacqueline Durran
Won[d]

Best Use of Music
Beauty and the Beast
Nominated

Chicago Film Critics Association
December 12, 2017
Best Art Direction
Sarah Greenwood
Nominated
[212]
[213]

St. Louis Film Critics Association
December 17, 2017
Best Production Design
Nominated
[214]
[215]

Best Visual Effects
Beauty and the Beast
Nominated

Women Film Critics Circle Awards
December 17, 2017
Best Family Film
Nominated
[216]
[217]

Seattle Film Critics Society
December 18, 2017
Best Costume Design
Jacqueline Durran
Nominated
[218]
[219]

Houston Film Critics Society
January 6, 2018
Best Original Song
"Evermore" – Alan Menken and Tim Rice
Nominated
[220]

Critics' Choice Movie Awards
January 11, 2018
Best Art Direction
Sarah Greenwood and Katie Spencer
Pending
[221]

Best Costume Design
Jacqueline Durran
Pending

Best Hair & Makeup
Beauty and the Beast
Pending

Best Song
"Evermore"
Pending

NAACP Image Awards
January 15, 2018
Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Motion Picture
Audra McDonald
Pending
[222]

Artios Awards
January 18, 2018
Big Budget – Comedy
Lucy Bevan, Bernard Telsey, and Tiffany Little Canfield
Pending
[223]

Art Directors Guild Awards
January 27, 2018
Excellence in Production Design for a Fantasy Film
Sarah Greenwood
Pending
[224]

Satellite Awards
February 10, 2018
Best Costume Design
Jacqueline Durran
Pending
[225]

British Academy Film Awards
February 18, 2018
Best Production Design
Sarah Greenwood and Katie Spencer
Pending
[226]

Best Costume Design
Jacqueline Durran
Pending

Make-Up Artists and Hair Stylists Guild
February 24, 2018
Feature Motion Picture: Best Period and/or Character Hair
Jenny Shircore, Marc Pilcher and Charlotte Hayward
Pending
[227]

text: Controversies[edit]

text: Gay character[edit]

text: Controversy erupted after director Bill Condon said there was a "gay moment" in the film, when LeFou briefly waltzes with Stanley, one of Gaston's friends.[228] Afterwards in an interview with Vulture.com, Condon stated, "Can I just say, I’m sort of sick of this. Because you've seen the movie—it's such a tiny thing, and it's been overblown." Condon also added that Beauty and the Beast features much more diversity than just the highly talked-about LeFou: "That was so important. We have interracial couples—this is a celebration of everybody's individuality, and that's what’s exciting about it.”[229] GLAAD president and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis praised the move stating, "It is a small moment in the film, but it is a huge leap forward for the film industry."[230]

text: In Russia, Vitaly Milonov agitated the culture minister for banning the film,[231] but instead it was given a 16+ rating (children under the age of 16 can only be admitted to see it in theaters with accompanying adults).[232] Additionally, a theater in Henagar, Alabama did not screen the film because of the subplot.[233] In Malaysia, the Film Censorship Board insisted the "gay moment" scene be cut, prompting an indefinite postponement of its release by Disney, followed by their decision to withdraw it completely if it could not be released uncensored.[234][235][236] The studio moved the release date to March 30, to allow more time for Malaysia's censor board to make a decision on whether or not to release the film without changes.[237] The distributors and producers then submitted an appeal to the Film Appeal Committee of Malaysia, which allowed the film to be released without any cuts and a P13 rating on the grounds that the "gay element" was minor and did not affect the positive elements featured in the film.[238][239] In Kuwait, the movie was withdrawn from cinemas by National Cinema Company which owns most of the cinemas in the country. A board member of the company stated that the Ministry of Information's censorship department had requested it to stop its screening and edit it for things deemed offensive by it.[240]

text: There were also a number of boycotts against the film. A call to boycott on LifePetitions received over 129,000 signatures,[241] while the American Family Association featured a petition to boycott with the film, asking the public to help crowdfund a CGI version of Pilgrim's Progress instead.[242]

text: The film also received criticism over its portrayal of LeFou, as many felt that it relied on stereotypes[243] and was used as a way of teasing LGBT+ viewers without providing adequate representation.[244] LeFou's status as a sidekick to the main villain brought about criticism over Disney's queercoding of villains in the past, and his infatuation with Gaston was seen as relying on a stereotype of gay men being predatory towards straight men.[245] Furthermore, the only gay interaction LeFou has is a three-second clip of him dancing with another man at the end of the film. Many saw this as Disney cheating its LGBT+ audiences.[246]

text: Belle and the Beast's relationship[edit]

text: Disney has sought to portray Belle as an empowered young woman,[247] but a debate questioning whether it is possible for a captor to fall in love with their prisoner, and whether this is a problematic theme, has resulted.[248] As was the case with the original animated film, one argument is that Belle suffers from Stockholm syndrome (a condition that causes hostages to develop a psychological alliance with their captors as a survival strategy during captivity). Emma Watson studied whether Belle is trapped in an abusive relationship with the Beast before signing on and concluded that she does not think the criticism fits this version of the folk tale.[249][250] Watson described Stockholm Syndrome as "where a prisoner will take on the characteristics of and fall in love with the captor. Belle actively argues and disagrees with [Beast] constantly. She has none of the characteristics of someone with Stockholm Syndrome because she keeps her independence, she keeps that freedom of thought", also adding that Belle defiantly "gives as good as she gets" before forming a friendship and romance with the Beast.[251]

text: Psychiatrist Frank Ochberg, who coined the term "Stockholm syndrome", said he does not think Belle exhibits the trauma symptoms of prisoners suffering from the syndrome because she does not go through a period of feeling that she is going to die.[252] Some therapists, while acknowledging that the pairing's relationship does not meet the clinical definition of Stockholm syndrome, argue that the relationship depicted is dysfunctional and abusive and does not model healthy romantic relationships for young viewers.[253][254] Constance Grady of Vox writes that Jeanne-Marie Leprince de Beaumont's Beauty and the Beast was a fairy tale originally written to prepare young girls in 18th-century France for arranged marriages, and that the power disparity is amplified in the Disney version.[255] Anna Menta of Elite Daily argued that the Beast does not apologize to Belle for imprisoning, hurting, or manipulating her, and his treatment of Belle is not painted as wrong.[256]

text: Notes[edit]

text:
^ Jump up to: a b Beauty and the Beast at Box Office Mojo. Retrieved August 14, 2017.
Jump up ^ Also credited for Darkest Hour.
Jump up ^ Tied with Dunkirk.
Jump up ^ Tied with Mark Bridges for Phantom Thread.

tag: ol


document_title: Lars and the Real Girl

question_text: where was lars and the real girl filmed

question_tokens: where was lars and the real girl filmed

root

text: Lars and the Real Girl

text: Plot[edit]

text: Lars Lindstrom lives a secluded life in a small Wisconsin town. It is gradually revealed that his mother died when he was born, causing his grief-stricken father to be a distant parent to Lars and his older brother, Gus. Gus left town as soon as he could support himself, returning only to inherit his half of the household when the father died.

tag: p

text: The inheritance has been divided between the brothers: Lars lives in the converted garage; Gus and his pregnant wife Karin live in the house proper. Karin's attempts to invite Lars into the house for a family meal are usually unsuccessful; when he does come, conversation is difficult and he doesn't stay long. He avoids social contact, finding it difficult to interact with his family, co-workers, or members of his church. A co-worker, Margo, is interested in him, but he avoids anything more than brief encounters.

text: One day a large package arrives; that evening Lars tells Gus and Karin that he has a visitor whom he met via the Internet, a wheelchair-mobile missionary of Brazilian and Danish descent named Bianca. They discover that Bianca is a lifelike doll which Lars apparently ordered from an adult website. Concerned about his mental health, they convince Lars to take Bianca for a checkup to the family doctor, Dagmar, who is also a psychiatrist. Dagmar diagnoses Bianca with low blood pressure and advises Lars to bring her in for weekly treatments. Her aim is to have regular contact with Lars, hoping to get to the root of his behavior. She explains to Gus and Karin that his delusion is a manifestation of an underlying problem that needs to be addressed. She urges them to assist with his therapy by treating Bianca as a real person.

text: Lars begins to introduce Bianca as his girlfriend to the townspeople. Due to their concern for Lars, everyone treats Bianca as a real person. Lars soon finds himself interacting more with people. During this time, Margo has begun to date another co-worker, which silently bothers Lars.

text: Lars asks his brother when he knew he had become a man and what being a man means. Gus says when he began doing the right things for the right reasons, even when it hurts. Gus gives several examples, including their father keeping them, and taking care of them, even though he didn't know how. Gus says that he never should have left Lars alone with their father, and he apologizes for being selfish. Their conversation seems to reach Lars and his dependence on Bianca immediately seems to shift.

text: When a co-worker with whom Margo has been playing pranks goes a bit too far, Lars comforts her. During the ensuing conversation, Margo reveals she has broken up with her boyfriend. She invites Lars to go bowling, which he initially declines before reconsidering. The two spend a pleasant evening together along with some other townsfolk. Lars is quick to remind Margo he could never cheat on Bianca. Although obviously disappointed, Margo replies that the thought never crossed her mind. As they part, Lars takes his glove off to shake Margo's hand – a significant advance in his ability to interact with others; he earlier explained to the doctor that others' touch felt like "burning".

text: One morning soon after, Lars announces that Bianca is unresponsive, and an ambulance rushes her to the hospital. Once there, he tells his family that her prognosis is not good and that Bianca would like to be brought home. The news spreads through town, and everyone whose life has been touched by Bianca sends flowers or sits with Lars at the Lindstrom home. Gus and Karin ask Dagmar why this is happening, and she reveals that it indicates a significant shift for Lars. They suggest that Lars and Bianca join them for a visit to the lake. While the couple is hiking, Lars gives Bianca a very sad farewell kiss. As Gus and Karin make their way back from the hike, they discover despondent Lars in the lake with a 'dying' Bianca.

text: Bianca is given a full-fledged funeral that is well-attended by the townspeople. After Bianca is buried in the local cemetery, Lars and Margo linger at the grave site. When Margo states that she should catch up with everyone else, Lars asks her to take a walk with him instead, to which she happily agrees.

text: Cast[edit]

text:
Ryan Gosling as Lars Lindstrom
Emily Mortimer as Karin Lindstrom
Paul Schneider as Gus Lindstrom
R. D. Reid as Reverend Bock
Kelli Garner as Margo
Nancy Beatty as Mrs. Gruner
Doug Lennox as Mr. Hofstedtler
Joe Bostick as Mr. Shaw
Liz Gordon as Mrs. Schindler
Nicky Guadagni as Mrs. Petersen
Patricia Clarkson as Dagmar Berman, MD
Karen Robinson as Cindy
Maxwell McCabe-Lokos as Kurt
Billy Parrott as Erik
Sally Cahill as Deb
Angela Vint as Sandy
Liisa Repo-Martell as Laurel
Boyd Banks as Russell
Darren Hynes as Moose
Víctor Gómez as Hector
Tommy Chang as Nelson
Arnold Pinnock as Baxter
Joshua Peace as Jerry
Aurora Browne as Lisa
Alec McClure as Steve
Tannis Burnett as Nurse Amy
Lauren Ash as Holly
Lindsey Connell as Victoria

tag: ul

text: Production[edit]

text: In The Real Story of Lars and the Real Girl, a special feature on the DVD release of the film, screenwriter Nancy Oliver reveals the inspiration for her script was an actual website, RealDoll.com, which is featured prominently in the film. While researching "weird websites" for an article, Oliver found RealDoll.com. She wrote the script in 2002.[2]

text: The film, set in the American state of Wisconsin, was filmed with a US$12 million budget on location in Alton, Elora, King Township, Toronto, Uxbridge, and Whitevale, all located in the Canadian province of Ontario.[3][4] Film credits include Rosalie MacKintosh as "Bianca wrangler" and Karly Bowen as "assistant Bianca wrangler."[5][6]

text: Release[edit]

text: The film premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival in September 2007 before going into limited release in the U.S. on October 12, 2007. It initially opened on seven screens in New York City, New York; and Los Angeles, California, and earned $90,418 on its opening weekend. It later expanded to 321 theaters and remained in release for 147 days, earning $5,972,884 domestically and $5,320,639 in foreign markets for a worldwide box-office total of $11,293,663.[1][7]

text: The film was featured at the Austin Film Festival, the Heartland Film Festival, the Torino Film Festival, the Glasgow Film Festival, and the Las Palmas de Gran Canaria International Film Festival.[citation needed]

text: Critical reception[edit]

text: Lars and the Real Girl received overwhelming positive reviews from critics, with Gosling's performance being universally acclaimed.[8] On the review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, 81% of critics gave the film positive reviews, based on 134 reviews with the consensus stating "Lars and the Real Girl could've so easily been a one-joke movie. But the talented cast, a great script, and direction never condescend to its character or the audience."[9] On Metacritic, the film has an average score of 70 out of 100, based on 32 reviews.[10]

text: Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times observed, "The film wisely never goes for even one moment that could be interpreted as smutty or mocking. There are so many ways [it] could have gone wrong that one of the film's fascinations is how adroitly it sidesteps them. Its weapon is absolute sincerity. It has a kind of purity to it."[11]

text: Mick LaSalle of the San Francisco Chronicle called the film "a gentle comedy, offbeat but never cute, never lewd and never going for shortcut laughs that might diminish character."[12]

text: Manohla Dargis of The New York Times said, "American self-nostalgia is a dependable racket, and if the filmmakers had pushed into the realm of nervous truth, had given Lars and the town folk sustained shadows, not just cute tics and teary moments, it might have worked. Instead the film is palatable audience bait of average accomplishment that superficially recalls the plain style of Alexander Payne, but without any of the lacerating edges or moral ambiguity."[13]

text: Kenneth Turan of the Los Angeles Times described it as "the sweetest, most innocent, most completely enjoyable film around," "a film whose daring and delicate blend of apparent irreconcilables will sweep you off your feet if you're not careful. The creators of this film were fiercely determined not to go so much as a millimeter over the line into sentiment, tawdriness or mockery. It's the rare film that is the best possible version of itself, but Lars fits that bill."[14]

text: Lou Lumenick of the New York Post awarded the film three out of four stars, calling it "an offbeat comedy that plays as if Preston Sturges came back to life and collaborated with the Coen Brothers on an updated version of the Jimmy Stewart film Harvey (1950). He added the script "eschews cheap laughs for character-driven humanist comedy, and is sensitively directed by Craig Gillespie."[15]

text: Alissa Simon of Variety stated, "Craig Gillespie's sweetly off-kilter film plays like a Coen brothers riff on Garrison Keillor's Lake Wobegon tales, defying its lurid premise with a gentle comic drama grounded in reality ... what's fresh and charming is the way the characters surrounding the protagonist also grow as they help him through his crisis."[16]

text: The film has received favorable reviews from Christian faith-based media,[17] and has been recommended as an instructional tool and a means for opening a dialogue on tolerance.[18]

text: Accolades[edit]

text:
Award
Date of ceremony
Category
Recipients and nominees
Result

Academy Awards
February 24, 2008
Best Original Screenplay
Nancy Oliver
Nominated

Chicago Film Critics Association
December 13, 2007
Best Actor
Ryan Gosling
Nominated

Most Promising Director
Craig Gillespie
Nominated

Critics' Choice Awards
January 7, 2007
Best Actor
Ryan Gosling
Nominated

Best Screenplay
Nancy Oliver
Nominated

Golden Globe Awards
January 13, 2008
Best Actor – Motion Picture Musical or Comedy
Ryan Gosling
Nominated

Humanitas Prize
September 17, 2008
Feature Film
Nancy Oliver
Won

National Board of Review
January 15, 2008
Top Ten Films
Lars and the Real Girl
Won

Best Original Screenplay
Nancy Oliver
Won

Satellite Awards
December 16, 2007
Best Film – Musical or Comedy
Lars and the Real Girl
Nominated

Best Actor – Motion Picture Musical or Comedy
Ryan Gosling
Won

Best Actress – Motion Picture Musical or Comedy
Emily Mortimer
Nominated

Best Original Screenplay
Nancy Oliver
Nominated

Screen Actors Guild Awards
January 27, 2008
Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Leading Role
Ryan Gosling
Nominated

St. Louis Film Critics Association
December 24, 2007
Best Film – Musical or Comedy
Lars and the Real Girl
Nominated

Best Actor
Ryan Gosling
Nominated

Best Screenplay
Nancy Oliver
Nominated

Writers Guild of America Awards
February 9, 2008
Best Original Screenplay
Nancy Oliver
Nominated

tag: table


document_title: Extinction

question_text: what is the most important reason that species are going extinct

text: Extinction

text: Definition[edit]

text: A species is extinct when the last existing member dies. Extinction therefore becomes a certainty when there are no surviving individuals that can reproduce and create a new generation. A species may become functionally extinct when only a handful of individuals survive, which cannot reproduce due to poor health, age, sparse distribution over a large range, a lack of individuals of both sexes (in sexually reproducing species), or other reasons.

text: Pinpointing the extinction (or pseudoextinction) of a species requires a clear definition of that species. If it is to be declared extinct, the species in question must be uniquely distinguishable from any ancestor or daughter species, and from any other closely related species. Extinction of a species (or replacement by a daughter species) plays a key role in the punctuated equilibrium hypothesis of Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge.[15]

text: In ecology, extinction is often used informally to refer to local extinction, in which a species ceases to exist in the chosen area of study, but may still exist elsewhere. This phenomenon is also known as extirpation. Local extinctions may be followed by a replacement of the species taken from other locations; wolf reintroduction is an example of this. Species which are not extinct are termed extant. Those that are extant but threatened by extinction are referred to as threatened or endangered species.

text: Currently an important aspect of extinction is human attempts to preserve critically endangered species. These are reflected by the creation of the conservation status "extinct in the wild" (EW). Species listed under this status by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) are not known to have any living specimens in the wild, and are maintained only in zoos or other artificial environments. Some of these species are functionally extinct, as they are no longer part of their natural habitat and it is unlikely the species will ever be restored to the wild.[17] When possible, modern zoological institutions try to maintain a viable population for species preservation and possible future reintroduction to the wild, through use of carefully planned breeding programs.

text: The extinction of one species' wild population can have knock-on effects, causing further extinctions. These are also called "chains of extinction".[18] This is especially common with extinction of keystone species.

text: Pseudoextinction[edit]

text: Extinction of a parent species where daughter species or subspecies are still extant is called pseudoextinction or phyletic extinction. Effectively, the old taxon vanishes, transformed (anagenesis) into a successor,[19] or split into more than one (cladogenesis).[20]

text: Pseudoextinction is difficult to demonstrate unless one has a strong chain of evidence linking a living species to members of a pre-existing species. For example, it is sometimes claimed that the extinct Hyracotherium, which was an early horse that shares a common ancestor with the modern horse, is pseudoextinct, rather than extinct, because there are several extant species of Equus, including zebra and donkey. However, as fossil species typically leave no genetic material behind, one cannot say whether Hyracotherium evolved into more modern horse species or merely evolved from a common ancestor with modern horses. Pseudoextinction is much easier to demonstrate for larger taxonomic groups.

text: Lazarus taxa[edit]

text: The coelacanth, a fish related to lungfish and tetrapods, was considered to have been extinct since the end of the Cretaceous Period until 1938 when a specimen was found, off the Chalumna River (now Tyolomnqa) on the east coast of South Africa.[21] Museum curator Marjorie Courtenay-Latimer discovered the fish among the catch of a local angler, Captain Hendrick Goosen, on December 23, 1938.[21] A local chemistry professor, JLB Smith, confirmed the fish's importance with a famous cable: "MOST IMPORTANT PRESERVE SKELETON AND GILLS = FISH DESCRIBED".[21]

text: Far more recent possible or presumed extinctions of species which may turn out still to exist include the thylacine, or Tasmanian tiger (Thylacinus cynocephalus), the last known example of which died in Hobart Zoo in Tasmania in 1936; the Japanese wolf (Canis lupus hodophilax), last sighted over 100 years ago; the ivory-billed woodpecker (Campephilus principalis), last sighted for certain in 1944; and the slender-billed curlew (Numenius tenuirostris), not seen since 2007.[22]

text: Causes[edit]

text: As long as species have been evolving, species have been going extinct. It is estimated that over 99.9% of all species that ever lived are extinct. The average lifespan of a species is 1–10 million years,[23] although this varies widely between taxa. There are a variety of causes that can contribute directly or indirectly to the extinction of a species or group of species. "Just as each species is unique", write Beverly and Stephen C. Stearns, "so is each extinction ... the causes for each are varied—some subtle and complex, others obvious and simple".[24] Most simply, any species that cannot survive and reproduce in its environment and cannot move to a new environment where it can do so, dies out and becomes extinct. Extinction of a species may come suddenly when an otherwise healthy species is wiped out completely, as when toxic pollution renders its entire habitat unliveable; or may occur gradually over thousands or millions of years, such as when a species gradually loses out in competition for food to better adapted competitors. Extinction may occur a long time after the events that set it in motion, a phenomenon known as extinction debt.

text: Assessing the relative importance of genetic factors compared to environmental ones as the causes of extinction has been compared to the debate on nature and nurture.[25] The question of whether more extinctions in the fossil record have been caused by evolution or by catastrophe is a subject of discussion; Mark Newman, the author of Modeling Extinction, argues for a mathematical model that falls between the two positions.[4] By contrast, conservation biology uses the extinction vortex model to classify extinctions by cause. When concerns about human extinction have been raised, for example in Sir Martin Rees' 2003 book Our Final Hour, those concerns lie with the effects of climate change or technological disaster.

text: Currently, environmental groups and some governments are concerned with the extinction of species caused by humanity, and they try to prevent further extinctions through a variety of conservation programs.[9] Humans can cause extinction of a species through overharvesting, pollution, habitat destruction, introduction of invasive species (such as new predators and food competitors), overhunting, and other influences. Explosive, unsustainable human population growth is an essential cause of the extinction crisis.[26] According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), 784 extinctions have been recorded since the year 1500, the arbitrary date selected to define "recent" extinctions, up to the year 2004; with many more likely to have gone unnoticed. Several species have also been listed as extinct since 2004.[27]

text: Genetics and demographic phenomena[edit]

text: If adaptation increasing population fitness is slower than environmental degradation plus the accumulation of slightly deleterious mutations, then a population will go extinct.[28] Smaller populations have fewer beneficial mutations entering the population each generation, slowing adaptation. It is also easier for slightly deleterious mutations to fix in small populations; the resulting positive feedback loop between small population size and low fitness can cause mutational meltdown.

text: Limited geographic range is the most important determinant of genus extinction at background rates but becomes increasingly irrelevant as mass extinction arises.[29] Limited geographic range is a cause both of small population size and of greater vulnerability to local environmental catastrophes.

text: Extinction rates can be affected not just by population size, but by any factor that affects evolvability, including balancing selection, cryptic genetic variation, phenotypic plasticity, and robustness. A diverse or deep gene pool gives a population a higher chance in the short term of surviving an adverse change in conditions. Effects that cause or reward a loss in genetic diversity can increase the chances of extinction of a species. Population bottlenecks can dramatically reduce genetic diversity by severely limiting the number of reproducing individuals and make inbreeding more frequent.

text: Genetic pollution[edit]

text: Purebred wild species evolved to a specific ecology can be threatened with extinction[30] through the process of genetic pollution—i.e., uncontrolled hybridization, introgression genetic swamping which leads to homogenization or out-competition from the introduced (or hybrid) species.[31] Endemic populations can face such extinctions when new populations are imported or selectively bred by people, or when habitat modification brings previously isolated species into contact. Extinction is likeliest for rare species coming into contact with more abundant ones;[32] interbreeding can swamp the rarer gene pool and create hybrids, depleting the purebred gene pool (for example, the endangered wild water buffalo is most threatened with extinction by genetic pollution from the abundant domestic water buffalo). Such extinctions are not always apparent from morphological (non-genetic) observations. Some degree of gene flow is a normal evolutionarily process, nevertheless, hybridization (with or without introgression) threatens rare species' existence.[33][34]

text: The gene pool of a species or a population is the variety of genetic information in its living members. A large gene pool (extensive genetic diversity) is associated with robust populations that can survive bouts of intense selection. Meanwhile, low genetic diversity (see inbreeding and population bottlenecks) reduces the range of adaptions possible.[35] Replacing native with alien genes narrows genetic diversity within the original population,[32][36] thereby increasing the chance of extinction.

text: Habitat degradation[edit]

text: Habitat degradation is currently the main anthropogenic cause of species extinctions. The main cause of habitat degradation worldwide is agriculture, with urban sprawl, logging, mining and some fishing practices close behind. The degradation of a species' habitat may alter the fitness landscape to such an extent that the species is no longer able to survive and becomes extinct. This may occur by direct effects, such as the environment becoming toxic, or indirectly, by limiting a species' ability to compete effectively for diminished resources or against new competitor species.

text: Habitat degradation through toxicity can kill off a species very rapidly, by killing all living members through contamination or sterilizing them. It can also occur over longer periods at lower toxicity levels by affecting life span, reproductive capacity, or competitiveness.

text: Habitat degradation can also take the form of a physical destruction of niche habitats. The widespread destruction of tropical rainforests and replacement with open pastureland is widely cited as an example of this;[13] elimination of the dense forest eliminated the infrastructure needed by many species to survive. For example, a fern that depends on dense shade for protection from direct sunlight can no longer survive without forest to shelter it. Another example is the destruction of ocean floors by bottom trawling.[37]

text: Diminished resources or introduction of new competitor species also often accompany habitat degradation. Global warming has allowed some species to expand their range, bringing unwelcome[according to whom?] competition to other species that previously occupied that area. Sometimes these new competitors are predators and directly affect prey species, while at other times they may merely outcompete vulnerable species for limited resources. Vital resources including water and food can also be limited during habitat degradation, leading to extinction.

text: Predation, competition, and disease[edit]

text: In the natural course of events, species become extinct for a number of reasons, including but not limited to: extinction of a necessary host, prey or pollinator, inter-species competition, inability to deal with evolving diseases and changing environmental conditions (particularly sudden changes) which can act to introduce novel predators, or to remove prey. Recently in geological time, humans have become an additional cause of extinction (many people would say premature extinction) of some species, either as a new mega-predator or by transporting animals and plants from one part of the world to another. Such introductions have been occurring for thousands of years, sometimes intentionally (e.g. livestock released by sailors on islands as a future source of food) and sometimes accidentally (e.g. rats escaping from boats). In most cases, the introductions are unsuccessful, but when an invasive alien species does become established, the consequences can be catastrophic. Invasive alien species can affect native species directly by eating them, competing with them, and introducing pathogens or parasites that sicken or kill them; or indirectly by destroying or degrading their habitat. Human populations may themselves act as invasive predators. According to the "overkill hypothesis", the swift extinction of the megafauna in areas such as Australia (40,000 years before present), North and South America (12,000 years before present), Madagascar, Hawaii (300–1000 CE), and New Zealand (1300–1500 CE), resulted from the sudden introduction of human beings to environments full of animals that had never seen them before, and were therefore completely unadapted to their predation techniques.[38]

text: Coextinction[edit]

text: Coextinction refers to the loss of a species due to the extinction of another; for example, the extinction of parasitic insects following the loss of their hosts. Coextinction can also occur when a species loses its pollinator, or to predators in a food chain who lose their prey. "Species coextinction is a manifestation of the interconnectedness of organisms in complex ecosystems ... While coextinction may not be the most important cause of species extinctions, it is certainly an insidious one".[39] Coextinction is especially common when a keystone species goes extinct. Models suggest that coextinction is the most common form of biodiversity loss. There may be a cascade of coextinction across the trophic levels. Such effects are most severe in mutualistic and parasitic relationships. An example of coextinction is the Haast's eagle and the moa: the Haast's eagle was a predator that became extinct because its food source became extinct. The moa were several species of flightless birds that were a food source for the Haast's eagle.[40]

text: Climate change[edit]

text: Extinction as a result of climate change has been confirmed by fossil studies.[41] Particularly, the extinction of amphibians during the Carboniferous Rainforest Collapse, 305 million years ago.[41] A 2003 review across 14 biodiversity research centers predicted that, because of climate change, 15–37% of land species would be "committed to extinction" by 2050.[42][43] The ecologically rich areas that would potentially suffer the heaviest losses include the Cape Floristic Region, and the Caribbean Basin. These areas might see a doubling of present carbon dioxide levels and rising temperatures that could eliminate 56,000 plant and 3,700 animal species.[44] Climate change has also been found to be a factor in habitat loss and desertification.[45]

text: Mass extinctions[edit]

text: There have been at least five mass extinctions in the history of life on earth, and four in the last 350 million years in which many species have disappeared in a relatively short period of geological time. A massive eruptive event is considered to be one likely cause of the "Permian–Triassic extinction event" about 250 million years ago,[46] which is estimated to have killed 90% of species then existing.[47] There is also evidence to suggest that this event was preceded by another mass extinction, known as Olson's Extinction.[46] The Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event (K-Pg) occurred 66 million years ago, at the end of the Cretaceous period, and is best known for having wiped out non-avian dinosaurs, among many other species.

text: Modern extinctions[edit]

text: According to a 1998 survey of 400 biologists conducted by New York's American Museum of Natural History, nearly 70% believed that the Earth is currently in the early stages of a human-caused mass extinction,[48] known as the Holocene extinction. In that survey, the same proportion of respondents agreed with the prediction that up to 20% of all living populations could become extinct within 30 years (by 2028). A 2014 special edition of Science declared there is widespread consensus on the issue of human-driven mass species extinctions.[49]

text: Biologist E. O. Wilson estimated [13] in 2002 that if current rates of human destruction of the biosphere continue, one-half of all plant and animal species of life on earth will be extinct in 100 years.[50] More significantly, the current rate of global species extinctions is estimated as 100 to 1000 times "background" rates (the average extinction rates in the evolutionary time scale of planet Earth),[51][52] while future rates are likely 10,000 times higher.[52] However, some groups are going extinct much faster. Biologists Paul R. Ehrlich and Stuart Pimm, among others, contend that human population growth and overconsumption are the main drivers of the modern extinction crisis.[53][54][55][56]

text: History of scientific understanding[edit]

text: For much of history, the modern understanding of extinction as the end of a species was incompatible with the prevailing worldview. Through the 18th century, much of Western society adhered to the belief that the world was created by God and as such was complete and perfect.[58] This concept reached its heyday in the 1700s with the peak popularity of a theological concept called the Great Chain of Being, in which all life on earth, from the tiniest microorganism to God, is linked in a continuous chain.[59] The extinction of a species was impossible under this model, as it would create gaps or missing links in the chain and destroy the natural order.[58][59] Thomas Jefferson was a firm supporter of the Great Chain of Being and an opponent of extinction,[58][60] famously denying the extinction of the wooly mammoth on the grounds that nature never allows a race of animals to become extinct.[61]

text: A series of fossils were discovered in the late 17th century that appeared unlike any living species. As a result, the scientific community embarked on a voyage of creative rationalization, seeking to understand what had happened to these species within a framework that did not account for total extinction. In October 1686, Robert Hooke presented an impression of a nautilus to the Royal Society that was more than two feet in diameter,[62] and morphologically distinct from any known living species. Hooke theorized that this was simply because the species lived in the deep ocean and no one had discovered them yet.[59] While he contended that it was possible a species could be "lost", he thought this highly unlikely.[59] Similarly, in 1695, Thomas Molyneux published an account of enormous antlers found in Ireland that did not belong to any extant taxa in that area.[63][60] Molyneux reasoned that they came from the North American moose and that the animal had once been common on the British Isles.[63] Rather than suggest that this indicated the possibility of species going extinct, he argued that although organisms could become locally extinct, they could never be entirely lost and would continue to exist in some unknown region of the globe.[63] Using the antlers as evidence for this position, Molyneux described how moose had continued to exist in North America even as they were lost to the British Isles.[60] The antlers were later confirmed to be from the extinct Irish elk Megaloceros.[60] Hooke and Molyneux's line of thinking was difficult to disprove. When parts of the world had not been thoroughly examined and charted, scientists could not rule out that animals found only in the fossil record were not simply "hiding" in unexplored regions of the Earth.[64]

text: Georges Cuvier is credited with establishing the modern conception of extinction in a 1796 lecture to the French Institute,[61][57] though he would spend most of his career trying to convince the wider scientific community of his theory.[65] Cuvier was a well-regarded geologist, lauded for his ability to reconstruct the anatomy of an unknown species from a few fragments of bone.[57] His primary evidence for extinction came from mammoth skulls found in the Paris basin.[57] Cuvier recognized them as distinct from any known living species of elephant, and argued that it was highly unlikely such an enormous animal would go undiscovered.[57] In 1812, Cuvier, along with Alexandre Bronigniart & Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, mapped the strata of the Paris basin.[59] They saw alternating saltwater and freshwater deposits, as well as patterns of the appearance and disappearance of fossils throughout the record.[60][65] From these patterns, Cuvier inferred historic cycles of catastrophic flooding, extinction, and repopulation of the earth with new species.[60][65]

text: Cuvier’s fossil evidence showed that very different life forms existed in the past than those that exist today, a fact that was accepted by most scientists.[58] The primary debate focused whether this turnover caused by extinction was gradual or abrupt in nature.[65] Cuvier understood extinction to be the result of cataclysmic events that wipe out huge numbers of species, as opposed to the gradual decline of a species over time.[66] His catastrophic view of the nature of extinction garnered him many opponents in the newly emerging school of uniformitarianism.[66]

text: Jean-Baptist Lamarck, a gradualist and colleague of Cuvier, saw the fossils of different life forms as evidence of the mutable character of species.[65] While Lamarck did not deny the possibility of extinction, he believed that it was exceptional and rare and that most of the change in species over time was due to gradual change.[65] Unlike Cuvier, Lamarck was skeptical that catastrophic events of a scale large enough to cause total extinction were possible. In his geological history of the earth titled Hydrogeologie, Lamarck instead argued that the surface of the earth was shaped by gradual erosion and deposition by water, and that species changed over time in response to the changing environment.[65][67]

text: Charles Lyell, a noted geologist and founder of uniformitarianism, believed that past processes should be understood using present day processes. Like Lamarck, Lyell acknowledged that extinction could occur, noting the total extinction of the dodo and the extirpation of indigenous horses to the British Isles.[59] He similarly argued against mass extinctions, believing that any extinction must be a gradual process.[57][61] Lyell also showed that Cuvier’s original interpretation of the Parisian strata was incorrect. Instead of the catastrophic floods inferred by Cuvier, Lyell demonstrated that patterns of saltwater and freshwater deposits, like those seen in the Paris basin, could be formed by a slow rise and fall of sea levels.[60]

text: The concept of extinction was integral to Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species, with less fit lineages disappearing over time. For Darwin, extinction was a constant side effect of competition.[68] Because of the wide reach of On the Origin of Species, it was widely accepted that extinction occurred gradually and evenly (a concept we now refer to as background extinction).[61] It was not until 1982, when David Raup and Jack Sepkoski published their seminal paper on mass extinctions, that Cuvier was vindicated and catastrophic extinction was accepted as an important mechanism. The current understanding of extinction is a synthesis of the cataclysmic extinction events proposed by Cuvier, and the background extinction events proposed by Lyell and Darwin.

text: Human attitudes and interests[edit]

text: Extinction is an important research topic in the field of zoology, and biology in general, and has also become an area of concern outside the scientific community. A number of organizations, such as the Worldwide Fund for Nature, have been created with the goal of preserving species from extinction. Governments have attempted, through enacting laws, to avoid habitat destruction, agricultural over-harvesting, and pollution. While many human-caused extinctions have been accidental, humans have also engaged in the deliberate destruction of some species, such as dangerous viruses, and the total destruction of other problematic species has been suggested. Other species were deliberately driven to extinction, or nearly so, due to poaching or because they were "undesirable", or to push for other human agendas. One example was the near extinction of the American bison, which was nearly wiped out by mass hunts sanctioned by the United States government, to force the removal of Native Americans, many of whom relied on the bison for food.[69]

text: Biologist Bruce Walsh of the University of Arizona states three reasons for scientific interest in the preservation of species: genetic resources, ecosystem stability, and ethics;[70] and today the scientific community "stress[es] the importance" of maintaining biodiversity.[70][71]

text: In modern times, commercial and industrial interests often have to contend with the effects of production on plant and animal life. However, some technologies with minimal, or no, proven harmful effects on Homo sapiens can be devastating to wildlife (for example, DDT).[72] Biogeographer Jared Diamond notes that while big business may label environmental concerns as "exaggerated", and often cause "devastating damage", some corporations find it in their interest to adopt good conservation practices, and even engage in preservation efforts that surpass those taken by national parks.[73]

text: Governments sometimes see the loss of native species as a loss to ecotourism,[74] and can enact laws with severe punishment against the trade in native species in an effort to prevent extinction in the wild. Nature preserves are created by governments as a means to provide continuing habitats to species crowded by human expansion. The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity has resulted in international Biodiversity Action Plan programmes, which attempt to provide comprehensive guidelines for government biodiversity conservation. Advocacy groups, such as The Wildlands Project[75] and the Alliance for Zero Extinctions,[76] work to educate the public and pressure governments into action.

text: People who live close to nature can be dependent on the survival of all the species in their environment, leaving them highly exposed to extinction risks. However, people prioritize day-to-day survival over species conservation; with human overpopulation in tropical developing countries, there has been enormous pressure on forests due to subsistence agriculture, including slash-and-burn agricultural techniques that can reduce endangered species's habitats.[77]

text: Planned extinction[edit]

text: Completed[edit]

text:
The smallpox virus is now extinct in the wild,[78] although samples are retained in laboratory settings.
The rinderpest virus, which infected domestic cattle, is now extinct in the wild.[79]

text: Proposed[edit]

text: The poliovirus is now confined to small parts of the world due to extermination efforts.[80]

text: Dracunculus medinensis, a parasitic worm which causes the disease dracunculiasis, is now close to eradication thanks to efforts led by the Carter Center.[81]

text: Treponema pallidum pertenue, a bacterium which causes the disease yaws, is in the process of being eradicated.

text: Biologist Olivia Judson has advocated the deliberate extinction of certain disease-carrying mosquito species. In a September 25, 2003 New York Times article, she advocated "specicide" of thirty mosquito species by introducing a genetic element which can insert itself into another crucial gene, to create recessive "knockout genes".[82] She says that the Anopheles mosquitoes (which spread malaria) and Aedes mosquitoes (which spread dengue fever, yellow fever, elephantiasis, and other diseases) represent only 30 species; eradicating these would save at least one million human lives per annum, at a cost of reducing the genetic diversity of the family Culicidae by only 1%. She further argues that since species become extinct "all the time" the disappearance of a few more will not destroy the ecosystem: "We're not left with a wasteland every time a species vanishes. Removing one species sometimes causes shifts in the populations of other species—but different need not mean worse." In addition, anti-malarial and mosquito control programs offer little realistic hope to the 300 million people in developing nations who will be infected with acute illnesses this year. Although trials are ongoing, she writes that if they fail: "We should consider the ultimate swatting."[82]

text: Biologist E. O. Wilson has advocated the eradication of several species of mosquito, including malaria vector Anopheles gambiae. Wilson stated, "I'm talking about a very small number of species that have co-evolved with us and are preying on humans, so it would certainly be acceptable to remove them. I believe it's just common sense."[83]

text: Cloning[edit]

text: Some, such as Harvard geneticist George M. Church, believe that ongoing technological advances will let us "bring back to life" an extinct species by cloning, using DNA from the remains of that species. Proposed targets for cloning include the mammoth, the thylacine, and the Pyrenean ibex. For this to succeed, enough individuals would have to be cloned, from the DNA of different individuals (in the case of sexually reproducing organisms) to create a viable population. Though bioethical and philosophical objections have been raised,[84] the cloning of extinct creatures seems theoretically possible.[85]

text: In 2003, scientists tried to clone the extinct Pyrenean ibex (C. p. pyrenaica). This attempt failed: of the 285 embryos reconstructed, 54 were transferred to 12 mountain goats and mountain goat-domestic goat hybrids, but only two survived the initial two months of gestation before they too died.[86] In 2009, a second attempt was made to clone the Pyrenean ibex: one clone was born alive, but died seven minutes later, due to physical defects in the lungs.[87]