Featured Audience Ratings

• Jason S

  
  Well made and interesting. This is about religion. Don't let that scare you off though. While most documentary films I have seen about God are making fun of those who believe in Him this one just sets out to ask questions and lets you make your own mind up about the answers… More
  Well made and interesting. This is about religion. Don't let that scare you off though. While most documentary films I have seen about God are making fun of those who believe in Him this one just sets out to ask questions and lets you make your own mind up about the answers given. While most interviewers would go the easy route and interview some of the weaker supporters of the "other side" this one goes straight to the top minds of the field of evolution and questions them openly and honestly about what they believe. Check it out.

• danny d

  
  obviously the rub with this film is due to the emotionally charged nature of its subject matter. because of this people keep challenging the fact that this film offers no scientific data to back up any claims, when in fact the film never pretended to be about that. this is simply a… More
  obviously the rub with this film is due to the emotionally charged nature of its subject matter. because of this people keep challenging the fact that this film offers no scientific data to back up any claims, when in fact the film never pretended to be about that. this is simply a look at the loss of the freedom of ideas and beliefs being presented in a public format without fear of persecution. unlike bill maher who made a documentary this year highlighting the charlatans of religion but dishonestly passing them off as the norm, stein offers an interesting look at a sad series of events in academia that should worry the religious and non religious alike. a bit tedious at points, but overall compelling.

• Curtis L

  
  I think he had his heart in the right place. The overarching message: That the scientific community is close minded and you have to kick against the pricks to change it. Most ground breaking scientists had to do that, in face most anybody anywhere that changed any ideas has had to… More
  I think he had his heart in the right place. The overarching message: That the scientific community is close minded and you have to kick against the pricks to change it. Most ground breaking scientists had to do that, in face most anybody anywhere that changed any ideas has had to do that. I think it would be a good idea if intelligent design was further studied and explored with some actual money, because it's STUPID to think that scientist's have it all figured out. I think both can be right, with parts not fully understood yet. Anyways, the 'documentary' does what most movies made for entertainment try and do...they try to entertain. Not a good idea when you're trying to prove a serious point. Putting up funny black and white videos to insult someone after they just spoke only makes you look like a jerk. Not only that, but the video goes into a completely unnecessary tangent about Darwinism leading to Hitler. STUPID. That took it so far that it only hurts his already credible argument.

• Nate Z

  
  [CENTER][img]http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/556/539wlz4.jpg[/img][/CENTER] [COLOR=DarkRed][FONT=Arial]Ben Stein is best known as the monotone teacher in [I]Ferris Bueller's Day Off[/I], but the man has also been a speechwriter for Nixon, a game show host, and popular… More
  [CENTER][img]http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/556/539wlz4.jpg[/img][/CENTER] [COLOR=DarkRed][FONT=Arial]Ben Stein is best known as the monotone teacher in [I]Ferris Bueller's Day Off[/I], but the man has also been a speechwriter for Nixon, a game show host, and popular figure of deadpanned irony. [I]Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed[/I] follows Stein as he travels across the world interviewing scientists, authors, professors, and others about what he sees as a disservice to science and America. "Big Science," as he refers, is so heavily entrenched in the theory of evolution and the teachings of Charles Darwin that they are unwilling to even broach alternative approaches. Intelligent Design believes that life is far too complicated to occur randomly, and thus must have been created by some powerful supernatural designer. The teaching of evolution is still seen as a controversial subject and I.D. proponents want their theory to be given equal time. Stein tries to skew his argument into one about freedom. The Constitution calls for the freedom of speech and our nation is built upon the bedrock of being a marketplace of ideas. Stein compares the resistance in the scientific community to Intelligence Design to the Berlin Wall, and he argues that I.D. proponents just want to open up the dialogue. Detractors warn that I.D. is just Creationism in sheep's clothing, and indeed the U.S. courts have ruled the same way. The problem with Intelligent Design is that it can't really apply to science. Science can only test what exists in the natural world, and religion by definition deals with the supernatural and thus can't be tested. It's one thing to say, "The sky is blue because God made it so," but what else do you do with that as a scientist? Where do you go from there as a teacher? Science textbooks would be awfully thin, since you would just need one sentence to sum up all of existence. Evolution begins with the start of life and no one has a strong feel for how life began, but I.D. runs into the same wall if you think about it. Saying, "God created life" leads to the question, "How was God created?" and now we're back where we started. Personally, I don't see why evolution and religion have to be seen as forces that cancel each other out. Ignoring the subject matter, [I]Expelled[/I] just doesn't even work effectively as an expose documentary. The movie continuously jumps to old newsreel footage as a visual resource even for mundane conversations. It happens again and again. Either the filmmakers thought their audience had ADD or was too stupid to sit through an interview without several jump cuts to visual reference points. Some of the clips are fun in a goofy retro way but the whole decision comes across like a narrative crutch and it makes [I]Expelled[/I] feel erratic. Stein doesn't try very hard to disguise his interview style, which includes him leading his interview subjects and lobbing softball questions like, "Intelligent Design is just Creationism, right," and the audacious, "What was the purpose of the concentration camps?" I think it is telling that the interview subjects are not given lengthy reactions and are not pressed into actually presenting what Intelligent Design proof that exists. In contrast, the evolutionary scientists interviewed are intercut with clips of Nazis and Communists soldiers. I don't even think Michael Moore would have chosen to go that obvious, manipulative route. While I'm on the subject of Moore, Stein follows some similar ambush tactics and they are obvious and obnoxious. Stein tries to walk into the Smithsonian Center to get a statement as to why a prominent scientist was released and ends up getting kicked out. Did he expect anything different? Portions of [I]Expelled[/I] come across as transparently staged, and upon some research I have learned that some were indeed staged. The film opens and closes with Stein addressing a full crowd of college students. They erupt in rapturous applause by the end of his speech and give the man a standing ovation. That crowd was nothing more than paid extras and Stein has never traveled the college circuit to speak on Intelligent Design. The scientists that were interviewed were also misinformed and told that they were being filmed for a documentary called [I]Crossroads [/I]about the "intersection of science and religion." The evolution scientists interviewed were then barred from free public screenings. That should tell you something. Scientists being blacklisted by their peers seems rather unfair, but the movie takes their subjects strictly at face value. I am convinced there is more to the story than [I]Expelled[/I] lets on. One woman off-handedly mentioned the phrase, and that was all, and was let go. I want to know more, but the film apparently doesn't. Stein even cuts her interview off and dubs his own voice over as she continues her story. I would have appreciated some interviews with scientists who believe in evolution and God. Given that approximately 99.97 percent of life scientists believe in the theory of evolution, so statistically there must be a healthy slew of scientists who happen to be Christians that believe in the existence of evolution. The film is heavy-handed propaganda, sure, but man oh man does it just take an ugly turn in its last third. Ben Stein eventually makes the leap from evolution to ? wait for it ? Nazism and the extermination of those less desirable. Stein and some of his interview subjects are making the case that Hitler was directly influenced by the tenets of evolution and that he used Darwin's template to snuff out Jews, Gypsies, gays, the handicapped, and all those holding back the human race with their inferior genetics. There are many steps removed from Darwin to Hitler, but Stein is laying the blame of the Holocaust at the feet of Darwin's ideas. Arguably, exterminating an inferior race could be applied to the idea of natural selection (though forcibly killing millions doesn't seem very natural to me) but people were killing each other long before Darwin was ever born. Before Darwin, there was still genocide in the name of eliminating those deemed inferior, and mostly it was performed with the justification of religion. Surely historically religion has been the motivator for more death than Darwin (count the Crusades and the Inquisition). Even specifically Jews have been persecuted and put to mass death centuries before Darwin. And what about all the countries in the world that have embraced evolution as science and not gassed millions of people? But Stein persists in trying to attach the Holocaust and Nazism to evolution. To me, this is like blaming [I]The Catcher in the Rye[/I] for shooting John Lennon in the head. Darwin posited ideas and cannot be blamed for others perverting those ideas for their own gain. The film also glosses over the fact that it was Herbert Spencer who introduced the phrase "survival of the fittest," And yet after spending a good deal of time linking Darwin and the Holocaust, Stein throws out this caveat: "But I know that Darwinism doesn't automatically lead to Nazism." Expelled is filled with other such contradictions. It argues that science and, specifically, evolution does not disqualify the existence of God, and to this I agree whole-heartedly. Science provides the "how" in life and religion can provide the "why" for people. Science does not disqualify God and vice versa; however, [I]Expelled[/I] then trumps interview after interview of scientists that explain how evolution turned them into atheists. Huh? The film presses the irritating and confusing point that evolution will turn everyone into a bunch of atheists, but this conflicts with one of the film's central points on the roles of religion and science. Stein never goes into great detail in this area and ignores the fact that a majority of the American public is both religious and believes in evolution. [I]Expelled[/I] starts to become an ideological dartboard by the end of its experience. Stein says evolution is responsible for eugenics, which lead to the idea of population control, which lead to Margaret Sanger founding Planned Parenthood. My reaction is: so? Planned Parenthood promotes safe sex and performs legal abortions, yes, but they have nothing to do with eugenics and religion. Henry Ford and Walt Disney were also believers in eugenics. But the interview subjects all seem to repeat the phrase "euthanasia and abortion" like it was a talking point they were handed. The exact phrasing is so precise for several interview subjects that it seems deceptive. Why does this matter at all in a movie reportedly about Intelligence Design? I cannot honestly see anyone being converted by [I]Expelled[/I]. Skeptics and believers in evolution will fail to be swayed, and for the large Christian community the film is courting, well it will be preaching to the choir. I just discovered that there's a website called expelledexposed.com intent to hold Stein's film to review. I'm a firm believer in evolution and that Intelligent Design is religion; yeah they don't specify "who," but how many I.D. proponents were the same ones pushing Creationism in schools earlier? If they stick to the tenets of Intelligent Design then I'd like them to accept the Raelians in their camp (Raelians believe that aliens seeded our planet). [I]Expelled[/I] never makes the case for why Intelligent Design should be taught, merely that it is unfair to exclude it from the classroom. The movie presents contradictions, logic fallacies, and some disconcerting guilt-by-association arguments that border on exploitation. Even though I disagree with its ideology, from a filmmaking standpoint it falls apart. The topic of evolution's relationship to religion deserves a thoughtful and intelligent movie. This is not it. Nate's Grade: D[/FONT][/COLOR]

• Byron B

  
  Ben Stein equates himself to Ronald Reagan and the fight for the freedom to explore ID to tearing down the Berlin Wall. Whereas Religulous is funny with lots of colorful clips inserted to make fun of the ideas, this movie has almost exclusively used old black and white clips, many… More
  Ben Stein equates himself to Ronald Reagan and the fight for the freedom to explore ID to tearing down the Berlin Wall. Whereas Religulous is funny with lots of colorful clips inserted to make fun of the ideas, this movie has almost exclusively used old black and white clips, many from propaganda films, to try to makes its point. The movie offers no data or proof of ID (or how it is really not the same as Creationism) from any research. And it exaggerates how scientists have lost their jobs specifically for trying to research ID. The movie is arguing against Darwin's theory of evolution and then tries to attack it as insufficient for explaining how life began. Except Darwin's theory isn't about how life began, scientists have been working on many other theories for how this happened. Ben Stein and the filmmakers only let the evolutionists express a couple of the theories that have been developed for how the first cells formed, and at times try to put words in their mouths. It's not mentioned in the film, but maybe you've heard of the Collider the European Center for Nuclear Research has built in Geneva to recreate the big bang. Then the filmmakers start to make the dangerous and ignorant claim that Social Darwinism or any genocide that has been committed against a people is because of the theory of evolution. Evil, crazy, power-hungry rulers whether religious or secular have had the idea of genocide and used it against those they view as inferior long before Darwin. Germany was a very Christian nation when Hitler came to power, not all god-less and de-valuing of human life. One evolutionary scientist seems overly depressed and cynical and makes some ridiculous claims like once you accept evolution you can't believe in free will anymore either. Other than him, I think all the other evolutionary scientists succeed in holding their own and making Stein look slow and confused. The ID scientists often make extreme claims and engage in double-talk. Anyways, this is yet another documentary on a controversial topic that had to rely on misrepresenting itself to several interviewees to secure interviews. You can tell Richard Dawkins near the end becomes annoyed when he realizes the direction Stein is trying to take the questioning. But he still answers as clearly as possible when not cut off. He even states, when prompted by Stein, that one theory for the forming of the first life, is that there could be some sort of intelligence that pushed the molecules into the right amino acids to form proteins to build the first cells. He doesn't say the evidence supports this, but that it is one of many theories about this (not to be confused with Darwinism). Science is not the democratic equal expression of opinions, it is based on data and evidence. There is freedom to research scientifically and this movie is too harsh in portraying ID and evolution as being at war or on opposite sides of the Berlin Wall.

• Dannielle A

  
  There has been much opposition surrounding this movie but when I saw it, it was a stand up and applaud 5 star masterpiece. Not only was it cleverly composed, snarky, humorous, but it was EXTREMELY important to see. It was very patriotic and unpolitically correct. (But it was polite… More
  There has been much opposition surrounding this movie but when I saw it, it was a stand up and applaud 5 star masterpiece. Not only was it cleverly composed, snarky, humorous, but it was EXTREMELY important to see. It was very patriotic and unpolitically correct. (But it was polite and fair to both sides.) I loved it very much!!

• Joseph E

  
  I Liked it's Cheerful Personality, But Loathed it's Arrogant Attitude.

• Lord N

  
  PLEASE READ MY ENTIRE REVIEW CAREFULLY IT IS IMPORTANT TO ME TO GET YOUR FULL THOUGHTS ON THIS ONE. AND PLEASE, DO NOT LET MY OPINIONS OF THIS ONE LOWER YOUR OPINIONS OF ME!!! I WOULD HATE THAT!!! Well, since this is a Documentary, my normal style of acting, Plot, screenplay, and… More
  PLEASE READ MY ENTIRE REVIEW CAREFULLY IT IS IMPORTANT TO ME TO GET YOUR FULL THOUGHTS ON THIS ONE. AND PLEASE, DO NOT LET MY OPINIONS OF THIS ONE LOWER YOUR OPINIONS OF ME!!! I WOULD HATE THAT!!! Well, since this is a Documentary, my normal style of acting, Plot, screenplay, and Likableness is hard to do. I can do plot and Likableness so yeah. I guess that's what I'll do. Plot: *sigh* well, If I thought that my review of The Passion would be controversial, well, that isn't going to be anything compared to this. now, I have never, nor will I ever, make my Christian beliefs a secret. I hate that I am forced to learn evolution as though it is fact. What sucks is, that people ALWAYS call it The THEORY of Evolution. But they teach it as fact and if it is a theory, why don't we learn other theories in school? Well, basically, what this documentary is, is Ben Stein showing how There is absolutely zero tolerance for Intelligent Design. Despite the fact that a good scientist looks at all theories. Scientists nowadays only look at possibilities within the realm of the THEORY of Evolution. If they don't then they are looked at as bad scientists or even religious kooks. There is much more that Ben Stein delves into such as how Darwinism played a big part in the Holocaust. I agree with that. While I'm fully aware that it wasn't the only cause, I know that Hitler saw his Final Solution as helping Natural Selection along. He was trying to create a master race by destroying all of those that he saw unfit (a note, Japan and Italy were doing the exact same thing during this time, Italy didn't commit Genocide, but the Japanese were pretty hard on the Chinese). My Take: Well, I know that people who don't believe that this stuff is happening just sweep this under the rug and say that this is totally bogus and "fact free" But I have seen comments on critics' reviews for this film and I see that people are saying that "yes this happens to me. I see this persecution a lot." Basically, if you believe in intelligent design you are going to love this film if you don't you are going to hate it and call all of us religious morons. Ben Stein interviewed many Evolutionist professors and one thing that really got me burned up was how many of them saw religion the same way that they see medicinal Marijuana. Just something that makes us feel good so that we can get through the week or maybe they see it as some sort of hobby like knitting. I can tell you firsthand, that something that defines you and is the core of your being is much more than a simply "hobby." Now I know all of the numerous criticisms of this subject. "oh waah waah you guys are just pretending to by martyrs to get sympathy" "oh boo hoo blah blah blah "flying spaghetti monster" blah blah" But the biggest thing that got me riled was Richard Dawkins. If you listen closely, you can hear him saying over and over again "I am the greatest thing to happen to the world since Darwin and everything I say is right and anyone who disagrees with me is a retard" He frustrates me. Stein also points out that this subject isn't an intelligent debate anymore it is just "Here's why you guy's are retards" I will not lie and say that evolutionists are the only ones doing it, but AAAAH it is frustrating. I hate being taught what I see as total falsities and being forced to pretend I believe them. I went through High School science classes, I experienced this stuff. Now I see this and I learn that it gets worse almost when I go out into the real world. I hate being taught baloney (what's interesting is that I'm a History major and I have found out that most of what I learned in my History classes all throughout my life was actually flat out lies. It wasn't like this where people actually believed what they were teaching, it was flat out lies. For more on that, I can write a blog if you all want me to). Well, I know that this review is deviating a bit from the actual film, but there you have it. But, before I go I must say this: I have no problem that people have their own beliefs but please don't persecute us for ours. Also, I have no problem with Macroevolution, Natural selection as a result of the changing environment, sure. But what I do have a problem with is the Origin of life stuff. The Single cell to monkeys to humans crap. I draw an example from the film, Stein interviews professors and asks them "If Darwin saw a cell as...what is it actually?" He asked "Buick" and the response was "If Darwin saw a cell as being as complicated as a Buick, it is actually as complicated as a Galaxy" Stein then asked "mud hut" and the response was "more complicated than a Saturn 5". Let the Thumbs Down and skepticism begin. And if you feel the need to get into a debate with me on this subject, A. Try to make it a message to me as opposed to 50 comments on my review and B. try to keep it respectful. I know that won't be a problem but I just have to say it. So yeah, there you go. Final score: 100% (N) TRIVIA TIME:Preview screenings for the movie were held for churches and other Christian groups months in advance, and by invitation only. After a movie critic was inadvertently allowed to view the film early, resulting in a negative review, a policy of requiring viewers to sign nondisclosure agreements was implemented at these screenings. Closer to release, an "RSVP" site was set up to allow members of the public to view the movie in a near-finished state. One of these was evolutionary biologist and Expelled interviewee PZ Myers. Although ejected from the screening, his anonymous guests - including fellow interviewee, biologist Richard Dawkins - were able to view the movie.

• Lovable M

  
  Wow, fantastic movie. The film didn't prove anything one way or another, but I don't think that's what it was trying to do. It wanted to make you think about how we really were created, what you were taught in school and how that's affected the way you think, and… More
  Wow, fantastic movie. The film didn't prove anything one way or another, but I don't think that's what it was trying to do. It wanted to make you think about how we really were created, what you were taught in school and how that's affected the way you think, and how the US is suppressing other ideas to unproven theories.

• nathometer

  
  It was better then I though it was going to be. I don't agree with all the point he was making.

• Sean S

  
  I could give a damn about evolution or intelligent design except as a bit of sophist shouting material it makes very little difference in mine or anyone else's existence. What I don't care for is paying for a movie that both doesn't inform me or entertain me. Stein… More
  I could give a damn about evolution or intelligent design except as a bit of sophist shouting material it makes very little difference in mine or anyone else's existence. What I don't care for is paying for a movie that both doesn't inform me or entertain me. Stein goes on a Michael Moore ambush junket with all the zeal but none of the fun. He blasts evolution (and some how compares the theory to the Nazi's- fastest way to lose any debate in my book), he presents "experts" who poke holes but don't offer any alternatives except the phrase "intelligent design" like it was the be all end all explanation. Well great, Thor or the Faeries or Yaweh or Aliens are screwing with us ultimately so Stein can make a movie and I can be bored to tears. I mean at least I can see the point of Evolution theory it has lead to many discoveries in biology and genetics, whether it is wrong or not. What does intelligent design bring to the table can we catch the faeries that have created us or turn the tables on god and use him to power some windmills. That's the question Stein and everyone else in this movie sidesteps there is no apparent benefit to the intelligent design argument. Give me something people. If there had of been a balanced argument I could have seen this movie being this dry but with the poorly plotted arguments and the zany sinister camera lighting on the Evolution side you'd think they would have at least tried to make it more entertaining. There truly is no intelligence.

Read all 11 featured audience ratings