…and this is a 
I get email
Category: Creationism • Kooks
Posted on: April 27, 2008 6:11 PM, by PZ Myers
This is some email I suspect a lot of you have already received; look at it through new eyes, though.
It's from Premise Media (I'm on their mailing list, and have been for a long time…how else could I have gotten an invitation to their premiere?), and I present it here as I received it, except that I stripped out most of the links. Notice anything familiar?
Ben Stein's movie is now in danger of being “Expelled” from theaters
Despite:
A “Top 10” box office opening…
Standing ovations in theaters…
Scathing critics and raving fans…Expelled is being sued by YOKO ONO – and she's demanding that it be booted from THEATERS NOW!
If you haven’t done so already, PLEASE SEE EXPELLED NOW; its future relies on you.
Check HERE to see where EXPELLED
is playing near you (1,000 screens nationwide)
Click HERE to hear a special message from Ben Stein
Despite harsh reviews from liberal critics, predictions of box
office failure and ridiculous lawsuits, EXPELLED has become
a FAN FAVORITE:
- #5 in per screen box office ($3,000 per screen)
- #9 overall, despite being on only half the screens of its competitors
- EXPELLED may become one of the top 10 box-office performing documentaries of all time.
"It opened as one of the most commercially successful releases for any documentary film," said the Christian Post.
BUT BEN STEIN NEEDS YOUR HELP…
Secular critics, atheist groups, and now the beloved Yoko Ono are black balling EXPELLED and trying to get it out of theaters.
Without strong support from leaders like you, EXPELLED could get tossed from the theaters.
PLEASE get out to SEE EXPELLED THIS WEEK. Ben is risking his career by taking on the world's leading atheists, and he can’t do it alone – he needs your support.
CLICK HERE to take a GROUP to see EXPELLED.
Please forward this email to friends and contacts!
Font size changes, random underlining, random color changes — it is so typical of creationist email. If I didn't know that these gomers had millions of dollars at their disposal, I'd consider this to be yet another rant from a lone fruitcake living in his mother's basement.
Notice too the palpable hysteria and desperation. "Oh noes! Our movie is tanking!!! You have to come see it!" It's also rife with contradictions; it's a "fan favorite", but at the same time it needs more people to come to the theater, its future relies on it. Attendance will not influence the course of the lawsuit from Yoko Ono, despite their complaints. This whole thing is laughably incoherent.
Have you seen any "blackballing" of this movie by atheist groups? No, none at all. There have been no picket lines, no harrassment of attendees, no threats to theater owners — atheist groups, such as Minnesota Atheists, have even held group trips to see this bad movie, the better to critique it. The reason there aren't any butts in the seats is that they made a lousy movie. If you want to know why it's sinking fast, look to the reviews.
They undermine their own premise, too. They need more people to attend so that the movie isn't "expelled" — apparently, "expelled" is now a synonym for "flopped". I can agree with their idea now: Sternberg, Crocker, Gonzalez, etc., are all failures in the competition for ideas, just as their movie is a failure in the competition for attendance.
Comments
I think my favorite part of that ridiculous e-mail was this:
Beloved?! These people really are totally out of touch with reality...
((disclaimer: I personally don't take issue with Yoko, but the fact of the matter is that she's not exactly beloved in the public eye....))
Posted by: Etha Williams | April 27, 2008 6:15 PM
PZ,
Yeah, I got this too, and I think it's great news! It means that they think they're going to lose. I wrote a blog post about it... I'm crossing my fingers.
http://acandidworld.wordpress.com/2008/04/27/expelled-expelled/
Posted by: Ames | April 27, 2008 6:15 PM
You know, this e-mail actually did convince me of something, though:
I was considering going out and seeing the movie sometime this week (out of the same masochistic inclination that compels me to "debate" creobots and and read the Left Behind books), but now I'm pretty sure I won't...though I suppose theater hopping is still an option...but doing as these people ask, even partially, seems abhorrent...
Posted by: Etha Williams | April 27, 2008 6:19 PM
Perhaps these people have never heard of the marketplace of ideas, and the competition therein. Now, markets in reality don't always "expel" the worst ideas. If they did, my guess is the world would be a lot bright place to live. It just is dumbfounding though, to see how these fools act out of self-righteous, oozing, banal fear. They do normal everyday things like everyone else, yet when it comes to rubbing two brain cells together and thinking, they react like most of the world's got ebola and they're about to be infected.
Posted by: BlueIndependent | April 27, 2008 6:23 PM
i like this:
yeh! i too will risk my career to help you take on those Leading Atheists, Ben!
Posted by: alex | April 27, 2008 6:31 PM
Plus they completely leave out the fact that its numbers have been boosted by the kickback scheme to force children in Xian schools to see it. I believe that the time runs out ten days after opening, so that source of inflating their numbers is soon to disappear.
Of course they're scared, they might have to pay for what they've stolen, and it's a pathetic movie by any standards. Even the egregious DI fellow Michael Medved believes that it goes too far in comparing "Big Science" to Nazis (still gave it 3 out of 4 stars), though he doesn't exactly advertise the fact.
They know their audience, though. The writing is paranoid tabloid screed, both in format and in content.
Glen Davidson
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Glen Davidson | April 27, 2008 6:32 PM
These people remind me of the Clintons: we can't be failing on our own merits; it must be someone else's fault.
Oh, and Dr. Myers, please remember to put the Google bomb link for Expelled in the story someplace. Couldn't hurt.
Posted by: Paul Lundgren | April 27, 2008 6:34 PM
It's nice to see natural selection getting its revenge. It's ok to anthropomorphize it in order for Mathis, Stein, et al to understand what I'm trying to say, isn't it?
Posted by: Mena | April 27, 2008 6:35 PM
Sounds like the writer just had a big spray can removed...
Posted by: Milo Johnson | April 27, 2008 6:35 PM
I agree with #3 above. I barely have time to go to the movie theatre anymore, but was considering going to see this the better to critique the film. I'll have to wait to netflix this one, though, and let them wallow in financial ruin. Ah, schadenfreude!
Posted by: Matlatzinca | April 27, 2008 6:38 PM
Expelled is certain to live forever in DVD form as one of the pinnacles of creationist creativity. In Ben Stein it has a semi-star (okay, so he's no Kirk Cameron) and its budget was big enough (filmed on more than one continent!) so that it doesn't entirely look like a spare-bedroom production. Eager creationists will buy up copies and press it on their friends as unwanted gifts. Groups of true believers will gather to watch it together and shake their heads in wonderment that it did not succeed in converting the whole world with its brilliance.
Its commercial success, however, will be decidedly second tier. According to Box Office Mojo, Expelled's receipts for Friday were nearly 63% lower than the take for Friday a week okay. Virtually all films do worse in their second week of release, but for a documentary film that finished back in the pack on its opening weekend, it's an indication that the movie doesn't have strong legs. DVDs will be out soon. DVDs and ... immortality!
Posted by: Zeno | April 27, 2008 6:39 PM
Heh, creationist burn. I love that Ben's antics have caught the attention of my favorite youtuber Thunderf00t and his "Why People Laugh at Creationists parts 23 and 24"
Posted by: Seth | April 27, 2008 6:47 PM
[sarcasm] Hey! Capitalism is just another form of Darwinists trying to suppress free speech. By applying their dangerous "survival of the fittest" notions to industries such as the movie business, they're allowing smart new ideas to be expelled from the supposedly "free" market. [/sarcasm]
Posted by: Etha Williams | April 27, 2008 6:49 PM
I love it when Christian groups prominently support a Jew (or Jewish cause), without mentioning that if Christian theology is true, the eternal fate of all Jews will be exactly the same as that of the evil atheists they are both abhor. Or when the Jew accepts the Christian support and adulation without, apparently, any qualms. Besides Ben Stein, Michael Medved and Dr. Laura come to mind, and of course most of the neo-cons. I actually saw a rabbi on John Hagee's show the other day.
Don't get me wrong, I certainly want people of all (and no) religion to get along, but I don't get why Jews so often make common cause with people who believe that they will spend all eternity in unbeable anguish simply because they're not Christian.
Posted by: MS | April 27, 2008 6:51 PM
The creobots hope that Expelled
will not be viciously derailed.
They hope you won't see
the truth of the movie:
in the marketplace of ideas they have failed.
But one truth I hope lingers on:
After all is at last said and done
because of this flick
and the creationists schtick
Ben Stein's credibility is gone.
I can't help but to be amused
at how often these morons confuse
scientists questioning "why"
and a zombie Jew in the sky.
Their IDiocy leaves me bemused.
Perhaps if they pray hard enough
(Hey! It could work! Don't you laugh!)
Their magic Dad in the air
will come down from his lair
and heroically save this dumb stuff.
But I won't try holding my breath.
It'd make more sense freebasing meth.
I wonder if I
make them laugh or cry
as I am mocking their cult of death.
Posted by: Rich Stage | April 27, 2008 6:52 PM
My blog post on Expelled attracted the good folks at Wikipedia and someone cited it in their article on the movie. That's right! I am now a source for the world's greatest compendium of human knowledge. I'll enjoy it while it lasts. Not long, I'm sure: my fifteen seconds of fame.
Posted by: Zeno | April 27, 2008 6:53 PM
Ben is risking his career by taking on the world's leading atheists, and he can't do it alone - he needs your support.
How is he risking his career? Most people aren't even atheists. It must be a really really horribly bad movie or something.
Posted by: 386sx | April 27, 2008 6:54 PM
Hypothesis 1: Bad publicity from a large number of highly visible, mainstream outlets quashed Expelled's chance of succeeding outside its narrow core demographic.
Hypothesis 2: Nobody reviews a movie these days without Googling it.
Hypothesis 3: The concerted effort by online science writers to debunk Expelled and make the debunking widely known influenced the aforesaid reviewers, even if it didn't reach the public directly.
If these hypotheses are more or less true, then. . . good job, everybody.
Posted by: Blake Stacey | April 27, 2008 6:57 PM
Does anyone know what are top ten box-office documentaries? Probably half of them were directed by Michael Moore.
Posted by: Corey Schlueter | April 27, 2008 7:01 PM
It appears that they are admitting that their days are numbered on Expelled remaining in theaters for very long. But it won't take Yoko Ono to do that for them. During a prime-time Saturday night showing here in the MIDWEST, I counted only 10 audience members, in an already small theater. It's already dead, down to #13 on Friday, falling fast.
My review will come this week when there's more time for me to write it.
Posted by: Inoculated Mind | April 27, 2008 7:01 PM
It's quite fascinating, though. I think Prof. Dennett is right; religions are wonderfully designed with all sorts of defence mechanisms for every situation.
When you think about it, one thing that Christianity really did for the world, out doing, I would suggest, the Orthodox Judaism from which it grew, was really developing this whole "Manichaean" (well, ok, I know Manichaeanism was historically thought of as a heresy) notion of Satan, as not merely being the "prosecuting attorney" for God as in Judaism, but as being the seditious enemy. It really allows for a... in a sense, a sort of immunological defence, a rapid mobilisation under strenuous circumstances whereby, if you're winning, it merely means that you have to keep a watch out for the heresy and satanisms you're not seeing, and if you're losing, it's merely because the satanic elements are all overt and without guile. It's an excellent motivating factor for something like an irritated inflammation response - freak out, puff up your chest, and throw everything into the defence effort.
I suspect that one of the prime characteristics of religion is its superlativity; the fact that it provides powerful psychological excuses for throwing yourself into issues that might otherwise consume you in deliberation and reflection.
Posted by: JM Inc. | April 27, 2008 7:04 PM
Translation: We need this movie to make a lot more money before Yoko Ono owns our asses.
Posted by: Chayanov | April 27, 2008 7:05 PM
I guess this picture is appropriate here too...
http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/onionmagazine_1020.article.jpg
Posted by: JCG | April 27, 2008 7:06 PM
Here's what slays me (among other things):
"If you haven't done so already, PLEASE SEE EXPELLED NOW; its future relies on you."
Please, please, pretty please with fluffo on top, please see our movie, wontcha?
It's hilarious because they are begging PZ to visit their movie - with friends, yet.
Seems to me he tried to see it with friends but something happened to prevent that.
What a bunch of nimrods, they don't even keep their mailing list updated. The only ticket they've got is a one-way ride to Loserville - and obviously, they are more than halfway there.
Posted by: Caveat | April 27, 2008 7:07 PM
The top movies at the North American box office
Reuters
Posted: 2008-04-27 13:32:28
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Following are the top 10 films at the North American box office for the three-day weekend beginning April 25, led by the new release "Baby Mama," according to studio estimates compiled Sunday by Reuters.
1 (+) Baby Mama ...................... $18.3 million
2 (+) Harold and Kumar
Escape from Guantanamo Bay ..... $14.6 million
3 (1) The Forbidden Kingdom .......... $11.2 million
4 (2) Forgetting Sarah Marshall ...... $11.0 million
5 (5) Nim's Island ................... $ 4.5 million
6 (3) Prom Night ..................... $ 4.4 million
7 (6) 21 ............................. $ 4.0 million
8 (4) 88 Minutes ..................... $ 3.6 million
9 (8) Dr. Seuss' Horton Hears a Who! . $ 2.4 million
10 (+) Deception ...................... $ 2.2 million
NOTE: Last weekend's ranking in parentheses. + - new release.
TOTALS TO DATE
Dr. Seuss' Horton Hears a Who! .... $147.9 million
21 ................................ $ 75.8 million
Nim's Island ...................... $ 39.0 million
The Forbidden Kingdom ............. $ 38.3 million
Prom Night ........................ $ 38.1 million
Forgetting Sarah Marshall ......... $ 35.1 million
Baby Mama ......................... $ 18.3 million
Harold and Kumar
Escape From Guantanamo Bay ........ $ 14.6 million
88 Minutes ........................ $ 12.6 million
Deception ......................... $ 2.2 million
Expelled? Minime!
Posted by: Latina Amor | April 27, 2008 7:07 PM
Ben Stein spoke at the University of Vermont on Friday. My daughter texted me an on the spot report. First thing he asked was had "anyone seen Expelled." Almost no hands. "Good," he said, "because I don't want to talk about it." My daughter said he spent a great deal of time distancing himself from the film claiming that he "had nothing to do with it." Hmmmm. He was invited by the UVM business school. Guess I'm going to have to write the president a letter asking why my money was being spent to have students listen to lies from such a theocractic, anti-science, anti-academic blowhard.
Posted by: Skyblue | April 27, 2008 7:09 PM
What has not been mentioned enough at the science based sites, if at all, is to urge anyone who decided they need to see this garbage in the theaters that they should wait until more than two weeks have passed since Expelled came to the theater they're considering. Producers get a much larger share of the take in the first two weeks, so waiting two weeks significantly reduces the share of your money that reaches the fools.
Unfortunately, this movie isn't a commercial failure, it will likely beat out Roger and Me for the fifth highest ever grossing political documentary. We need to do all we can to cut into its profitability.
Posted by: Brian Schmidt | April 27, 2008 7:12 PM
Etha @ #1
Since they lumped her in with "secular critics" and "atheist groups" I'm reading that "beloved" but to be a snark.
OTT can I just say welcome to the blog. I know you haven't been here long but since you have we've all been richer for your witty, intelligent and succint comments.
Posted by: Bride of Shrek | April 27, 2008 7:12 PM
Expelled: falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus. Gaudeamus igitur!
Posted by: Latina Amor | April 27, 2008 7:12 PM
...and you succinCt comments too. Oops typo.
Posted by: Bride of Shrek | April 27, 2008 7:14 PM
I believe the word they're looking for here is "expectorated," as in being spat out. Ptui.
I haven't seen Expelled, plan never on watching it, and from all signs it appears to be having no impact on anything. Give it a year or two and it will have been forgotten by all but the most hardcore Neo-Creos... the same ones who still insist on quoting AiG today.
Posted by: Mike O'Risal | April 27, 2008 7:14 PM
Give the hacks at Premise Media credit where due: they didn't add an extraneous apostrophe to "its" in the fourth & eighth 'grafs.
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | April 27, 2008 7:14 PM
#19: The top 10 currently stands as follows:
1. Fahrenheit 9/11 $119,194,771
2. March of the Penguins $77,437,223
3. Sicko $24,540,079
4. An Inconvenient Truth $24,146,161
5. Bowling for Columbine $21,576,018
6. Madonna: Truth or Dare $15,012,935
7. Winged Migration $11,689,053
8. Super Size Me $11,536,423
9. Mad Hot Ballroom $8,117,961
10. Hoop Dreams $7,830,611
Expelled currently sits at #15, and needs another $2.5m to break into the top 10.
Posted by: MPG | April 27, 2008 7:14 PM
No, but it may influence the size of the copyright infringement damages or settlement ;)
Posted by: semi | April 27, 2008 7:14 PM
That reeks of desperation. Good.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | April 27, 2008 7:16 PM
I think this part is hilarious:
Yes, despite all THAT -- even INCLUDING "Scathing critics" -- our film is in trouble!
You know, most movies don't actually brag about bad reviews. It makes me wonder if they would have considered it an embarrassing disappointment if the critics had unanimously praised it to high heaven.
Nah. This is religion. Either your faith is reinforced -- or your faith is reinforced even more!
Posted by: Sastra | April 27, 2008 7:16 PM
semi is exactly right; every person that sees this movie will increase the damages awarded in the copyright infringement suit.
Fools.
Posted by: Chris Bell | April 27, 2008 7:17 PM
BTW: Since Prof. Dr. P.Z. "Big Meanie" Myers viciously and godlessly ripped out the link, can anyone else here with Top Level Expelled Access reveal what the special message from Ben Stein has to tell us?
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | April 27, 2008 7:23 PM
OK, Ben. I'll go see your movie. Just as a favor to save your foundering career. Because I care. Oh, wait. The nearest theater showing it is almost two hundred miles away. It's not exactly 'nationwide', is it, Ben? It played in a theater only one hundred miles away last weekend, but it was yanked in favor of Harold and Kumar. I think that's a political documentary, too. I'll see that instead. Harold and Kumar can tell me what to think, because the only thoughts I have are ones that I get from movies.
Posted by: Will TS | April 27, 2008 7:27 PM
Probably something like.
"I need you all to go and see the film, or at least a few of you,
anyone
anyone
ANYONE"
Posted by: Bride of Shrek | April 27, 2008 7:27 PM
#26:
Like bush/cheney on Iraq and NOLA, letting Stein distance himself from this p.o.s. is something we should never let happen. Tying this turkey around his neck until he disappears forever from the public eye just makes sense.
Posted by: Larry | April 27, 2008 7:28 PM
It would help if y'all wandered over to Yahoo! movies and gave it an "f". It still has a "B" for the movie user reviews!
Posted by: Kay | April 27, 2008 7:29 PM
I like the acknowledgement that their "fans" are "raving." It's the first truly honest thing they've said.
Posted by: Sioux Laris | April 27, 2008 7:29 PM
Subcommandante Yoko gives the orders, we fall in line.
Posted by: me2i81 | April 27, 2008 7:31 PM
@#21 --
It's really fascinating how Xianity has conflated the distinct entities of Satan (the adversary or prosecuting attorney of God), Lucifer (the fallen "son of Dawn" of Isaiah 14:12), Beelzebub (a specific form of the "false god" Baal, the Philistine Ba'al Zebub ["Lord of Flies"]), the Greek concept of Diabolos (origin of "devil"), and the serpent of Genesis. Then when they read things like the Book of Job, they get radically different meanings out of the story than were originally intended. It's one thing to appropriate and alter the meaning of a word for your own religion, but then to go back and apply that new meaning to texts in which it was used with its original meaning -- that's just bizarre.
Posted by: Etha Williams | April 27, 2008 7:32 PM
Beloved Yoko Ono? The stupidity, it burns...
Posted by: Moses | April 27, 2008 7:33 PM
The latest box office for the week end of the 25 until now shows a total of $ 5.3 M
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=weekend&id=expelled.htm
(They estimate they will do $ 1.4 M this week end, or a 54% drop over last week end)
So tentative forecast :
Week 1 $3.9 M
Week 2 $1.7 M
Tail $1.0 M
Total $6.7 M : 700,000 Tickets 0.2% of population
Take out 40% distibution costs, remains max $4 M for Premise media to pay for Ben Stein, the production, the huge advertising budget... They'll recover some of their losses from DVD sales but, what a bad deal.
Posted by: negentropyeater | April 27, 2008 7:35 PM
13 10 Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, this weekend's take: $1,379,000 -53.6%
Total take: $5,282,000
Which means they've probably gotten about $3 million back to them. Probably not enough to cover costs, though. Oh well. Too bad. So sad.
Posted by: Moses | April 27, 2008 7:40 PM
The Burlington Free Press reports on Ben Stein's UVM talk:
No, it doesn't make more sense in context.
The article is rather fawning, and not written by a person familiar with the issues, but perhaps that makes the unintentional ironies all the richer:
As opposed to, say, an economist?
Enough said.
Posted by: Blake Stacey | April 27, 2008 7:45 PM
Yep, their release prints alone (for 1052 theaters) cost them about $2 million. Doesn't leave much left does it? :) Especially since all many prints are being pulled.
Posted by: semi | April 27, 2008 7:47 PM
This particular "Expelled" bulletin/flyer/appeal reminds me of the hundreds (probably thousands by now - I've lost count) of snail mail notices I have received over the years. Bold and color special effects included!
I took over my grandmother's account as legal POA. I was frightened when I signed those papers to take over POA for my ex-mom in-law and her newest husband. You can imagine the horror when I was offered (and accepted - yes, by then I understood the legalese) the POA position for my mum and pop as well as one of their adopted ones. The last 13+ years has been a boon to my mail carrier but also to my shredder and recycler.
My mum and pop would have been horrified to see the actual amount of mail they got via snail mail per year. (They were both blissfully into Alzheimer's when I agreed to POA status.)
It's so much easier to send electronic notices to the "recycle bin", click of a button and not a second thought. BUT it truly is not "easier" at all. A click means they took up resources to generate the appeal and a click means I took my resources to delete the garbage.
This is anyone who receives any type of snail mail or electronic mail of any UNWANTED type - please, remove your name from those mailing/e-mail lists BEFORE your legal representatives (your kids, progeny, in-laws, friends, relatives of any sort) are forced to do this.
Posted by: LeeLeeOne | April 27, 2008 7:47 PM
I thought about going to see the movie, apparently due to some deep inner self-loathing that I wasn't aware of prior to this ... but the nearest theater that is showing it is in a suburb on the other side of town, realistically a 130-140 mile round trip. I think not...
Posted by: dogmeatib | April 27, 2008 7:50 PM
#26
Ben Stein spoke at the University of Vermont on Friday. My daughter texted me an on the spot report. First thing he asked was had "anyone seen Expelled." Almost no hands. "Good," he said, "because I don't want to talk about it." My daughter said he spent a great deal of time distancing himself from the film claiming that he "had nothing to do with it."
Who does think he is? The Discovery Institute? Thanks for the report, Skyblue.
#42 Kay,
If people put the same amount of effort crashing Mike Mathis' stupid poll as they did into posting reviews and ratings at Yahoo, IMdB, Fandango, Flixster, and BoxOfficeMojo, they would actually make an impact on sites moviegoers read.
Look at Box Office Mojo:
As: 181 62.4%
Bs: 10 3.4%
Cs: 2 0.7%
Ds: 3 1.0%
Fs: 94 32.4%
But the Expelled myspace poll is 97.69% against ID. Boy, we showed 'em, on a poll comparatively no one reads!
Posted by: James F | April 27, 2008 7:50 PM
To be fair if I had a movie that might be forced out of theaters by legal action, I would try to encourage people likely to see my film to see it now instead of waiting. And producers trying to encourage fans to so things to help out a movie/tv show/publication/book/etc. via the internet is not exactly new.
Heck even if one is not going to be forced off the silver screen, the simple reality is many people get busy doing other things...you know life. There are certainly movies which sound interesting to me that for one reason or another I don't go to. From any movie producers point of view, it better that someone see the movie now instead waiting for next week which risks turning merely renting it on DVD in several months. And of course the more people see it now the more likely they are to get more screens next week which will result in more ticket sales for them. So in this case the typical creationist modus operandi of trying to panic the faithful really fits well with basic business needs.
While they are certainly not a hit, they are certainly doing respectably for a low budget movie. Expelled, regrettably. is generating more B.O. per screen then most movies at the multiplex. If they had invested a million or two in better writing and film making they really could have had a real hit on their hands. Maybe an attitude of our sheep will buy tickets for any piece of crap we make has come back to haunt them.
In any event we all got lucky. A hit could have had bad influence on the political front. And worst of all it would spawn a dozen imitators to spread lies about science. But of course we still need to see how well they do on DVD. Low budget movies these days often go straight to DVD and skip the theaters (or have a token theatrical run) anyhow since DVDs are where the real money can be made. I strongly suspect that they can make a modest profit after the DVDs start shipping. (If could have been mega profit if they considered making a movie that was watchable.)
Any profit they make can be dangerous though. If you wanted to engage in apologetics which would you prefer: spending money for the cause or spending money for the cause that generates the money back so it can be spent on the cause again? For that reason alone, pro-science organizations need to become more media savvy. And given that real science can be more interesting then saying "God did it" one would think that some low-budget, but well done pro-science films might even be able to make a profit.
Posted by: A lurker | April 27, 2008 7:51 PM
"Skyblue's" daughter reported: "First thing (Ben Stein) asked was had "anyone seen Expelled." Almost no hands. "Good," he said, "because I don't want to talk about it." My daughter said he spent a great deal of time distancing himself from the film claiming that he "had nothing to do with it."
We need more information on this. If Ben is saying this in public, it is really bad news for Premise and the Dishonesty Institute and all the other liars supporting intelligent design creationism.
Posted by: Paul Burnett | April 27, 2008 7:54 PM
#11: (filmed on more than one continent!)
Slightly off-topic, but I read that and a thought occurred to me: Has anyone contacted the officials at Dachau and other Nazi sites where Mathis and Stein filmed? I'd be curious to know a) whether there was any deception on Premise Media's part, and b) what the curators think of the Darwin-->Holocaust hypothesis.
Maybe one of your colleagues at scienceblogs.de could take up the German side of the story.
Posted by: HP | April 27, 2008 7:55 PM
All it needs is annoying animated GIFs and loads of broken links and it'll meet the standards of your typical fundie site.
Posted by: Laser Potato | April 27, 2008 7:55 PM
I guess Stein's promotional contract with the producers ran only through opening weekend.
Posted by: semi | April 27, 2008 8:00 PM
I suddenly like Yoko Ono very much. Who would have thought?
Posted by: Crystal | April 27, 2008 8:00 PM
Look at Box Office Mojo:
As: 181 62.4%
Bs: 10 3.4%
Cs: 2 0.7%
Ds: 3 1.0%
Fs: 94 32.4%
Not surprising at all. The vast majority of people watching the movie are the true believers who have a reason to give it an A. I am actually surprised that the A/F ratio is not far larger then it is. If anything these numbers are good news for us: look at all those Fs. Non-true believers clearly think it is a bad movie. Also note that Mojo's poll requires a login so merely using a script to vote a zillion times won't work. (I really don't mind that anyways given just how unethical such behavior is anyhow.)
Posted by: A lurker | April 27, 2008 8:02 PM
@ #45 Etha,
If I remember correctly, the change in Satan comes from the influence of Gnostic teachings at the time of Christianity's early years. Gnosticism is heavy on the dualism, with an imperfect and evil demiurge being responsible for evil. God is far above and not involved in earthly matters. This makes a lot more cosmic sense for the problem of evil, because an all powerful personal God allowing evil is himself evil. Christianity absorbed this, along with other religious ideas of the time, such as the Greeks and Zoroastrians. It was a real flashpoint of thought in that region, and a new religion like Christianity was all but inevitable. Or it's God's holy word, whichever you prefer.
Posted by: Dennis N | April 27, 2008 8:03 PM
@#28 Bride of Shrek --
Ah, ok, that makes more sense. After a while of reading ID propaganda, I'm afraid my ability to detect irony may be going :\.
Thank you. The feeling is reciprocal.
Posted by: Etha Williams | April 27, 2008 8:04 PM
"First thing (Ben Stein) asked was had "anyone seen Expelled." Almost no hands. "Good," he said, "because I don't want to talk about it."
Uh huh. And if a whole bunch of hands had gone up, Stein would have said "Good -- because that's exactly what I'm here to talk about." And so much for speech #2 on economics in his other pocket.
Maybe not, but this guy's a former political hack. I wouldn't read too much into this.
Posted by: Sastra | April 27, 2008 8:09 PM
This movie HELPS Ben Stein.
...People?
Posted by: SC | April 27, 2008 8:20 PM
Boomerang anyone? Expelled could well end up being counterproductive.
1. It is just a bunch of lies strung together. So Fundie Death Cultists = Liar? Well sure, but while many people know this, more will now.
2. It is an attack on science. This is the whole basis of our civilization. We brought about the 21st century, which looks a lot different from the Dark Ages. Attacking science makes as much sense as attacking Indoor Plumbing, Modern Medicine, or Electricity.
The ranting and raving Death Cultists undoubtedly liked it. OTOH, with minds encased in concrete and brains the size of walnuts, any old nonsense would have worked as well. They could have just spliced together Hovind reruns.
Posted by: raven | April 27, 2008 8:21 PM
I wonder how many of these idjits will be out picketing and trying to stop people from seeing "Religulous" when it comes out?
Posted by: Shane Killian | April 27, 2008 8:28 PM
#60 Lurker,
You raise a very good point. I'm not suggesting a "flood" like on the MySpace site (come on, hundreds of thousands of votes?), I just wish more people would focus instead on writing a review on Yahoo (if you have a a Yahoo account, you can already post without registering anew), post "ExpelledExposedDOTcom" on there somewhere, not let Ben Stein and company get a free pass on spreading nonsense.
Posted by: James F | April 27, 2008 8:29 PM
I find it very interesting that the producers of Expelled are trying to pre-spin the whole copyright infringement charge in the press:
A quick trip the US Copyright Office website reveals these little nuggets of wisdom about "Fair Use":
The criteria for determining Fair Use are as follows:
Notice that the use of Imagine doesn't really fit any of these criteria.
And I love this section:
While it seems that the Premise Media guys are trying to claim that they are providing social commentary about John Lennon's song Imagine, it seems much more likely that their use of the song will be interpreted instead as commentary toward the greater theme of the movie.
The song is not the point of the movie, so I think their "commentary on the song" meme is going to have a tough time.
The producers' legal exposure is huge in this case, and I think that they will settle quickly and quietly out of court to protect their financial backers from liability.
Posted by: semi | April 27, 2008 8:30 PM
>> Ben is risking his career
Wasn't aware he had one. Come on, what kind of credibility did Premise Media thought it was garnering by making BS their spokesperson for the former Nixon speech writer.
I've been a lurkerer from quite some time now and just wanted to thank PZ for his highly informative blog.
Kaddath
Posted by: Kaddath | April 27, 2008 8:31 PM
I think it's funny that the email doesn't mention WHY Yoko Ono is against the film:
Ono sues producers for using Lennon song
Just another slimy move by the producers to add to the list...
Posted by: Kelsey | April 27, 2008 8:32 PM
"Ben is risking his career by taking on the world's leading atheists"
Ben Stein has a career?
Posted by: Russell Stewart | April 27, 2008 8:33 PM
"Despite:
A "Top 10" box office opening...
Standing ovations in theaters...
Scathing critics and raving fans...
Expelled is being sued by YOKO ONO - and she's demanding that it be booted from THEATERS NOW!"
So much wrong here. First, how do the "scathing critics" fit with the rest of this list? Second, I don't believe I've ever seen "scathing" applied to people; I think it is only supposed to be used to describe reviews, etc. Third, why the "despite"? What would any of these things have to do with Ono's decision to sue? And fourth, why would they capitalize just "THEATERS NOW" and not "BOOTED FROM THEATERS NOW"?
Pathetic and ludicrous, start to finish.
Posted by: SC | April 27, 2008 8:34 PM
@ #66,
I wasn't aware of the movie Religulous but thanks for the mention. Bill Maher is a great guy. I can't imagine it would take very much effort to make religion look ridiculous.
Posted by: Dennis N | April 27, 2008 8:34 PM
What I don't understand ( or perhaps I do) is how they could be so STUPID. Yoko Ono is famous for her protectionist stance on the copyright of any Lennon songs. She has sued often and quickly in the past and always wins. I'm not in the music/film industry and I know this just from reports in the media. Have these guys been living under a shell to not know this?
Posted by: Bride of Shrek | April 27, 2008 8:35 PM
If by shell, you mean massive fundie compound complete with Christian themed tennis courts, cafes, and grocery stores, then yes.
Posted by: Dennis N | April 27, 2008 8:43 PM
I didn't see a contradiction PZ. It really is a "fan favorite". The problem is, all the "fans" have seen it, and nobody else is going to go. I'm sure all IDiots loved this film, but luckily they are the minority.
Posted by: Adrian Hayter | April 27, 2008 8:51 PM
Huh. Expelled's still rated as "B" on Yahoo Movies site. Time to vote, eh?
Posted by: Simon G | April 27, 2008 8:52 PM
Somehow Armin Van Buuren's "Who is Watching" has more meaning now...
Posted by: DonRocko | April 27, 2008 9:04 PM