You may have heard that Expelled opened in Canada this week…but it's not off to a soaring start. The first reviews are coming in, and I am encouraged by the opening line of this one: "I found this film so distasteful I hestitate to dignify it with even a thumbnail review."
Also noteworthy: the reviewer interviewed the awful Ben Stein about it.
I interviewed Ben Stein for a Newsmaker item in this week’s Maclean’s, and he did acknowledge the debt his film owes to Michael Moore. "We were greatly influenced by him," he said. "He showed you can make a documentary on a political subject and make money." But Stein couldn’t really elaborate on how Moore’s influence was applied. After all, he reminded me, unlike Moore he was just the host, not the filmmaker. Besides, he's never seen more than two minutes of a MIchael Moore film. "It makes me sick just to look at him," he said. "He's physically revolting. He so angry. I like to look at people who have sweet, nice faces." Stein--whose face is familiar from his roles as a teacher in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off and The Wonder Years--immodestly included himself in that sweet, nice camp.
He did, however, concede with a sigh that Expelled is a whole lot less successful than Moore's films, "so whatever secret he has, we haven't learned it."
No kidding.
Wait—Ben Stein, a guy with the face of a mackerel and the emotional range of a dead one, finds Moore physically revolting? He isn't one of the beautiful people (and neither am I), so judging his work by how he looks…well, Stein should not go there.
Nice admission at the end, though.
(via Canadian Cynic)
There's more at Straight.com and The Coast. It's getting panned all over. Again.
- Log in to post comments
Now come on PZ, thats a bit harsh, Mackerels aren't anywhere near as sphincter-clenchingly ugly as Ben Stein.
Maclean's even bothered to review it? Well for a dead stinker it sure is getting a lot of press.
I love this passage though:
I have never really seen much about the movie so i decided to check out the official website. Under the blog section is a nice quote by Pz himself.
"It's (EXPELLED) going to appeal strongly to the religious, the paranoid, the conspiracy theorists, and the ignorant -- which means they're going to draw in about 90% of the American market."
-Atheist blogger and fabulist PZ Myers, on a film he has not yet seen.
You must have really got to those creators! Nice work Pz!
I couldn't agree with you more :)
But have you seen the film yet, PZ?
That gives me an idea for turning lumps of coal into diamonds.
Expelled is headed (or has gone) right it deserves to go... the bargain box of various church basements.
Well, I think Stein's comments put to rest the true motives behind this disaster of a film. It has nothing to do with getting any sort of message out. From the onset, they were only interested in bilking the gullible, god-soaked hordes out of their money.
As for Stein's crack at Moore, I don't get it either. Is Stein broadcasting that he is nothing more than a shallow, superficial halfwit who won't pay attention to a message unless it's delivered by what he considers one of the "beautiful" people?
I honestly think Stein has suffered some sort of traumatic brain damage. I don't know if these are symptoms of a stroke or what, but his thoughts just seem so unhinged and disjointed. I'd almost feel sorry for him if he wasn't constantly spouting a malicious lie bent on destroying the education of America's children.
BrideofShrek,
I wonder when that abomination is coming to us.....
Says Ben Stein about M Moore :
//He so angry. I like to look at people who have sweet, nice faces.//
I wonder what he would like to do to the ones with non-nice faces...
I'm torn between sadness and happiness that I have not yet been able to locate a cinema that shows this sad excuse for a film yet. The beauty of living in Australia I suppose.
I was 'forced' into reading a copy of the nazinational post sometime last week whilst obtaining my aqueous caffeine fix and to my surprise there was a very unflattering mention of the dread film. Given the political stance of said rag I was expecting a glowing review with a diatribe on the virtues of faith, but instead almost had to agree. That scared me. Normally the only thing I can agree with in that publication is the date.
Not to worry Pandora, I've got my sister in Indo working on getting me a bootlegged copy. If I get one I'll freely pass it on to all Australian Pharyngulite members as I'm sure I'll only be viewing it once.
As far as cinemas go I doubt they'll release it as such and, if it gets out at all, it'll be in those straight to DVD bargain bins at Blockbuster. Given that most of Australia doesn't give a shit about religion I suspect it wouldbn't make a cent at the box office.
OT, but in the realm of Australians being apathetic about religion, the latest figures for the World Youth Day show that almost a third of the tickets haven't been sold and it looks like it'll be a huge commercial failure. Seems the Wiggles can sell more seats than Papa Ratzi.
It says something about the incompetence of the producers that they didn't simultaneously release the film in the US and Canada, but waited for the latter. Box office tallies are calculated on a "North American" basis, putting the receipts from both countries together, so it could have potentially had a (slightly) bigger opening weekend than it did. As well, all the negative reviews in the US have no doubt damaged it prior to its debut in Canada. And who the heck releases this kind of film against the competition of summer blockbusters: "Let's see, there's that action movie with Angelina Jolie looking smokin' hot, or the documentary with Ben Stein...what to choose, what to choose...."
Brideof Shrek,(to shamelessly continue OT)
im hearing similar news regarding the World Youth Day,not being helped by the Cathofascists doing stuff like this :
http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/news/stories/200806/s2287400.htm?tab=a…
Bunch of wankers,and 2/3 of tickets sold is still too many.
it's not that michael moore showed a political movie could make money. (ben stein's in it for the money? what, did he lose his own game show once too many?)
the debt owed is one of dishonest film-making techniques in the name of an ideology. oh, but his criticism of moore REALLY gets me:
"I like to look at people who have sweet, nice faces."
therein lies the failure of your film, mr. stein. you should have cast some hot young starlet to host it.
BoS
Lucky you live in Qld. World Yoof Day is costing the NSW taxpayer over $100 million to put on this party for "il Papa".
Crikey (www.crikey.com.au) published this bumper sticker the other day. It's supposed to have been seen around Sydney lately.
So release the lions.
That's just a little sickening that the taxpayer is expected to foot the bill for this nonsense of papal posturing.
I hope it rains. A lot.
I just got back from watching it with a friend here at Tinseltown in Vancouver. When Richard Dawkins came to UBC, I asked him if Expelled was as bad as I'd been hearing. He looked as if I'd slapped him with a trout - shocked and somewhat dismayed to even have to comment on it. He described it as dreadful and dishonest...
Now that I've seen it, I have to agree. The worst part of it was that people in the audience were AGREEING WITH IT. How can people be so simple-minded?
I dunno... I'd consider PZ somewhere around the top of the attractiveness bell curve -- Neither particularly attractive nor particularly unattractive. I'd place Ben Stein at slightly less than a standard deviation toward the unattractive side.
Michael Moore is, unfortunately, at least two or three standard deviations further over.
Can we please not talk about World Youth Day? Its depressing enough as it is to hear the thing is going to be hosted in Sydney let alone that the bill is going to be footed by NSW and all the other shenanigans that have arisen from it...
Pandora, check out the bumper sticker. I think we Sydneysiders will cope. :)
Of course we'll get the usual whinging about religious bigotry.
Only bad reviews could be the only possible reason to revive the "Expelled" movie in this blog again. I did find Dawkins reaction a bit amusing...
When Richard Dawkins came to UBC, I asked him if Expelled was as bad as I'd been hearing. He looked as if I'd slapped him with a trout - shocked and somewhat dismayed to even have to comment on it.
Doesn't he ever stop pouting? My goodness...I assume the one asking the question and perhaps some in the audience knew he wasn't thrilled about the movie. It would seem logical to conclude when your in a movie that doesn't support your stance, your not too thrilled about it.
You should see the Expelled review in today's Toronto Globe and Mail! The money quote: "Then the Lord looked upon Ben Stein's work and declared: '"Though I am a loving God, quite frankly, Ben, this film is an appallingly unscrupulous example of hack propaganda and it sucketh mightily. What's more, I didn't laugh once.'"
Even the Catholics aren't that happy about World Youth Day. The amount of bitching and moaning that I've heard from family friends who teach in the Catholic system - not a single one I know has anything good to say about it.
Personally, my bitterness stems from the fact that the State Government thought it was a good idea, the thought that there would be any money at all to make out of it, the way they're shutting down pretty much the entire CBD for a week.
The only speck of brightness is the hope that BinLaden!Chas manages to invade something and start asking the State Government whether they'll sponser a rally for him to win the hearts and minds of young Australians for the faith.
Shane, I know I shouldn't say this as it will only give the god botherers more ammo against us amoral, holocaust promoting, baby eating atheist evilutionists, in fact, one already held it against us over on Phil Plait's blog, but that poster is a thing of sheer beauty and I'm still giggling thinking about it :)
To Captain Dan in #7:
"As for Stein's crack at Moore, I don't get it either. Is Stein broadcasting that he is nothing more than a shallow, superficial halfwit who won't pay attention to a message unless it's delivered by what he considers one of the "beautiful" people?"
I'm guessing it's a ham-handed attempt to push the "liberals are angry" meme. (Note the reason Stein claims he can't bear to look at Moore.) See also: "Bush Derangement Syndrome". Stein's poisoning the well, in other words, so he doesn't have to explain why he's a close-minded jackass.
And yet he idolizes Nixon.
PZ, you *are* one of the beautiful ones.
To #10, Mr. Rowledge,
Your little 'nazi' crack was a little unfair to the National Post wasn't it?
Yes, it is a conservative-leaning paper, with a regular column by a reverend, but they also regularly post Christopher Hitchens' articles from Slate. Commenter Colby Cosh is an atheist, and I find their science reporting to be pretty good, (though not in the Financial Post section where the climate deniers lurk).
I find they do more to balance their reporting than The Globe & Mail, and the Post is at least willing to acknowledge the culture wars instead of swimming only in the muck of cultural relativism.
I'm not saying ya gotta like the Post, but the nazi crack is a bit much.
Well, on an unrelated topic, Ray Comfort has taken notice of your blog, PZ.
Take a look at the cartoon...especially what it says at the bottom...I love it when they try to be insulting, only to have it apply more to themselves than anyone else.
"so whatever secret he has, we haven't learned it."
Mr, Moore is often not as honest as he should be, esspecially with editing, he is passionate and makes people believe he's fighting for a just cause.
A dead mckeral has a higher IQ than Ben Stein
sorry I didn't proof read enough Mackeral
Mackerel. :-)
OMG...the Globe and Mail review is teh awesome:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080627.wexpelled27…
10. Then the Lord looked upon Ben Stein's work and declared: "Though I am a loving God, quite frankly, Ben, this film is an appallingly unscrupulous example of hack propaganda and it sucketh mightily. What's more, I didn't laugh once."/quote>
Bulletin: Jindal has signed the Louisiana creationism bill. I blogged about it, but don't bother with that. All the news is in the Times-Picayune: Science law could set tone for Jindal.
It is time to begin measuring the tardensity levels again.
We can close the Internet today and just go home. Emmet (#5) won.
I'm not saying ya gotta like the Post, but the nazi crack is a bit much.
They have no right to call themselves "National" until they move to the country they are actually publishing from... the US. The National ComPost spends so much time licking the jackboots of USian neocons that if it was under "entertainment" it would violate CanCon regulations.
I'm the most handsome person I know, and I say you're BOTH wrong. Case closed.
oh no!!! They are showing it here in Montreal!
I feel like somebody was sick south of the border and we got splashed...
Did something recently happen to Ben Stein's psychological health, or has he always been this egotistical and cognitively impaired? If so, I'm just curious how he managed to keep it hidden. The arrogance he exudes is so intense I cannot see him hiding his craziness on purpose, but at the same time it is so prevalent I cannot see it not coming to light in an interview of any sort. Maybe someone should get him an appointment with a neurologist.
Side Note: I just learned that Jehovah's Witnesses encourage their followers to not vote. I have a whole new respect for them. It's not many who are big enough to realize they aren't qualified to vote. Well done Witnesses.
The documentary I want to see made is the one that convinces ALL Christians that the bible takes a dim view of people who vote.
@Philippe #41: Thus far I seem lucky, it's not shown in Quebec.
For the first time I'm proud that we're snobbed at the profit of montreal!
@Michelle #44: Touché!! Also, I'm guessing that an english-only movie wouldn't do that well in Quebec. I'd be surprised that they would go to the trouble of translating that pile of merde.
It's true we only have one theater giving us english movies here. And only a few. It's a big theater but it is pretty much impossible to access for a bus riding person like me. Unless I like taking a 2 hours ride to see a movie.
But with the oh so sanctified and glorious christian gathering we had last week I'd think they would have LOVED to show it here to their Holy Friends.
I have to laugh at the irony of your criticism on "a movie he has not yet seen" when they spent the entire movie bashing evolution, "a theory they have not yet understood".
The Vancouver distributors offered local scientists and science-friendly people free tickets to an "advance media screening" (it was last night, so #17 would have been there). This turned out to be just more trickery, as when we asked what media would be there (so we could prepare our response) we were told that this screening was only for the science people.
Check out the Toronto Star review. Panned, definitely, but with a nice backhanded swipe at Dawkins. Interesting to hear him described as "not an authority on evolution".
http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/article/450104
Here's a current (to the time of posting) set of reviews from Canadian media outlets. The first three are from our largest national newspapers.
The National Post.
The Toronto Star.
The Globe and Mail.
Eye Weekly.
MacLeans Magazine.
Now Magazine.
The Hour.
Straight.com.
CanWest News Services.
Montreal Mirror.
While reading these, I blissfully forgot that Stockwell Day, bible college drop-out and our Minister of Public Safety is a young earth creationist.
@Philippe #41 and Michelle #44: It's playing in Montreal at the AMC Forum (bad sign already), and there is no french version at all, although only 13% of Montrealers are anglophones! I hope this movie gets what it deserves... it's not even worthy of a DVD release, should be on Betamax!
"He so angry. I like to look at people who have sweet, nice faces."
That explains soooo much.
@Francois: Don't diss the Betamax! It's far too superior for THAT!
From the Toronto Star review:
I don't find that very analogous. Both of those terms are describing one of the sides.
Wow, that's a lot of whitespace.
I was disappointed that the Ottawa Citizen didn't bash it more. It was definitely a negative review, but gave far too much credit to the film, and rated it 2 stars (out of 5).
Ok then Jay, what on earth makes it a "counter-argument"?
"I like to look at people who have sweet, nice faces."
There are no mirrors in Ben Stein's house, apparently. (Either that or there are; he just doesn't cast a reflection.)
Personally, I think Stein has no business whatsoever throwing stones about looks at Michael Moore. Michael Moore is heavier (OH NOES! FAT!), but Stein has a face that could stop an entire shop window full of clocks.
To their credit, the National Pissed at least used to publish Linda McQuaig, probably right up until the point where LordConrad Black of Crossharbour said she should be horsewhipped on national television. 'Course, since they stopped running her columns, there's been nothing in there worth reading past the masthead.
I'm surprised about the Toronto Star review. Usually the Star has its collective head screwed on straight, and that column isn't even written by their usual movie reviewer, who is a bit of an asshole. I tangled with him back about eight or nine years ago, and he absolutely went out of his way to misquote me in order to make the entire group of people for whom I was attempting to speak (by explaining their position to his ignorant self) look bad...
Pretty accurate description of the review itself, actually.
#3:
Didn't they kick PZ out of a showing of their diatribe? Then denounce his criticism because he has not seen the film. Nice.
Also, in Stein's own words he admits to the film as a political beast and not a scientific one. And in terms of verification, Moore is not the best role model. Michael Moore did not start fact checking his films until Fahrenheit 911.
He so angry.
Why is it that everyone these morons disagree with is always "angry"? You could be dancing along the street singing "Happy Days Are Here Again" and the minute they find out you're an atheist (or a "liberal" or whatever) they'll go on about how angry you are.
I like to look at people who have sweet, nice faces.
I'm guessing he stays away from mirrors.
Uh... Metro Magazine (Toronto Daily) gave it a good review. Rick McGillis posted the link to expelledexposed then said the film played the middle ground quite well. Then brought out the eugenics trope and an odd argument about the Darwinists having a problem because he doesn't understand it.
Wierd.
I think St. Louis fell off the arch and bumped it's head.
WTF? The argument's over which host is better looking? What kind of infantilism have we slid into? If you're going to a Michael Moore film for the pulchritude, you've got some serious issues.
@Michelle: OK then... Stone Tablets??
The Globe and Mail and the National Post are both conservative rags with clear and present bias which I generally find pretty easy to read past.
The Star the rumour has is has axed most if not all of their editors. Ummm a little fact checking please?
Here's my favorite line from the review by John Moore in the National Post: "ID is often referred to as Creationism light. In fact it's more Creationism in drag."
Jams @ 42,
"Side Note: I just learned that Jehovah's Witnesses encourage their followers to not vote. I have a whole new respect for them. It's not many who are big enough to realize they aren't qualified to vote. Well done Witnesses."
Give em time. The seventh-day-adventists used to be that way too. Eventually they all turn.
The thing about Ben Stein's face is: you fall asleep from his inane being before you have to experience looking at his face much. Anger would actually improve his presence, and help keep his audience awake.
It would also help allay any concern that Stein is an emotionally bottled-up loon.
To #10, Mr. Rowledge,
Your little 'nazi' crack was a little unfair to the National Post wasn't it?
Well possibly, but given that they are a big powerful news organ I think they can survive the pain. Admittedly I really ought to be careful about breeching Godwin's law since I do actually know Mike and he might slap me next time I see him.
And please, 'tim' will do. Unless we're actually being formal in which case it is 'Sir tim'.
I was also disappointed with the review, however I liked the first paragraph:
@ 28: As a matter of fact, I don't find much effort to balance news reports in the Post. I recently canceled my National Post subscription over a news report on "Expelled" and a related anti-Darwin demonstration at the Royal Ontario Museum, in which the reporter gave several paragraphs to Charles McVety, a few to Walt Ruloff, with one (vague) response from a museum employee-- see
Protesters Rail Against Darwin Exhibition
The result was typical for the Post, and as bad as anything Faux-news would do: help the right get their message out, no matter how crazy, don't present arguments from the other side, and avoid any evaluation of your own.
The use of Hitchens as 'balance' isn't entirely to their credit either, since he's supported the WOT and done a lot of silly cherry-picking in his (typically bombastic) attacks on left-wing opposition to the war in Iraq. The fact that he's an atheist may show the Post isn't just about the Christianist right, but a strong right-wing bias is clear throughout the paper. (It was started as a vanity project by our glorious if no-longer-Canadian neo-con social climber, Conrad Black (now a convicted criminal-- such schadenfreude), and continues under the ownership of the Asper family, who've clearly got neo-con views on foreign policy, especially with regard to Israel.)
I saw Constantine's Sword the other day. It's the anti-Expelled.
He so angry.
Why is it that everyone these morons disagree with is always "angry"? You could be dancing along the street singing "Happy Days Are Here Again" and the minute they find out you're an atheist (or a "liberal" or whatever) they'll go on about how angry you are.
I like to look at people who have sweet, nice faces.
I'm guessing he stays away from mirrors.
The Metro News review is here:
http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/Entertainment/article/75514
Note the false equivalence.
[blockquote]Needless to say, there are proponents on both sides of the issue willing to argue adamantly for their case[/blockquote]
and here comes teh stupid:
[blockquote]Darwin's defenders might want to ask why a science they claim is self-evident provides such unsatisfying proof for so many people[/blockquote]
Sheesh! Okay with the correct brackets this time:
The Metro News review is here:
http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/Entertainment/article/75514
Note the false equivalence.
and here comes teh stupid:
#28 Flying Trilobyte
Apples and Oranges, Nazi is a term implying far right. Hitchens is a Bush-sucking imperialist war-monger who flails about between militarist authoritarianism and the Libertarian Right hand side of the political spectrum.
It's also fairly well known that Karl Rove is a non-believer.
Mr Myers' blog is subtitled: Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
The tone at Pharyngula therefore originates from a politically liberal source.
There is a strain of thought that critical thinking and the rejection of superstition is a precursor to an open society that operates on rational problem solving rather than Iron Fisted militarism from a rapacious corporate state.
However there is no evidence for that at all.
Your argument that a publication prints articles by atheists, and therefore is not entirely Conservative is non-sequitor.
Conservatism/Liberalism, Believer/non-Believer...
sorry....
no observable correlation.
"I like to look at people who have sweet, nice faces."
Tut, tut, Ben Stein. So did the Nazis!
What a contemptible, hypocritical, media whore. No wonder he can't believe he evolved "from scum" when he's acting like such a scumbag.
I have to laugh at the irony of your criticism on "a movie he has not yet seen" when they spent the entire movie bashing evolution, "a theory they have not yet understood".
One thing, alverant at #46; on Ben's movie blog they talked extensively about what would be in the movie and it turned out that it was the same things that people on both sides had already been arguing about.
Scooter,
I'll dispute that. The main evidence (to a certain degree)being what has been behind the architecture and the construction of the European Union.
From the Straight:
Brilliant!
Oh, does the architecture of which you speak include this fence - "much higher than the Berlin Wall"?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/sep/22/spain.gilestremlett
My understanding of American politics is that there is a correlation between a person's position of the poltical spectrum and their religious views or lack thereof. Put simply, the data I have seen suggest that the more right wing a person is the more likely they are to be religious, and to hold fundamentalist religious views. Conversely the more to the left a person is, the more likely they are to not be religious, or if they are, to hold moderate religious views.
I was rather shocked to see ads for Expelled on CBC that portray the movie as a comedy. I guess it is a comedy, in a kind of sick way.
The Vancouver Sun also had a review that rips it apart as the lousy piece of garbage that it is.
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=f022096b-6832-4ec…
gruggach @ #83,
That's the best one I've read yet.
Scooter,
Well, maybe in the United States because there is still such a relatively small % of non believers (10%?), so it's hard to make a clear analysis, but in countries where non believers represent a large proportion of the population, such as in France, Scandinavia, Benelux, the correlation between conservatism and religiosity is quite observable.
To give you an idea, in France, there are about 50% catholics, 5% other religions, 45% non religious, in the last presidential elections catholics voted at 75% for right-conservative parties and 25% left-socialist parties, non religious voted the other way round.
This was the McCleans' money quote for me:
"Like Moore, Stein serves as a disingenuous host, feigning naivete as he asks questions while pretending not to know the answers"
Feigning? HA!
I've never seen "Ferris Beuller's Day Off", so for me, the archetypal 80s movie high school teacher was Vincent Schiavelli in "Better Off Dead".
From the Vancouver Sun article:
[blockquote]Nowhere does Stein mention the centuries of anti-Semitism before Darwin -- in fact, Expelled all but ignores anti-Semitism as a reason for the Holocaust. Consequently, the Anti-Defamation League issued a statement saying, "Using the Holocaust in order to tarnish those who promote the theory of evolution is outrageous and trivializes the complex factors that led to the mass extermination of European Jewry."
When I asked Stein about this statement, his response revealed his hostility toward the Anti-Defamation League more than anything else, as he told me bluntly, "It's none of their f---ing business."[/blockquote]
Well, it's good to get angry once in a while, but not to go unhinged.
I wonder if Ben Stein is seething inside, ready to explode.
SC,
Spain would be much better off giving up Ceuta and Melilla, it makes no sense, but the European Commission can't force them to do so, so you get this nonsense.
That's why now there's this new idea of Meditteranean Union, I don't know if you have been following this...
The Holocaust is "none of (the ADL's) f---ing business"? Seriously? Stein has said a lot of stupid things, but I think this may take the cake.
Another review is here:
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=f022096b-6832-4ec…
Some creationist nutter did a "rebuttal" of the review here:
http://kevinwrites.typepad.com/otherwise_known_as_kevin_/files/McKnight…
And I commented on his rebuttal here:
http://peter-cockerell.net/id/derxsen.pdf
Cheers,
Pete
The Globe & Mail had a very funny review of the movie.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080627.wexpelled27…
The reviewer ended by saying:
10. Then the Lord looked upon Ben Stein's work and declared: "Though I am a loving God, quite frankly, Ben, this film is an appallingly unscrupulous example of hack propaganda and it sucketh mightily. What's more, I didn't laugh once."
Cheezits #59: Why is it that everyone these morons disagree with is always "angry"? You could be dancing along the street singing "Happy Days Are Here Again" and the minute they find out you're an atheist (or a "liberal" or whatever) they'll go on about how angry you are.
I've been muttering on a few threads about the role of anger or "emotionalism" lately. In the US, it appears to have some racial/gender connotations, and to be tied in to the midwest sub-cultures extremely subtle emotional signalling. It seems to be a very deep cultural structure that affects everything, and tends to make us prey to local authority structures -- you can't fight back if you show your emotions.
Don't know if anyone has studied this, but I feel that it's probably very important for us to understand about ourselves.
Ken McKnight @ #65:
No, ID is Creationism wrapped in a lab coat stolen from the dumpster, full of holes and covered with filth.
# 78 Negen..
It's a bit of a stretch, but let me put it this way, I hope you're right.
Another very strong factor is that since WWII you do not find European Countries involved in ultra nationlism and military adventures as in the US.
They are hardly innocents in this respect, but they all of Europe combined has not invaded as many countries as the US counting all proxy wars and mercenary actions.
This makes it easier to maintain open societies and further democratic principles.
"He so angry."
Please. I saw Fahrenheit 9/11 and Moore didn't raise his voice once. And he's always smiling in pictures. Well, nice to have more confirmation of the incredible shallowness of ID and Republican thought.
Still, someone set up Mr. Stein with a nice, plastic-faced, glass-eyed Christian host that will soothe him as they forcibly convert him to Christianity for the Apocalypse.
#81 and #85
In the US we have the fundie-loons, who are generally bible literalists, their numbers have been on the rise since 1980. THEY will always vote Republican, because the Republicans lure them in with their anti-abortion stance (as long as it has no possibility of actually working) and Homosexual Marriage.
Then there are the Catholics, in large numbers, who can go either way but primarily vote Democrat.
Then there are the Jews. The Jews, including ultra Zionists, strongly support the Democratic party, which is why you never see any movement on the issue of Palestine.
Then there are the Blacks, who are the most church-going, out of the Southern Baptist tradition, who virtually ALL vote Democrat.
This leaves the white protestant majority, who vote on economic issues, and are all over the place. These are BTW, the least church-going of them all.
You can't get away from God around here, whether it's a Civil Rights movement, the Catholic Worker's Party, the great religious war protest movements of the 60', 70's, the Ku Klux Klan, or the Religious Right Fascists.
But when it comes to the really nasty things done by the US National Security State, it's always framed in terms of Nationalism. As the US rampaged through Latin America they killed 10 Catholics to every 1 Communist.
My point is that the secularization of the United States may or may not have an effect on this Nationalist Impulse. This country is astonishingly supremacist , Xenophobic and oblivious to anything outside the borders. It scares the crap out of me, and I'm used to it.
That's what we have to worry about.
Cheezits @ 59:
Why is it that everyone these morons disagree with is always "angry"? You could be dancing along the street singing "Happy Days Are Here Again" and the minute they find out you're an atheist (or a "liberal" or whatever) they'll go on about how angry you are.
Because they are angry and are projecting. They also don't seem to have much intuition about how other people express their emotions and therefore fail to see that we aren't angry with them, we're ridiculing them. They probably really do also believe that atheists hate god. The fact that we don't believe in him in the exactly same way that they don't believe (I hope) in Santa or the Easter bunny. We are raging at him, denying his love. It's bizarre.
Ben Stein and Egnor explained. I keep saying these guys show evidence of organic brain dysfunction of some sort. It turns out in older people, that silent strokes leading to brain damage are quite common, 10% in over 60's. My guess, when you see normal, high functioning, rational adults suddenly lose those characteristics, SCI is a likely cause.
One of the local free weeklies here not only shredded the film, but includes links to ExpelledExposed, talkorigins, Panda's Thumb, Pharyngula, and excerpts from the Wedge document at the end of the review.
Now that's journalism that doesn't pander.
"Then there are the Blacks, who are the most church-going, out of the Southern Baptist tradition, who virtually ALL vote Democrat."
Scooter, my good man, African-Americans, while many of them are Baptists, are not Southern Baptists, per se. The whole raison d'etre of the Southern Baptist organization is that it split from other Baptist conventions over the slavery issue. Similarly, the African Methodist Episcopal Church developed due to the segregation of congregations... HA!
Wikipedia has a decent overview of the history of the Anabaptists in America.
Oh, and as far as liberals being angry- of course I'm friggin' angry, the Republicans drove my country into a ditch, and it'll take years to make it run properly again.
If you'll all excuse a brief moment of nationalism, never have I been so proud of my country as I am after reading so many unmitigatedly scathing reviews.
Don't worry; I'll ground myself by remembering the Canadian shame that was the Somalia Affair.
I haven't really, but my take on it would probably most resemble theirs:
http://www.cnt-f.org/
The Globe and Mail, Canada's preferred national paper, has also dealt the movie a critical blow.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080627.wexpelled27…
That's because some of us are angry.
I get angry when Ann Coulter claims that I'm a traitor to America because I don't agree with her politically. I get angry when George W. Bush claims I'm "with the terrorists" because I don't accept his excuses for invading Iraq. I get particularly angry when someone tries to get something outlawed because The Big Guy In The Sky thinks a certain behavior is icky. I've got other, similar reasons to be angry.
I try not to let my anger show. Among other things, anger can be self-defeating. But the anger is there.
Anger can be self-defeating, true, but it can also steel you. A wiser man than I wrote:
"Let fury have the hour, anger can be power
D'you know that you can use it?"
Just make sure that yours is a cool anger, not a hot one... it's rage that is self-defeating, not anger.
That's because some of us are angry.
Some of us, but Michael Moore? Does he look SO angry to anyone else? What the hell is Stein talking about, he looks pretty pissed off in that ad for _Expelled_.
Oh PZ, don't sell yourself short: I think you're cuddly! You could use a good hat, though...
I can't even watch Ferris Bueller's Day off anymore without cringing whenever Ben Stein comes on screen, he disgusts me that much. I used to think that he was a intelligent guy, but this movie destroyed all my respect for that guy.
I was surprised to see french-language La Presse reviewing the movie. They just dispatch the thing in 3 brief paragraphs, calling it crude propaganda that stinks, and rating it as low as possible.
Well, the first Canadian numbers are in. And they're pretty damn funny.