Guest review - Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed
April 21, 2008 by Jeffrey Overstreet
Greg Wright, who edits Hollywood Jesus and runs Past the Popcorn, impressed me with his thoughtful examination of the new documentary Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed when we participated in a roundtable discussion at The Kindlings Muse a week ago. (That discussion will be available via podcast soon.)
So I was delighted to see that Wright had published a full review of the film at Past the Popcorn, and I quickly asked him if he would be willing to share the review here.
So here is Greg Wright’s review of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed…
•
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed
a review by Greg Wright
Here are the two truest statements you are likely to hear in Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, the latest quasi-Moore-ish documentary:
“Intelligent Design is merely a skirmish in a much larger war.”
“We all have our biases.”
Expelled, which argues that “Darwinian evolution” is exercising a stranglehold in our schools and scientific institutions, certainly provides proof of bias—in both intentional and unintentional ways. And the vituperative response from detractors who haven’t even seen the film proves that, yes, there is a much larger war going on out there.
Before talking about the film itself and its claims, it’s worth talking about that larger war just a little. It’s one we’ve all experienced to some degree and at some level: you know, those moments when we have encountered some educator who was far more interested in “shaping minds” (of the right sort) than in instilling a thirst for education. We may have encountered such indoctrinators in Sunday School classes; we’ve almost certainly encountered them in high school history classes or college comparative religion or literature courses.
This week in The Los Angeles Times, Greg Lukianoff wrote the following about such Thought Police:
It is chilling that we are raising a generation of citizens who believe it is their right to mandate the appropriate views that other citizens should have. It’s a formula for totalitarianism. … I shudder for the republic if the next generation of leaders brings such fundamentally anti-democratic thinking to America’s institutions of power.
It’s into this context — and with a long history of mutual antagonism, lawsuits, and hateful rhetoric between proponents and foes of Intelligent Design — that Expelled rather blithely wades. I say “blithely” because it seems the makers of the film don’t (or at least didn’t) appreciate the stakes of this “larger war.” To my taste, the film is neither precise enough nor rigorous enough to be of much value other than stirring an already sloppy pot.
For those who don’t know, “Intelligent Design” is a notion that has been around for a long, long time. Anyone who’s heard of the “Divine Proportion” or “Golden Ratio” knows the gist: when you look at certain aspects of nature, it’s hard not to think, “Gee. All this looks as if someone designed it.” And again, such observations have been around for hundreds, if not thousands, of years.
Well, along came Charles Darwin, who popularized the also long-cherished notion that nature wasn’t designed at all, but came about through gradual processes that weeded out non-useful genetic variations, as well as traits that no longer suited the environment. Ideologues of all sorts jumped on board for all sorts of reasons, and Darwin’s theses got applied and extrapolated in all sorts of bizarre ways. Along the way, as the larger culture became saturated with neo-Darwinist influence, it became intellectually suspect to actually believe in a Designer; and when the grand Creationist project of the late 20th Century jumped the rails, many of its passengers rather craftily snuck about the I.D. train because they felt it could get them somewhat near their destination. But those who had fought the Creationists weren’t snookered… and the fight was on. It’s been waging now for going on twenty years. Poor Intelligent Design; it really didn’t deserve that kind of attention. And being distracted by the public relations battle hasn’t helped it gain any real traction as a scientific theory, either.
What Expelled posits — and, on the surface, it’s plausible, given the general recognition we have of Thought Police of all shapes and breeds — is that there is a concerted and organized effort in scientific academia to suppress inquiry into I.D. The film presents interviews with a number of editors, educators, and scientists who feel that they have been unfairly excluded from the scientific dialogue (and even punished) for daring to broach the subject of I.D. The film uses Michael Moore-ish documentary film techniques to entertain us as Ben Stein goes on a hunt to figure out if these claims are true; and it argues that the answer is “yes” — and that fundamental American freedoms are being challenged.
On the entertainment level — the one that probably counts the most to audiences (and should, to critics) — the film comes in at about a B level. It isn’t as outrageous as its Moore-ish or Spurlock-ian counterparts, and the subject matter just isn’t the kind of thing that can be easily dressed up as popcorn fodder. Relatively inexperienced director Nathan Frankowski does a decent enough job of helming such a powder keg of a topic, though it’s fair to say that Moore could probably have done a better job with such material. But heck; Moore’s been refining his techniques for twenty-odd years.
When it comes to its subject matter, though, Expelled fumbles the ball quite a bit. In the interests of entertainment and of simplifying its argument, it never bothers to tell us much about I.D., its tenets, its history, or its connections to Creationism. It oversimplifies the “opposition,” too, conflating activist atheists with practicing scientists who object on purely scientific grounds, and failing to distinguish between “Darwin,” “social Darwinism,” and “Darwinian evolution” as merely one branch of evolutionary biology. It also conveniently ignores voices in the debate who represent something of a middle ground.
Worse, in driving toward its “why this is important” conclusion, it takes us along on an unnecessarily distracting and inflammatory side trip to Germany so that we can get riled about Nazi Germany’s links to “Darwinian” thinking. Sure, such thinking was part of the recipe for the holocaust; but so was the Church. Eugenic laws were still on the books in the U.S. as late at the 1960s, so the film needn’t have raised the specter of Hitler to make its case.
On the plus side — and in my book, this is a big plus — Frankowski and primary screenwriter Kevin Miller don’t resort to the worst of Moore’s tricks in crafting their narrative. They don’t splice bits of archive footage together to make it appear that folks believe things that they really don’t; they don’t stage “recreations” and pass them off as real documentary footage; and they don’t strain our credulity by trying to pack in every outrageous claim they could possibly devise.
At the end of the day, though, I don’t find that the film makes a compelling case. Yes, I am inclined to believe that the opposition fights pretty dirty, particularly when Dawkins prattles on about his stereotyped description of God, or when P.Z. Myers dismissively compares religion to knitting, or when I read intros to emails like that from XVIVO’s David Bolinsky who writes to “the anti-ID community which is giving XVIVO support in our ideological battle against the microcephalic apostates of ‘Intelligent Design’.” So, yeah. I imagine there’s a cabal of repressionist, hateful thinkers out there who are as “systematic and ruthless” as the movie claims. And it’s kind of scary when you think that you might just be targeted by such folks. I simply don’t think those folks are really the same cabal that Expelled wishes us to believe that they are.
But if they are — and I stress, if they are, and they might be — Expelled simply plays too nice to catch them red-handed.
•
Expelled is rated PG for “thematic material, some disturbing images and brief smoking.” I am not a fan of this style of documentary, and think all such beasts should be rated at least PG-13. Certain levels of critical thinking skills and experience analyzing filmmaking techniques are required to guard against the kinds of cinematic manipulations that these films practice, and Expelled is no exception. Go in prepared and informed, keep your radar whirring, and be sure to do some of your own research on the issues when you leave.
Courtesy of the Discovery Institute and a national publicist, Greg attended a private screening of the final cut of Expelled.
6 Responses to “Guest review - Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed”







“And the vituperative response from detractors who haven’t even seen the film proves that, yes, there is a much larger war going on out there.”
Personally, I plan to see the film, but I will not spend nine or ten dollars on it, as so far, the reviews I have read that seem to fall into three categories. Balanced ones such as Greg’s(which I overall thought was very good), biased propaganda (towards either side) or “Not very good”. The fact is, the glowing reviews all come from people who’s takes on movies in general I tend to find anywhere from laughable to simple “we just do not agree”. People I tend to trust in regards to movies seem pretty unanimous…as an information source it fails, as entertainment it could be passable, but there is far better out there.
Plus, to be honest, it’s been far to easy for the film’s critics to debunk the claims of the film’s creators-most specifically Ben Stein. Stein has not come out looking particularly brilliant here. I admit to being hard on the film, and that is partially because my own Church has been promoting it heavily and that concerns me that it is being pushed without question.
My wife and I saw the movie over the weekend and both liked it. We found it refreshing to watch a movie that showed viewpoints and opinions so contrary to a particular worldview (in this instance, the worldview that evolution is fact, and to think otherwise makes you an idiot). It was also nice to see Ben Stein and company take on militant atheistic scientists who are blatantly out to kill God, to lead as many people away from God as possible, and who think anyone who believes in God is an idiot. Yes, God is bigger than these men and doesn’t necessarily need a movie to arguing against these men, but it’s certainly satisfying to see some of these intelligent men make themselves look so foolish. And while I agree with some of the shortcomings that Mr. Wright points out, I think overall the film should be commended for taking on a worldview that is so widely accepted, and pointing out that a scientist’s belief in evolution is no less faith-based than a belief in Intelligent Design or a Creator God.
And just so you know, I did go in somewhat skeptical. I too do not like “Christian movies” just for the sake that they’re Christian and “we’re supposed to like them.” I like good movies because they’re good! I found Expelled fairly riveting and entertaining. Could it have been more compelling? Probably. Did it do what it set out to do, raise questions about the atheistic science community and what it does to squelch viewpoints other than their own? Yes.
I like how Gary DeMar of American Vision put it,
“One of the best points about the movie is that it has the atheist and evolutionist communities fuming, and I mean raging madly. Atheist Richard Dawkins’ website has been rolling with anti-Expelled articles for several days—before the movie even came out—the anger is visible in all corners of the site. There’s an old saying that when you throw a stone into a pack of dogs, the one that yelps is the one that got hit. Well, this time the whole pack is howling in unison.” http://www.Americanvision.org
—Steve
http://thatsagreatquestion.blogspot.com
Greg-
Nice review. I saw the film almost two months ago and gave it a more or less positive review on my blog, if only for the fact that it wasn’t terrible and provided an alternative to the largely leftist op-ed docs that increasingly populate our culture. But I also agree with your statement that “the film is neither precise enough nor rigorous enough to be of much value other than stirring an already sloppy pot.” I suppose any “balancing-out” value it might have in terms of providing the “other” voice in the discourse (and I’m talking about the larger cultural war that you speak of) is only short-term– a battle won, perhaps, but a victory that makes the war all the more brutal. I think a big problem is that the nature of documentary film has changed so much in the past few decades: so that now a “documentary” is no longer about observed truth in any sort of objective sense but rather a subjective, expository “essay” of sorts that provides a convenient means (film, with all its power for manipulation, is indeed convenient for these purposes) to argue a point. We can perhaps go back to “Roger and Me” as the beginning of this trend…
I hope that documentary won’t become just another media spin mechanism to be used by special interests on fringe sides of whatever issue. But with films like “Expelled” (and any number of recent documentaries), it seems this is precisely the direction we’re heading.
Greg Wright says the detour to Germany to invoke the links between Darwinism and Nazi thought is “unnecessary” but it serves a very real purpose. In academia, you will frequently hear it expressed as a truism that Hitler’s Nazi policies have direct links to the mindsets one finds in American Christian conservatives, and the idea of Hitler as a “traditional values” man. All Stein does is provide a necessary corrective to this by (correctly) noting the real links Nazi thought has to Social Darwinism, and how one finds ultimately that it isn’t American Fundamentalist Christianity that Nazi doctrines have more in common, but rather the doctrines of those who are militant Darwinians.
As for Wright’s dismissive comment “I simply don’t think those folks are really the same cabal that Expelled wishes us to believe that they are”, that comes off as the height of naivete. It would seem that Wright is more afraid of having to acknowledge that a perspective argued in large measure by the conservative Christian community has some actual validity to it in terms of what it says about the world as it really is.
It would seem, epaddon, that you are more interested in what seems to be than what it is.
There most definitely is an anti-ID community, and I’ve been interacting with it daily for the last several weeks. I’ve seen memos addressed to that community, and I’ve seen who circulates those memos. I’ve talked personally to Kevin Miller, Mark Mathis, and PZ Myers. I’ve exchanged emails with many other principals in the argument, on both sides. So I’m actually pretty well informed.
But the film presents a simplified view of the debate: those who are in favor of I.D. and freedom are on one side, and anyone who doesn’t support that particular agenda is part of Big Science. And that just is not, as you assert, “the world as it really is.” The world is more complicated than that — and my experience is not consistent with the world that the film presents.
So this has nothing to do with “fear” or “naivete.” (It can’t be about fear, because I have no stake in the debate whatseover.) I’m completely sympathetic to “a perspective argued in large measure by the conservative Christian community.”
What I’m not sympathetic to is a film that oversimplifies the situation, and then fails to adequately make its case.
What I’m really unsympathetic to is what gomezeec describes: that “a ‘documentary’ is no longer about observed truth in any sort of objective sense but rather a subjective, expository ‘essay’ of sorts that provides a convenient means to argue a point”… and that the moviegoing public increasingly tends to swallow these subjective, biased cinematic essays as objective truth.