Where can you go to see this movie? I have looked everywhere in Colorado to find a theater showing it.
These guys were the best. Great festival!!!
John Krueger, The Fall
I heard Pete speak as part of a documentary filmmaker panel at AFI Dallas in connection with the screening of "HAZE", and he was great! So glad he's being recognized in his own town!
What about "Six Feet Under"? That is where I first saw Rainn.
I am appalled that you are being paid to write such a rotten review. I loved the film and everyone I know that has seen it also liked it. When did critics elevate themselves up (harhar) to the ranks of snarling dogs? I'm a fan of Reeves from way back. I enjoy his performances and felt he did the role justice. It's a good film. Sourpuss. You should be waiting tables at IHOP.
"as those who know their Wars lore will recall that Huttlet's father will one day be killed by his rescuer's son" I seem to recall that Leia killed Jabba.
OUCH! Sounds a bit harsh....(but this is coming from someone who hasn't seen the moving, only previous M. Night efforts....
That's a HELL of a movie review...
Say, you forgot about the new theatre complex at Interquest Parkway at I-25, called Hollywood Theatres. The parking lots (and overflow lots) were just packed for at least the first three days. And this afternoon, threatre goers were given a bonus performance by the Air Force Thunderbirds, who were practicing for the big graduation event.
Damn it you creationists!! The Florida creationists need your prayers: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/05/florida_creationists_need_your.php
When you are done with your praying to your imaginary friend read this: http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_fundamentalist_043008
Also, kudos to Jill Thomas for recognizing and sharing Shiveley's documentary with such a well written article. I really enjoyed it!
When Shiveley released his first independent CD titled "Everything Is Good", it not only caught the attention and accolades of front range music critics, it made me an instant fan. His creative spirit shined bright through his talent as a musician. Beautiful original songs and memorable compositions that only a real artist could create.
When I first saw Shiveley's trailer for "Everyone But You", it immediately reminded me of why I'm a huge fan of his. Whatever the artistic medium may be, Shiveley has a way of delivering his ballad with poetic grace. His quirky style and awkward perspective may be humorous to some, but I find it honest and refreshing. There's a feeling of hope in his desperation, and a sense of success in his aspirations.
Sadly, due to scheduling conflicts, I am unable to attend this special viewing. I look forward to seeing this story in it's entirety soon, and celebrating yet another fanastic achievement by this well-deserved Colorado artist.
I did and I found that it did a good job of showing both sides of the academic lines.
You're wrong, webgirl. There is no "other side" to the ID issue, a fact that the film completely obscures. No reputable, peer-reviewed scientist has yet put forth any kind of scientific defense of ID. There simply is no controversy about evolution in scientific circles. Ben Stein is lying to you.
I think that the most comment came from Dr. Dawkins himself when he said that he believed that life on Earth was "seeded" from an advanced, intelligent society. Now isn't that interesting? An evolutionist who admitted that he believed in intelligent design?
And now you're lying. Dawkins admits it's within the realm of possibility that aliens could have seeded Earth with the most basic form of life... but -- he goes on to say -- those aliens would themselves have had to have been the products of natural evolution. And in any event, Dawkins is talking about the origin of life on Earth, NOT the development of life after that point, which is ALL the theory of evolution is concerned with. Evolution does NOT even pretend to cover the origin of life on Earth. And once again, Stein is confusing the issue by pretending that evolution has anything to do with that area.
Here, once again, is the insidiousness of Stein and *Expelled*: he misleads the ignorant for his own purposes, which I'm not even sure we can discern from the film. Why does Stein believe it's better to lie about these things?
PS-The movie wasn't all about Nazis. It simply revealed in one small portion of the film that Hitler based his selective breeding plan on Darwinismthat anyone not fitting his Arian model was a worthless eater (in the case of people with disabilities).
The thing that I find most interesting is that the comments are all posted before the film was released in the Springs (April 18). Has anyone even seen this film? I did and I found that it did a good job of showing both sides of the academic lines. I think that the most comment came from Dr. Dawkins himself when he said that he believed that life on Earth was "seeded" from an advanced, intelligent society. Now isn't that interesting? An evolutionist who admitted that he believed in intelligent design?
I digress. I really do believe in intelligent design. Ever heard of the flying spaghetti monster theory? Praise the Spaghedeity or be scorned for all eternity! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster
It never ceases to amaze me that IDers want this crap in SCIENCE classes (comparative religions class anyone?)- maybe I'm not getting it...errrrrr wait, wait, now I remember, the scientific theory is largely based on refutation. Something about keeping a theory as long as it can't be refuted? Information that becomes available that coincides with the proposed theory simply strengthens it- not proves it (look how reasonable, science leaves the concretes" up to religion :)? So, creationists need to relax the hell out, first of all, you can't refute a god (creator-whatever), but then again, its not a hypothesis AVAILABLE for negation. Why do IDers want to play ball in the realm of science when they're not willing to participate within the bounds of the scientific method???? And second of all, its completely inappropriate for religion to enter science, it not only retards scientific process, it also threatens the very separate, important realm of spirituality and religion. Shoo evangelicals, shoo- for your own good as well as the rest of humanitys
It would be silly to try and discuss science vs. creationism here, or anywhere else where creationists actually show up. The only place where it *would* be sensible for creationists to try and discuss their ideas is where _any_ person with a scientific idea goes : peer-reviewed journals where experts (not gullible rubes) can read a clear presentation and give feedback, point out errors, detect deceptions, etc.
But no scientist who claims to support ID (i.e. creationism) has _ever_ presented a clear description of Intelligent Design, or any of its associated "critiques of Darwinism [sic]" to a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. The stories of "suppression" presented in this film, every one of them, have been skewed and nuanced to cover up the incompetence, ethical lapses, and irrelevance of the "victims". If anyone wants to learn more check out http://expelledexposed.com .
The clearest and best explanation of Intelligent Design I have ever seen - honestly - is given by ljackso (above) : "I am a Christian. It is impossible that all life on earth just happened." Q.E.D. There really, really isn't anything better out there. Michael Behe, the intellectual heavyweight of the ID movement (i.e., he used to be an actual scientist) quit submitting his work to peer-reviewed publications when he joined the ID movement. Now he hawks his (million dollar bestselling) books on ID to a gullible public, and deletes any actual criticism of his work from the comments section of his web forum. Apart from the very detailed information he presents on molecular biology, his logic is exactly the same as ljackso : "I don't understand X, it looks very complicated, therefore God (er, uh, the Inventor) did it." Behe, BTW, admits that it is "trivially obvious" that all life is descended from a common ancestor, so it is a bit ironic to find him as the scientific frontman for ID.
But the true sophistication of the ID movement is the realization that there is actually NO NEED to convince scientists. Why bother joining a fight you know you will lose, when you can stage a fight you know you can't lose. By preaching to the base, the already converted faithful and scooping up gullible followers on the margins, they have been able to advance quite far. Ben Stein's film will certainly not convince anyone with half a brain, but it will energize the movement nontheless. And it happens - pureley by coincidence, I am sure - that the release of the movie coincides with the introduction of bills in Florida and Missippi that would allow teachers to present anything they feel "sounds" scientific in science class, regardless of how goofy or overtly religious it may appear to educated "elites". Mr. Stein has travelled to these states to hold private screenings of his "documentary" with favorably inclined lawmakers.
All in all, my response to this movie is that points out a clear and urgent need for more people to be taught about ID. Not its scientific claims - which there are none - but it's techniques, agenda, and overall level of sleaze. Thankfully, the movie itself is a good start.
Hey, ljackso when I meet the creator I'll fart on him for you, k?
"Creationists often take his famous quote "God does not play dice" out of context..they take A LOT of things out of context for that matter. Einstein was referring to Quantum physics and Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle."
Exactly so. The statement that "God does not play dice with the universe" - was merely a metaphorical expression embodying Einstein's contempt for modern quantum theory. As a strict determinist he couldn't bring himself to accept its tenets that trajectories (say of electrons inside an atom) are impossible to map out, or that positions (say of electrons) are impossible to specify or fix down to the last decimal.
Perhaps the premier biographer of Einstein was Jeremy Bernstein (cf. Einstein, Fontana-Collins Books, UK, 1973) who noted (p. 20) that Einstein often loosely invoked God as a substitute for the rational connections, the laws, governing the behavior of the universe.
Einstein also used the pet term "Old man" interchangeably - but that didn't mean he thought a literal "old man" was behind the laws of the cosmos!
Einstein would have openly laughed at any suggestion God (or personal salvation) can be found by believing on a glorified human, or personalized incarnation. Hence, his embrace of "Spinoza's God".
As for the ID'ers, they will never get it. Plus, they will never get that they cannot have a bona fide alternate theory until they first enunciate the means for falsifying their ID. Up to now, I haven't heard peep one from any of them. All they do is tear into Darwinian evolution and natural selection, but offer nothing substantive of their own.
All content © Copyright 2013, The Colorado Springs Independent
Website powered by Foundation