Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (view source)
Revision as of 18:51, March 14, 2008
, 18:51, March 14, 2008→Critical response: nothing addressing the substance of the film - just a silly complaint of being "tricked" into revealing their academic dishonesty
==Critical response==
==Critical response==
Predictably, complaints about the film from liberals have not addressed the film's premise. [[Richard Dawkins]] claimed he was tricked into appearing - apparently he didn't know that the producers had any plans to expose [[academic dishonesty]], or he would have kept his mouth shut. (Two others who were similary "deceived" said they would have appeared anyway.)
Predictably, complaints about the film from liberals have not addressed the film's premise. [[Richard Dawkins]] claimed he was tricked into appearing - apparently he didn't know that the producers had any plans to expose [[academic dishonesty]], or he would have kept his mouth shut. (Two others who were similarly "deceived" said they would have appeared anyway.) In response, Ben Stein said that no one he interviewed asked what the film would be about, and the co-producer Walt Ruloff said at the preview that interviewees were paid and were even told ahead of time what the questions would be.<ref>Bethell, Tom, [http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=12759 No Intelligence Allowed] ''The American Spectator'', 19th February, 2008.</ref>
==Favorable response==
==Favorable response==