Changes

→‎Negative Reception: -Rotten tomatos and metacritic
Line 89: Line 89:     
John Derbyshire, a columnist at the [[conservative]] [[National Review|National Review Online]], wrote a surprisingly critical review, ''despite not having seen the film'', and confused [[intelligent design]] with [[creationism]].  He said that "[[creationists]]" have been "morally corrupted" and engage in "willful act[s] of deception." He concludes that attacking "science" (i.e. [[evolution]]) is equivalent to attacking [[Western Civilization]].<ref>http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZGYwMzdjOWRmNGRhOWQ4MTQyZDMxNjNhYTU1YTE5Njk=</ref>
 
John Derbyshire, a columnist at the [[conservative]] [[National Review|National Review Online]], wrote a surprisingly critical review, ''despite not having seen the film'', and confused [[intelligent design]] with [[creationism]].  He said that "[[creationists]]" have been "morally corrupted" and engage in "willful act[s] of deception." He concludes that attacking "science" (i.e. [[evolution]]) is equivalent to attacking [[Western Civilization]].<ref>http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZGYwMzdjOWRmNGRhOWQ4MTQyZDMxNjNhYTU1YTE5Njk=</ref>
 +
 +
On [http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed/?critic=creamcrop RottenTomatos.com], the "Top Critics" section has the film labeled at a 0% (rotten) rating. The "[http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed/?name_order=asc#mo T-Mater Critics]" have the film at a 9% (rotten) rating. However, the [http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed/reviews_users.php Rotten Tomato community] has more favorable reviews, giving the film an average rating of 50% (rotten).
 +
 +
On [http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/expellednointelligenceallowed?q=expelled Metacritic.com], the average critic rating is 20 out of 100 (generally negative reviews). The Metacritic community has an average of 3.7 out of 10.
    
== Issues surrounding the film ==   
 
== Issues surrounding the film ==   
234

edits