Joined: June 2011
|Quote (Kristine @ June 25 2011,18:16)|
|Quote (Stephen Furley @ June 25 2011,16:48)|
|Quote (Kristine @ June 25 2011,12:16)|
|Quote (kevinmillerxi @ June 25 2011,12:07)|
|You haven't addressed my "shoe on the other foot" analogy, Kristine. And I'm sorry, your attempt at dispassionate interest in archiving the material fails to convince. This is all about vindictiveness. And I don't mean to single you out in that. Let's just call a spade a spade.|
I have addressed it, Kevin. I told Richard to save everything.
You or anyone can come out with an annotated version if you want. After all, Expelled was a particularly vile annotation of Origin of Species.
Quit while you're behind.
I haven't seen this film; I tried to buy a copy while I was out today, but couldn't find one. Can you please explain in what way you think it is 'particularly vile'? I know that Richard was unhappy about the way in which the film was represented (misrepresented?) when he was requested to give an interview; is it this that you are unhappy about, or the content of the film itself? Do you claim that the content of the film was untrue, or that it was simply selective in the truth which it chose to present?
What was the content in the film relating to the holocaust which many people seem to have found particularly objectionable? Was this attempting to put the blame for the holocaust on atheism/humanism/secularism? If so, this would be ridiculous, but certainly not unique to this film; such claims have been made by many in the past.
What do you hope to find if it is possible to buy the rights to this film, and materials relating to it? Is it not likely that much of this material not included in the film itself would have been discarded when the production was completed?
There has been considerable discussion about the possibility of producing an 'annotated' version of the film. While I can see the merits of doing so, would it be possible? How would you distribute this version? A cinema release seems unlikely, Would you do it on DVD? On the Internet? We know that a company, I can't remember the name at the moment holds the rights do distribute the original film on DVD, but we don't know exactly what rights they hold? For example, if it turns out that they hold exclusive rights for all non-theatrical distribution of the film and all derivative works in digital works for a long period then that would pretty much put a stop to any annotated version being distributed. If they simply hold the rights to distribute the original film on DVD then that might not be a problem, but we simply don't know. They might still try to stop the distribution of an 'annotated' version, which contains the content of the original film, by another party.
Stephen, are you under the mistaken impression that I administer or own the Talk Origins site? Your questions regarding distribution should be directed there. I have nothing to do with the site other than to have read it and have donated to it.
What is "particularly vile"? Are you joking? How many other films made this direct link between the theory of evolution and the Holocaust?
How about this review: "One of the sleaziest documentaries to arrive in a very long time"?
How about a deliberately taken-out-of-context quote from Charles Darwin:
| With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated. We civilized men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination. We build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed and the sick, thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. Hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.|
without including this important statement which follows:
|The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, if so urged by hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature.|
How about using movie extras to portray "Pepperdine University students" to which Ben Stein in shown addressing as if he were giving a "speech"? Is this standard procedure in a documentary?
The movie is one lie after another. That is not vile?
I have seen the film, Stephen - I was the one who told PZ about the screening, and I was there when he was thrown out right before my eyes. Then that same scary security guard came and sat right behind me after I asked producer Mark Mathis a question.
Have you read the auction notice? You would find that it includes all ephemera related to the film. My suggesting that such ephemera has been or is being destroyed got me called "paranoid" by the writer of the film, Kevin Miller.
Why do you single me out in this manner? I am not bidding on this film myself. Who are you? Where did you come from?
I don't single you out, I'm simply trying to find out what it is that people find so offensive about this film; as I said, I haven't seen it, and wasn't able to buy a copy from the HMV store when I tried yesterday. I'd never even heard of the film, or Stein, until I was watching a clip from a Richard Dawkins lecture on Youtube recently where the 'Sexpelled' parody of this was shown, after which Richard explained that it was a parody of the film 'Expelled'. I know that the film claims to be about how people are being harassed and discriminated against for their beliefs, and I know that Richard feels that the film was misrepresented when he was requested to give an interview, and that is as much as I know.
I read the discussion of the proposal to bid for the rights and existing materials of the film, and wanted to know more before deciding whether to make a donation.
I did read the auction notice; it seems that you get all existing materials, but it's not known what actually does exist. 'Lavenders', 'Colour reversals' and 'Matrices' were all mentioned, but none of these would have been likely to have been used in the making of this film. Indeed, matrices were used for Technicolor imbibition printing, a process which has not been used for years, and when it was used the matrices remained the property of Technicolor, were held by them in their vaults, and could not be sold. It seems that the list of elements in the auction notice is just a standard one which they would use for any film; if these exist they are included in the sale, but there is no indication as to what actually existed for this film, what may have already been discarded, and what still exists. It is also unclear exactly what the terms of the contract for the video distribution of the original film are, and whether these would impose any restriction on what may be done with the film by whoever wins the rights at auction.
You obviously know considerably more about this film than I do; you described it as being 'particularly vile', I simply wanted to know what it was about this film which you, and many others, find so offensive, and also what benefit there would be if it were possible to buy the rights to this film at auction.