In a light-hearted take on the culture wars, FLOCK OF DODOS tweaks egos and pokes fun at both sides in the evolution vs. intelligent design debate. Evolutionary biologist and filmmaker Dr. Randy Olson rides along with jarg... more »on-impaired scientists and jargon-rebranding intelligent designers as they engage in the comic theatrics that erupt wherever science and religion clash over the origins of life. From the shadowy, well-funded headquarters of the pro-intelligent design Discovery Institute in Seattle to the rarefied talk of Olson s science buddies around a late-night poker table, FLOCK OF DODOS lends a thoughtfully critical ear to the wonderful personalities and passions driving the Darwin wars.
By explaining the quirks of evolution with colorful visual aides while respectfully listening to people of faith, FLOCK OF DODOS is intelligently designed for popular appeal (VARIETY). And if you find it difficult to determine which side of the issue is the bigger flock of dodos, Olson offers up his 83-year-old mother, Muffy Moose, as the ultimate head dodo who provides the Rodney King perspective of can't we all just get along? This enlightened, fun film is a must-see for anyone who cares about the issues of our time.
DVD Features: Top Ten Questions; Shared Visions: A Comic Debate; Pulled Punches: Controversial Content; Vetoed Comedy: Humorous Deleted Scenes; Panel Discussion Highlights; Howard Hughes Medical Institute Clips; Animation Outtakes; Filmmaker Biography« less
"This is a very insightful condemnation of Intelligent Design and the approach of evolutionists, with minimal humor, but a lot of fun. Olson takes a relaxed approach to this huge controversy, and teaches us a great deal in the process.
He tells the story with some of the style of Michael Moore, using dry wit, multiple interviews, and an overt agenda. He was an evolutionary marine biologist, a student of the great Stephen Jay Gould, who decided to go into film, and here looks at all angles of the intelligent design controversy and how it tries to attack evolution. The movie is short on content and long on entertainment, and that's for a purpose. The goal of the movie is to show how behind biologists are in public relations, and how much more they need to do.
The movie did this admirably. The evolutionists come across as either Ivory Tower scientists who can't relate to the public, or real prigs who you wouldn't want to drink with. The Intelligent Design folks are all pretty likable, but simultaneously really off when it comes to science, for the most part not knowing anything behind what they are saying. Olson wishes to point out this huge gulf between the facts and likability, and call scientists to a place where they can start to actually reach out to the public on a level that doesn't require four years of grad school to understand. The scientists are therefore the dodos in the film.
This movie's raised a lot of controversy because the Discovery Institute, based in Seattle and the leader of the ID movement, complained that they weren't consulted and that the movie is very biased against them, for instance making it look like their budget is 5 million instead of 4 million. Likewise the scientific community complained that the movie makes them look bad and that Olson is calling for them to dumb down their material. Yet Olson tried to use material indicative of the personalities, even excluding the comment that Behe made that he didn't care what was taught in public schools because his children don't attend them. This comment wasn't reflective of all of the rest of Behe's interview, and so therefore was excluded from the film. (It can be viewed, however, as an extra on this DVD.)
There are moments to smile at here, rather than laugh out loud. Some of the focus on the director's mom, Moose, was perhaps a bit irrelevant. But the film overall is a brilliant work, simultaneously condemning both sides, and calling for radical change in the way that science is presented- but in a light-hearted manner that few can effectively achieve on film."
Educational and interesting...
LARRY | Capitol Heights, MD | 06/25/2007
(4 out of 5 stars)
"Wow! I liked *Flock of Dodos*. You have to have an open mind to view this documentary on evolution and intelligent design. It is both educational and interesting. This film touches aspects of the debate that you may not have seen in the media.
What is the difference between evolution and intelligent design? What is the difference between intelligent design and creationism? If you don't know or not sure, then this is the one you need to watch.
It's interesting to see how much and how long these people have been fighting for what is to be taught in the schools, especially the Kansas Board of Education. It is amazing to see what people believe about the origin of life.
One camp believes in "teaching the science". The other camp believes in "teaching the controversy". So, one believes that presenting natural evidences (fossils, etc.) is the way to go in schools. The other believes that one should lay out pros and cons of each theories/approaches. The bigger question that this film presents is what exactly is intelligent design? And how is this really different from evolution or even from creationism?
This film touches on the state boards of education in a few cities, the Discovery Institute, scientists/evolutionists and their views, Christians, and other whatnots. For a film that is 1 and a half hour long, it is packed with information. You just have to watch it.
Now, Olson did a good job on the subject of intelligent design. There's just some parts of it that could have been edited out. I think that Olson tries to be like Michael Moore. The difference is that Moore has more balls to confront people. Olson tries to confront people but he ends up liking his interviewees even if he disagrees with him. Nothing wrong with that."
A Quality Film on a Difficult Subject
Guy Owen | Hyattsville, MD USA | 08/18/2007
(5 out of 5 stars)
"I do not think that Mr. Olson comes down firmly on one side or the other in this film, even though he identifies himself as an Evolutionist. This is not the point of this film. He most definitely is not bashing anyone. Instead, it shows the difficulty that comes about when two sides have such a hard time even discussing such a topic. If anything, he takes the Pro-Evolutionists to task for not being able to clearly articulate their points of view to common folk.
I'm sure many of us have had good or bad experiences in discussing certain topics with family and friends. If we have a wide-enough group of contacts there must inevitably be the individual or group that you simply cannot continue the discussion with because you cannot understand how they could possibly think the way they do. This film shows why it is so difficult for Evolutionists to engage in a debate when they mostly feel there is no reason for a debate. And it is told with a great deal of sensitivity, respect and humor toward both sides -- especially endearing when he presents his own mother's points of view (the last scene of which left me chuckling for hours).
I am sorry, but I cannot compare Randy Olson to Michael Moore because I do not see where Mr. Moore shows any respect toward anyone who disagrees with him. Where Mr. Olson presents an engaging experience, Mr. Moore simply comes across as a smartass.
Upon watching this film, you may be surprised at how serious the divide on Intelligent Design and Evolutionism really is. Other than sound bites on TV, you may not even be aware that there is a group with $5 Million in funding geared toward promoting their point of view. Truly a fine bit of film-making!"
A Must See!
Carl | Springfield, Missouri | 10/12/2007
(5 out of 5 stars)
"I don't usually feel the need to leave feedback, but Dr. Olson's poignant and clever documentary Flock of Dodos really got me thinking about things differently. Times when my perspective changes, or even shifts a little, are worth noting.
I am a high school biology teacher in a rather conservative town. I consider myself a Christian, but also believe that evolution and religion aren't at odds. As an educator, I am often frustrated that others in the field turn so many good, and yes, intelligent, people away from science because they refuse to acknowledge that much of the country and world do not hold the same set of beliefs that they do. Many of my students arrive in biology class opposed to hearing about Darwin because they have been raised to believe all scientists are atheists liberals. I have learned it takes patience, understanding, and tolerance to be effective and so many in science treat this sensitive topic without regard to other perspectives and values. Attacking someone's core set of beliefs is a losing strategy.
Dr. Olson's film is a masterpiece because he gets this problem across in an engaging way that resonates with me. Yes, many scientists are dodos when it comes to debate and exchanging ideas. You cannot hope to provide a convincing argument when you begin by being close-minded and argumentative. Flock of Dodos is fun, funny, and makes a statement about where we are as a nation. If we have any hope of evolving and moving forward by incorporating the best science into the average American experience, this film should serve as a wake up call.
I am online purchasing Flock of Dodos to show to my 9th grade students. They will laugh and my hope is that they will also think about things differently and even be more open to new ideas."
Enjoyable Infotainment
Todd A. Garrison | Tampa, Florida | 11/29/2007
(4 out of 5 stars)
"Writer/director/narrator Randy Olson stars in this documentary exploring some of the ideas driving the Creationism vs. Evolution controversy. By utilizing light-hearted, graphical animations juxtaposed with first-hand interviews, the filmmaker makes fairly entertaining work of fleshing out a few of the fundamental issues underlying the debate.
The film begins at the narrator's home, where he explains a little about himself and his background before embarking on a personal journey to explore the intelligent design controversy through interviews with some its leading proponents. As the filmmaker himself explains, he is an evolutionary biologist, so it is pretty clear from the outset as to which side of the debate he subscribes.
His interviews with scientists and advocates are insightful and thought-provoking. To his credit, the filmmaker seems to make an honest attempt to engage his subjects in a rational, open exchange of ideas, and for the most part succeeds in presenting viewpoints that are contrary to his own personal position.
If there is a weak point in the film, for me personally it lies in the fact that it seems to lose focus when it moves from the purely substantive, scientific arguments and wanders into the more political aspects of the controversy (i.e., religious fundamentalism, separation of church and state, etc.) as well as the individual and corporate personalities influencing the present debate.
For example, the concept of irreducible complexity is introduced and explained fairly well through graphical representations and personal interviews with leading proponents. However, rather than presenting a solid counter-argument from the pro-evolutionist side based solely upon scientific reasoning, he instead shifts toward the financial funding aspects of the pro-intelligent-design movement and what its underlying motivations might be.
Personally, I would have preferred if the film stuck to the scientific arguments so I could decide for myself which side I believe.
I suppose presenting some of the personalities involved may provide part of the "entertainment" aspect of the film, and might be included to appeal to a wider audience. The card game with the obnoxious, wine-drinking, evolutionary "intellectuals" is certainly an example of this, as are some of the other characters presented, including the pro-intelligent-design school board member embroiled in political turmoil, and the filmmaker's own rather eccentric mother, who late in life has adopted a Buddhist philosophy because, "it's a happy religion."
I was not disappointed with this film. All in all, I found it to be an entertaining work aimed primarily at those preferring slightly more substance to their viewing regiment, rather than the typical "bubble-gum" fare that seems to pervade popular culture today. I would, however, have enjoyed seeing more of the substantive arguments and fewer of the political and character-driven aspects of the issue."