Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.

A Disappointing Continuation

This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

I first caught sight of this documentary on YouTube a few years ago and then stumbled upon some others like it on YouTube produced through Ilustra Media and I've then since ordered the DVD Box Set. I have repeatedly watched and followed up with my own research on the scientific facts presented in this film and the others and found them to be extraordinarily accurate and very educational. Certainly substantial material that calls for a reason to pause and contemplation on the theory of Intelligent Design. The graphic depictions are amazing, the commentary is well spoken and it keeps your interest. I highly recommend it.

I just finished watching The Case for a Creator. In the interest of full disclosure, I'll tell you that I am an atheist and am therefore biased myself. I expect that some reading that statement will probably skip over the rest of this, however, I always enjoy a challenge to my beliefs (or lack thereof) so I attempted to view this documentary with an open mind and see what sorts of assertions it made.As each claim was made, I paused the movie to do some very simple research to broaden my understanding. Without exception, I discovered each claim to be false. Not utterly false for the most part; just false enough to skip on to the next claim. The most astounding was a claim that was involved in a court case prior to the making of this film: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_DistrictI generally expect documentaries to be well researched, and this one falls well short of the mark. Whether intentionally or not, it is misleading. Regardless of any beliefs or preconceived ideas you may have, please do yourself a favor if you watch this documentary - question it. Preferably from a variety of sources. Faith shouldn't mean believing in something that is demonstrably false, or believing because you're told to.

I've seen this documentary knowing of its Christian biased view because I honestly wanted to learn what is the scientific evidence in the natural world, to a supernatural god. And although I've learn the reasons why the producer and director think like they do, I have to say, they should update their arguments. the director shows interviews with some scientists and philosophers where they basically say that it is impossible for life to exist without a creator, due to the fact that it would be improbable to happen any other way. and this is a problem. not one, I'll repeat, in the whole documentary there is not one evidence of god mechanism at work, not one proof of god as a creator can be seen. the whole premise of the argument is that the scientific knowledge we have now is way too incomplete and has gaps, therefore a creator must exist. but wait, wasn't it always like that? wasn't always the core of religious ideas about the universe, based on the lack of knowledge we had? don't scientists keep on working trying to find more and more?I was disappointed with this documentary not due to the underlying religious views, but because i was expecting to actually find an intellectual case for a creator (you know, it says in the title), but instead I have this ongoing presentation of what science is still looking for, and then with a twist justifying the existence of a creator because those gaps exist.and by the way, no, I'm not afraid of confronting my own convictions like the previous comment refers to. that's what I was expecting from this documentary. it just didn't happen.

What could have potentially been a great work, instead I found it dis-enfranchising? How so? No closed captioning or sub-titles.For us deaf/hard-of-hearing folks, this is a MUST so that we too can participate. Instead, we are cutoff.God apparently makes perfect human beings, that have 2 ears that can hear.For those of us who can't: tough beans.I watched about 5 minutes of it. I could read the lips okay, but the underlying narration, was non understandable.What a shame that such a powerful tool, instead has the power to dis-enfranchise.Wayno