Justin Chang of Variety wrote,“There's an intelligent case to be made for intelligent design, …”
No there isn’t. There are less dishonest efforts, but there are no successful arguments for Intelligent Design Creationism that can pass as science. We tried to find one years ago. I, and a group of twelve other scientists approached the IDC leading authors, Johnson, Behe, and Dembski on their own terms; could IDC be scientific, and as science could it survive on its own without supernatural magic as a prop? The resulting book, “Why Intelligent Design Fails (2004, Rutgers University Press), was also cited as part of the Dover “Pandas Trial” which found that IDC was merely a religious dogma masquerading as science.
Anyone writing about film must know that editing trumps raw footage, or the intent of the people interviewed. So what is one to do? Dawkins is widely know to refuse interviews with creationists because he knows from long experience that there is no possible protection from the editing bias. In ideologically driven documentaries such as “Expelled” you might find that your “answer” was to a question the interviewer never even asked. The “Expelled” producers avoided Dawkins’s (and other’s) resistance by lying about the nature of the film they were making.
The NCSE webpages dedicated to Exposing Expelled detail this and other lies and misrepresentations made by Stein and his cohorts.