Bill Maher's new film, a documentary comedy called RELIGULOUS (a combination of the words religious and ridiculous), examines the connections of the big three religions (from the Judeo-Christian credo of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) with politics and the news stories of recent years. Whatever your personal flavor of religion, you can't deny that religion has affected everything it touches in our world today. And not always in a good way, as so many would have you believe. It might be hard to believe, but outside of the many predominately-Muslim countries and perhaps Vatican City, the US is the most religious country in the world today.
Maher's intelligently witty and wry view of the world as displayed in 
RELIGULOUS will likely garner him an Academy Award nomination for Best Documentary. And it couldn't come at a better time. With the current crazy economic picture, people around the world can use a good laugh... as well as some education. Though most who will pay to see this film will most likely already be in agreement with Maher, it's possible that his matter of fact questioning of the fairy stories that most believe to be actual truth, and called "religion" by them, just might pose a serious question to some. And questioning has to be a good thing.
Maher opens while standing on the Ground Zero of Megiddo, the prophesied location of the final battle of Armageddon as written in Revelation. He points out that the US is now helmed by a man and a political party (Republicans) who believe in "the end of days." As Maher says, having people who yearn for the end of the world by drastic tragedy running a country can't possibly be a good thing for anyone. And that's hard to disagree with. If someone wants something bad enough
they will probably do whatever they can to help bring it to fruition. And if most American yearn for peace, but elect someone who yearns for the total destruction of humanity, then they are electing someone counter to their own best interests. This dichotomy is the greatest barrier to world peace today. Too bad the religionists of all the big three don't want to recognize this base conflict of personal interest. One of many good reasons to never vote for end-days-religionists.
In RELIGULOUS Maher shows a bar graph illustrating the percentage of Americans who are non-religious. We learn that in American 16% of all people 
are non-religious. That's more than the number of African Americans, Jews, and many other minority groups who have no problem getting their point of view in front of the people who make our laws and run our country. Then why, Maher asks, are this 16% not having an impact on national discussions? This unheard and unfocused 16% minority needs to vote as a block. Maher's goal is to give these people the clarity and motivation they need to get them out of the closet and do something before it's too late.
Maher doesn't go to the real nutcases, he's more interested in asking questions of the partially sane and apparently rational religionists who believe in something Maher regards as insane. For example, why do we recognize that the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus are fantasies of imagination, when most people accept that a man called Jesus was real, or someone had a baby without being impregnated when there is a complete absence of proof? Or why do people pray to images on food and in clouds that just by chance look like some religous figure? The answer religionists give is always "faith."In other words, "faith" is defined as: if I believe it to be so, why then it must be so because I have "faith" that it is.
It's this complete misunderstanding of the idea of "faith" that has created the current global economic problems. Bankers had "faith" (because they wanted only to enrich their own pockets) that loaning people large sums of money to buy homes they could never afford was a good thing. Then the bankers had "faith" that these overly-leveraged people would be able to pay off their loans. So thebankers turned around and repackaged the bad loans (we call them sub-prime loans today) and sold them to other banks and investors. I don't have to tell you what happened due to their misplaced "faith," do I? That "faith": gave us the Global Financial Crash of 2008. Folks, "faith" ain't what they've been telling you it is! Wake up and think for yourself! Don't buy a house or take out a loan you can't repay. Don't belive your religious leaders who live high on the hog on your hard earned dollars while you're living in a carboard box on the street somewhere. That ain't "faith" that's simple gullability. Indeed, "faith" should never be the answer to any question that begins with the word "why."
Maher takes us on a trip to a Christian living museum where he talks with a theme-park Jesus. We visit a "Creation Museum" where we see a saddled triceratops grazing near playing human children. Maher points out the simila
rities between the story of Jesus and the Egyptian god Horus - they were both supposedly born of virgins, the only son of their god, their mother's name was from the same root: Meri and Mary, both of royal descent, birthed in a cave on the winter solstice, both had 12 disciples, walked on water, raised from the dead, made wine from water, etc.) Read more about the similarities between Jesus and Horus here. Not mentioned by Maher in RELIGULOUS is the fact that many other mythical gods and goddesses from many myths, legends, and other religions all share the many of the same mythos as the man we call Jesus.
RELIGULOUS follows close on the heels of a few books on the same topic: Sam Harris' The End of Faith, Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion, and Christopher Hitchens' God Is Not 
Great which are all required reading for that aforementioned 16%. While these books are serious, Maher's film is consistently funny throughout and it becomes hard to not agree with his take on religion.
While in production the film was called "A Spiritual Journey" in order to obtain interviews with religious leaders. No one knew that Maher was involved in the project until he arrived for the interview. This gambit worked well for BORAT and it works almost as well for Maher, though Maher is much better known here in the US. In fact when the production went to Salt Lake City no one there would talk to them or allow them to film at all. It's not surprising that a religion based around aliens and magic underwear might not want a rationalist to be questioning them on camera.
Director Larry Charles, who scored a big hit with Sacha Baron Cohen's 
hilarious mockumentary Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan (2006), accompanies Maher as he travels around the world seeking religious nut foils for his comedy. Looking like a mute rabbi in long coat, beard and fedora, Charles's hand in the film is light as he gives Maher the reins to query various religious nuts from many denominations. Watching them try to defend religious fairy stories on camera is a hoot as are their blank stares when Maher asks them for any kind of proof for their outlandish beliefs.
After reading my review you might consider me Maher's target audience, and I am. I am one of those 16% of Americans who think that religious fundamentalists of any religious flavor are all alike, they want you to either convert or die, do as they - and their religion - say, that women were put on earth to serve men, actually believe that dinosaurs were still alive when humans were... I could go on but I'm making myself sick. None of that stuff makes any sense, it's just simply RELIGULOUS!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ © 2008 by Digital Dogs~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Digital Dogs rating: A-
MPAA rating: R for some language and sexual material.
Running Times: 101 Minutes
Producers Chelsea Barnard, Roberta Brodsky, Cara Casey, BillMaher, Kevin O'Donnell, Jonah Smith, Palmer West, Director Larry Charles,Screenplay Bill Maher, DP Anthony Hardwick, Editors Jeff Groth, ChristianKinnard, Jeffrey M. Werner, Actors Bill Maher, Steve Burg, Jose Luis De JesusMiranda, Andrew Newberg
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 |  |  | ||
| Digital Dogs, Gather Movies Correspondent - Los Angeles | ||||
Digital Dogs' column, HOLLYWOOD POV, published every Thursday to Gather Essentials: Movies is an insider's look at the art, people, and product of Hollywood. Digital Dogs is an opinionated writer, editor, and digital designer who lives and works in the Entertainment Capital of the world. DigiDogs' unique reviews are usually written well before a film's release date, and definitely worth the advance look at the films that influence the world. Keep up with Digital Dogs' movie review series by joining her network, or subscribing to her content. | ||||
 | ||||
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 54
This is FEATURED in Artistic Minds®
I'll be back with my comments!
Blessings ~
Rene
Thank you for posting to this group whose only purpose is to thank you for posting to this group.
"Maher opens while standing on the Ground Zero of Megiddo"
Whenever I see that name, all I can think of is that line from The Omen: "Go to the town of Megiddo. There, see the old man Bugenhagen. He alone can say how the child must die."
http://friendsofdanh.gather.com.
Our goal is to help you further your exposure and to support other gather members.
DD thanks for reminding me about this movie, it definitely sounds like a well spent Hamilton.
Mr. Maher is a National Treasure, it's a damn shame that he happens to be Swiss! LOL
Bill Maher is a satirical social and political commentator. He observes what's going on in our society and points out the more flagrant problems. One of the most flagrant problems this country faces today is the complete failure of the republicans to do what they say they are going to do to get elected. In fact, the repugs only pay lip service to most everything on their agenda and only focus on social issues they find objective. That's why they focus on non-political issues like a woman's body or marriage. How do those things have anything to do with running a country? They don't. The repugs know they can't win on the issues so they run on divisive social issues in an effort to divide the country. McCain is doing the exact same things right now.
Once the repugs take office they mess up our economy. They did with Howdy Doody... woops I mean Ronald Reagan (remember the "trickle down" theory? You're seeing the results of it today)... and they're doing it with the worst president of this country EVER, Bush.
Bushco's watch word for his presidency was "faith." He and his failure of a staff all had "faith" based political theories - which have all failed. If they believed something to be true, why then it magically must be true. And they will find the lies to support their truth. For examples simply look at everything Bushco has done. Daddy didn't finish off Sadaam, so baby bush must do the job by lying to everyone about having proof of WMD. They had "faith" and they forced the entire country - and the world - to hold the same "faith" as truth. They had "faith" that giving tax breaks and tax rebates and incentives to the obscenely rich and big successful corporations would then mean that the money they saved would eventually trickle down to the rest of us. They had "faith" that if they hired their friends, family, & religious cronies to run important agencies of the US government they would be able to do a good job. But they didn't. They messed up FEMA so it couldn't respond to Katrina, they messed up our Justice Dept. by forcing a litmus test on lawyers so it couldn't do it's job, they messed up our financial and banking systems the same way... honestly, need I go on and on?
These crooks used the cover of "faith" to ruin our country just as many people use the cover of "faith" to somehow prove to themselves that all these religious fairy stories are true. Greed is simply the reward for their "faith."
I ask you all - how come I personally knew that the DOW would tank at the end of the Bushco reign? I called it when he took office and I rarely put any money in the market in the 7+ years Bushco has been in office. I knew he would mess up our economy and I saved a ton of money and kept it all in cash, putting the money in the highest earning CD's I could find. I'm on paper as having predicting this and I have witnesses to this prediction. I predicted this based on reality and facts, knowing that repugs would favor only the rich and while watching them make these incredibly bad loans to people who could never pay them back. It didn't take a mental giant to know this was coming. So please tell me, where were the so-called fiscal conservative repugs these past 7+ years? Why didn't Paulson do something about it the minute he was appointed 2 years ago? Why didn't he do something then? Because they all had "faith."
Same word, same idea, same excuse to explain their faulty thinking away, "faith." The same word religionists use when trying to explain why they believe in the unbelievable. Faith.
> "J.C.... had some ideas that, if they were generally adhered to, would make this world a far, far better place than it is today. Is that a bad thing?"
Why in the world would belief in something that doesn't exist make anything better? If this country had not been such an overly-religious nuthouse then maybe our response to Katrina might've saved some lives; maybe we wouldn't have murdered thousands of Iraqi's, maybe your investments wold have been worth a lot more money than they are today, maybe a CIA agent wouldn't have been outed to cover more lies from the religionists... and on and on.
I am a moral person, I have never broken the law, I've never killed anyone, I donate money to good causes, I have never coveted my neighbors wife or husband, I have honored my parents, etc - but I don't believe in religion so there must be some other reason why I acted in a moral manner. Its' called common sense!
No one needs an outside source to tell one how to be a good person. Just be a good person because it's the right thing to do, not because some fairy story told you to.
I think, though, that you're overlooking the role that faith plays in the lives of a great many good, charitable, honest, loving people. The fact that the concept has been hijacked, and exploited, by a bunch of dishonest, greedy, unscrupulous people who have no conscience doesn't invalidate it.
From my POV "faith" and those who profess it are searching for the answer to what happens to them after they die. Religion has offered a nice compact lie about "heaven" so people can feel some relief from their fear of death. Of course, to reach heaven one has to believe in the "right" god or else they'll go to hell. And in other religions if you don't believe in the "right" god then that gives the true believers the lawful right to kill those non-believers.
Honestly, noon of that makes any sense at all!
And I don't believe that you have any more reliable knowledge of who, or what force, set this universe into motion, and sustains it, than anyone else. Belief and knowledge are, again, two entirely different things. Your "beliefs" are no more valid than anyone else's, my friend (and if you have any kind of definitive proof to support your beliefs I'd be very interested in seeing it).
As far as I'm concerned people can believe in what they want to believe in. I am not telling anyone what to believe, I'm simply telling you what I don't believe in. No one should be telling anyone what to believe in. No one should be pushing prayers on me in schools and in public places, no one should be telling me what to do with my body, no one has the right to tell anyone else who they should marry or should not marry because of their gender. No one should be hiding behind religion while they go out and have annonymous gay sex in a men's bathroom.
I see no atheist forcing their beliefs on all the nutcases who believe in the supernatural. So why then must our society continue to force their religious rules on the rest of us?
And, BTW, allow me to take you up on your own request, as you typed, I'd love to see your response, would you please provide me with...
> "definitive proof to support your beliefs I'd be very interested in seeing it"
Seperation of Church and State all the wayyyyyyyyyyyyy
Can't wait to see this.
You judge others "nutcases" based on the assumption that they could not possibly have witnessed real things you have not. That is self worship, and nothing more. You may claim you are "objective", or "open-minded" all you wish, but it will not change the judgmental nature of your behaviour.
15 years ago I would have been a lot more strident in my disdain for religion of all stripes - but I know so many intelligent people who believe in Christ or Vishnu or Allah that I've come to realise that intelligence and faith belong in different realms of human experience like poetry and nuclear physics.
Personally, I believe that when I die that's it, and like Groucho's Country Club, any god I can conceive of isn't worth believing in. But that's just me. If you want to believe something else that fills that void that so many of us feel - that's fine too, so long as you don't force your beliefs on me.
Must say tho, I could do with a lot less "God Bless America" & "In God we Trust." And I think that's a big part of Maher & the 16%'s problem - religionists tend to want to impose their beliefs on the rest of us, so that a homogenized Protestantism has become the de facto main stream default position.
It's not the Spanish Inquisition, but it's pretty annoying sometimes.
PS NOBODY expects the Spanish Inqiuisition.
The word itself defines me as one who is without the god in which I don't believe. It presupposes the existence of god. For me it's more that god doesn't enter my equation, and I'd rather not be defined by a label that presuppose god.
Don't have any better suggestion - but certainly not the smug "Bright." Might as well just call yourselves "The Self-Chosen People."
And BTW - Maher is on the very mild side - if you want real anti-theism, check out Christopher Hitchens - quite entertaining but not for the true believers who want to keep their blood pressure under control.
This conversation we're having is what I love about blogging. I have a string point of view as most of you do and even if we don't agree I find it fascinating.
try it sometime.
Interesting...
But, here's the deal . . . I'm going to SEE the movie for myself. And, I suggest you make one yourself, because you definitely have a lot of material within for a good film -- with all that you've got going on inside . . . tooth fairies, and this mesh~mash of religious ideas that you have stored up . . . GOOD LORD! DD ~ I'd put my money on you making a million dollar movie (no less) . . . no doubt -- I've got that kinda FAITH -- or DISCERNMENT -- take your pick . . .
GOOD DISCUSSION! I can't wait for your next REVIEW/COMMENTARY . . . going to stock up on popcorn now!
No one knows for sure. All the visions and so forth used to be called drug induced hallucinations in my day so, how come some are and some are not. We all pray, pray that things will be good, but it is us, our positive affirmations that goad us on, not a guy with a long beard on a cloud playing a harp. All these images are made up by men, like mother Goose. There is a force in this Universe, but like aliens, I don't think we would see them in our image. i love Bill Mahar and can't wait to see this film! 'Bout time!
I do agree with what Rosa said to a degree... I certainly believe that a man called Jesus might have lived as there is evidence on a few grave sites that mention his name, and even though I know the bible was written by men appx 50-70 years after the death of this man called Jesus, I know that the stories within its pages were written by men - most of whom were not alive at the time jesus was. This simple fact alone proves that the bible was not the word of some god. Which leads me to ask you all if you've ever played the game called "Telephone?"
Stories change each time they are repeated. In addition, at the time news and information were told by Bards and Griots (the storytellers of their time). Before writing was practiced by everyone the only way to pass along news and history were through these town-crier types of people who carried the news via an oral tradition. This is where the bible stories came from. Men told the stories within it for years before they were actually written down. And, as I said, stories change each time they are told. Just try it yourself.
But I do think that most of these people who had an impact on our world and were considered important enough for others to write about them prolly did exist or were perhaps amalgams of a variety of people who did exist. I just know we have no proof that any of these people professed talking with god or hearing voices from god because at the time they would have been burned as witches since speaking to beings that did not exist was considered either crazy or witches.
But I certainly do believe that these men most likely existed and obviously had an impact on our lives and continue to do so.
And you're mostly right about the translation. Many translations are inaccurate, because they've been changed to conform to the beliefs of the beliefs of various branches of Christianity and other religions. But going back to the oldest renderings of the scriptures will ensure that you are getting the most accuarte translation, and there are some hard working translators who have done that and for centuries have produced the most accurate translations of the Bible, without any additions (or subtractions, like the travesty of most translations choosing to omit the name of God: Yahweh, or in English: Jehovah)
And again, here is where faith comes into the picture: If you believe that Word of God found in the Bible is true, then you know that He is the author, men are merely the scribes who recorded what he directed. Then too, if God is the author, then He would make sure that an accurate record of his Word survives time and imperfect men.
Thanks for sharing.
I agree with the idea that statues and medals and trickling waters or bottles of water have added the superstition to a simple set of truths that were reportedly given to us by an entity that calls itself God. No wonder He said not to make any likeness of anything in heaven or earth to bow down to. Also people, both well intentioned and power hungry, have rushed into the masses of searchers and added their own opinions and controls until we are faced with a myriad of 'religions' across the world that finally make people turn away in disgust. Some are mistaken ... some have made it a business ... some teach many partial truths mixed with error, some worship the Creator.
For all these reasons ... I don't use the word religion to describe a person's genuine search for the Creator. His genuine desire to know whether or not that Creator cares about Him or has in any way communicated to him.
I LOVED the posts of Lewis K He is turning people away from all the superstitious, religious idea's back to logic. He is saying begin with the truth that you can grasp hold of. I would like to add another fact of logic to his rusty nail. Not to add to a particular line of thinking at this time, put to show possibilities of really finding truth.
You must, of course, have a desire to know truth. We've a tendency to only want to prove our preference :)
Lewis has prevailed upon the scientific laws of our universe to determine the facts about his rusty nail. And I'm sure you all are reasonable enough to accept his logic. As we take that same fact to a larger scale you might find yourself wanting to resist accepting it, not because the laws of nature changed but because that truth might feel like it will intrude upon the view you have chosen to believe regarding reality. If you give into that, then you become one of those that are choosing to falsify your 'religious' thought to please your self. A false preacher so to speak. It is a temptation we are all prone to.
Everyone in this world knows that something cannot come from nothing. Many scientists try to falsify this absolute law of our universe because they cannot live with the conclusion that must be concluded. Hmmmm ... strange wording :) I love astro physics (for dummies) one author actually mentioned that we were created from a singularity. (To keep it short) A singularity is usually the center of a black hole. A black hole is a portion of space the size of a pin head to the size of ??? a galaxy? I don't think that big. But anyway ... a portion of matter got packed tighter and tighter due to it's gravitaional pull that it kind of implodes and the mass increased beyond belief as it continues by it great gravitational pull to suck in more and more. Imagine mount Everest being squeezed so tight it is the size of a baseball. & yet that baseball still contains all the matter that was in the mountain. These black holes can suck in whole solar systems. They finally explode spewing out billions of trillions of lbs of matter and energy creating a big bang. Is that how we were created? Of course not. That's not creation. That brought nothing into existence. It simply took matter that had already been created and changed its structure into other matter.
If any man will acknowledge the truth that under the laws of our universe something cannot come from nothing he will understand that is automatic proof that our existance is an affect from a cause outside of our universe. Even a child can know this because he has no personal philosophy to protect.
Also, last thing I'll say, if we take just one other law of our universe into consideration; the 2nd law of thermodynamics, we know beyond any doubt that matter and energy spewed into existance did not, and cannot, come together to form more and more complicated structures. It is impossible under the laws of our universe. That fact forces one other conclusion. Whatever the source ... the cause of the existence of our universe is ... not only is it outside our universe, but it has intellect and retains power over the matter and energy that it created.
I'll stop. Trust logic. Logic will bring you face to face with an entity that calls itself God. Forget manmade religion (although I believe there are many churchs founded on logic that teach and learn together about the God they discovered. I'm not knocking all churches) I'm just saying keep your priorities straight. First commit to accept TRUTH. Follow logic then ... ??? more for another time. :)
We can only see as far back as the Big Bang - whatever's beyond/before that you can call god if you wish - but that's faith not logic. For a fascinating take on on this problem read "The Blind Watchmaker" by Richard Dawkins
I'm going to have to put you all away and read the books that are piling up. Also sitting here is The House of Leaves by Mark Z Danielewski (I keep reading one or two page of his) and The Hidden Face of God by Gerald SchroederMIT trained scientist working in physics and biology. I'll bet I can guess which of those don't interest you :)
I thought both of your above comments had interesting points and were well written.
One thing I don't get about Maher though is that he very arrogantly stands in judgement of religion (especially at the end of the film) from a very poorly constructed foundation. He says he believes in doubt - thats fine, but if all a person has is doubt how can they judge ideas at all? That is simply put, illogical. What standard can he use when he claims to have no standard?
Its clear that he does have a standard. He believes in survival and entertainment and feeling superior to others. The documentary is flawed because of this. Maher clearly states his objectives at the end of the film - if we were to watch the end first it would be obvious that he set about looking for people who would be easy targets. He picked people who could help him present religion as ridiculous. Anything that would not support his perspective would logically make it only to the cutting room floor.
This said, I really liked the movie. It should be labeled properly as a documentary of ridiculous religion, not a representation of all religion.
Google: Mars Hill Rob Bell and check out the site.
Pope John Paul II came for a visit to Mother Theresa in India and brought with him a present - a collection of Rolls Royce type cars (3 I think). She thanked the Pope and when he left she sent them to be sold to buy medical supplies. There is poisonous religion and positive religion. In either case, its not the people we should keep our focus on - they are supposed to be an example to the rest of us about who God is and how we can be freed by Him, but they will fail and embarass themselves and their religions simply because they are human. People are not perfect and aren't capable of being perfect - the standard with which a person judges a religion should not be the people (though they can be definite evidence of cure or curse).
The value of a religion is found in what it brings out in you.
Don't look at rituals, ceremonies, histories of people connected to the religion - look at what it leads you to.
Once you strip away the people representing the religion (good or bad), food, clothes, habits, rituals and ceremonies of a religion - what is left? Is there anything worth talking about?
What are the fundamental truths upon which the religion is built?
Does it lead you to freedom, or does it lead you to oppression? Does it lead you to liberation, or to burden? I don't trust humanity to be able to do it ourselves, without God. We are capable of doing terrible things. As things stand, we need the divine to step in and guide us. Don't trust me, or any other person - trust what you begin to understand as you try God out.
THe God of the Bible says that if we call out, He will answer and act to deliver us.