If you enjoy Bill Maher's take on religion along with his brand of humor, I would recommend taking the time to see this movie.

Like Bill Maher, my wife and I are very skeptical of organized religion, and if you find yourself in this category, you'll both laugh out loud and be scared shitless. He also uses cut ins from old religious movies and other video that's cut into the movie to make a point, most of them being pretty funny. The Documentary will probably be his last on the subject, as it was pretty entertaining that any of the participants would willingly be interviewed by someone making a documentary that's openly questioning their beliefs and allowing most of those interviewed to hang themselves with their own words. Bill asks these guys tough questions and many can't answer so they say some of the craziest things.

One thing is for sure, and that is that Bill Maher is more educated on religion in general than almost everyone he interviews. Maybe that's why he's so skeptical.

Well maybe Bill Maher needs to interview some people who can actually speak their minds and have a good laugh at themselves too. Folks like Jim Wallis, Tony Campolo, Phillip Yancey, Chris Taylor....

So if you're skeptical about organized religion, are you okay with disorganized religion?

For me, more so.

And thanks for the review Vitalogy. Appreciated.

It bothers me significantly to see things like "Victory Christian Mission Center". Victory over what exactly?

One's own mind? Well, ok. There's a case for that. Wouldn't be my call, but I can see that one as being valid.

Victory over others? No way.

Victory over the nation? Same. No way.

Victory over the "other" religions?

See what I mean?

IMHO, organized religion, of any kind, presents a danger proportional to it's size. At some point, that collection of power, in the form of willing and able people who have swallowed enough of the dogma whole to be a problem, will be leveraged by assholes looking to fulfill their own agenda and that's where I draw the line.

I don't see how such a mass of people can exist without the temptation to exploit them also existing.

Having lots of sects helps some. This breaks up the unity that presents as a danger.

Some religions work this way intentionally. Quakers, for example, just don't permit the kind of structures that are a problem. Like those guys a lot.

(have many reasons, but on this thread, that's the primary one)

There is an awful lot of religious debate framed in terms of war. Don't like that one bit. Some larger scale religious leaders do not do this very much. Wallis is one of them.

But there are just a lot that do. There are enough that it's really a black mark on the whole affair.

Combine this temptation with general ignorance, and you've got a recipe for disaster every time. The only questions really are who and when and how they will choose to employ it.

That said, I'm all for freedom of religion, so long as it includes freedom FROM religion, as all these things are personal choices. As such, they really shouldn't carry any significant authority.

And, if you think about it, given the authority thing, why even bother with very large scale religion? It's gonna be a problem, isn't authoritative, and probably isn't healthy for a very large number of practitioners.

IMHO, the burden should be on those wanting to further develop large scale religion as to exactly how they aim to protect their members and us, and detail as part of that, why their religion, in particular, deserves that deference given the potential harm we've seen historically, over and over and over.

Saw it last week. Enjoyed it pretty well. Maher's take on religion is similar to mine. It's more than simply a movie that takes potshots at religion, though - Maher makes a serious, sobering point at the end, an appeal to non-religious people to rise up (since we are larger minority than any organized religious group combined) and take control of our governments before religious fanatics who do have control of it ruin the world for real.

A friend who saw the film with me was a bit put off by the director's style, the kind of "gotcha" interviews that Maher did. The director was the same guy who did "Borat" and according to my friend who has seen that, the style was much the same.

The most amazing thing about Bill Maher is how incredibly quick he is with one-liners. He's got an incredible improvisational mind.

Andrew

I do like Bill Maher from what I've seen on the internet. I don't watch his TV show.

The religious whacko's deserve what they are getting.

Words like "Victory" are religious fundamental buzz words like "justification" or phrases like "slain in the spirit" and "bought by the blood."

These buzz words and phrases work like a secret code of arms which is great material for a guy like Maher.

Thankfully there are far more down to earth Christians who don't use this kind of terminology when expressing their beliefs. I'm not sure if Maher spent anytime with people like that, which could be a nice balance.

You got whackos on all sides of life not just in the religious community.

I may need to check this movie out at some point.

Maher does have a great sense of improv.

Chris, I'm sure he has spent time with the down to earth types. Bet he has no problem with them. They are not ever targets. And that's good.

whackos on all sides of life!

Yep!! Maybe I should modify that T-shirt Littlesongs suggested: "Are you a Nut-Bag?"

>>Victory over what exactly?

Sin control in your life. Christianity does not make you perfect but forgiven.

"...but forgiven"

Another buzz phrase that is thrown around.

Yes there is forgiveness, however I don't attach myself to the bumper sticker variety.

ok...redeemed...saved...ransomed...rescued...found...regenerated...pardoned

>>buzz phrase

with eternal meaning...

All those words sound good but have little meaning or value outside of the church walls.

How about words like: respect, dignity, caring, compassion, listener, friend.

>>How about words like...

Great...all character of Jesus Christ who claims to be God...who works inside your heart to outside the church and into the world.

Chris, us "down to earth type" Christians don't make for such fun movie making. If he was trying to make a serious documentary about religion and show a cross section, maybe we'd be in there too.

I think Maher is really funny, quick, and intelligent. I saw him live in PDX a couple of years ago, and he's great in that mode as well.

Broadway-

Of course I knew those were characteristics of Jesus, I was being a bit more subtle than you. BTW- how goes your new venture of relaxation from the morning grind?

Warner-Agreed. We're just not whacko enough for the media. We offer low ratings and un-stimulating quotes. We make Bill Maher work for every laugh.

I saw _Religulous_ yesterday. In making this movie, Maher traveled through various parts of the US as well as to Holland, Vatican City, England, and Israel. The movie included viewpoints from various flavors of Protestant Christianity, Catholicism, LDS, Judaism, Islam, Scientology, and a "Cannabis Church." Maher interviewed a wide variety of people, including run-of-the-mill believers, preachers, a man who believes that he is the incarnation of Jesus, scholars, Ken Hamm, scientists, and a Jewish inventor. "Wackiness" is in the eye of the beholder, as I think that some of the viewpoints expressed in the movie would generally be considered mainstream in contemporary society. The main strength of this movie is that it covered a lot of ground.

What disappointed me the most about this movie was that it seemed to be put together in a slapdash way. Instead of presenting the interviews in a linear fashion, as I would have expected, the producers chose to present the interviews in bits and pieces. In some cases, one would see the film cutting back and forth between Bill's commentary (mainly shot in a van) and segments of interviews. In other parts of the movie, pieces of different interviews were juxtaposed against one another. This made it nearly impossible to take in all of the doctrinal details espoused by any one person who was interviewed. I found this very frustrating; for instance, while visiting the Holy Land theme park in Florida, Bill managed to spark an argument between two visitors. Footage of this was presented in bits and pieces, so it was impossible to tell what these two people were arguing.

At the very end of the film, Bill reiterates the point that some parts of Christianity and Islam are on a collision course that could have deadly consequences. If this was intended to be the main point of the movie, then many of the people that Bill interviewed weren't the right ones to effectively make this point.

B-

Alfredo_t: At the very end of the film, Bill reiterates the point that some parts of Christianity and Islam are on a collision course that could have deadly consequences. If this was intended to be the main point of the movie, then many of the people that Bill interviewed weren't the right ones to effectively make this point.

I got an entirely different impression of the end of the movie. I didn't think his point was that Christianity and Islam for on a "collision course" - rather, that all organized religions were putting Mankind in jeopardy and that the 16% of non-affiliated/non-religious voters (this may have been in the United States), larger than any religious voting block, should stand up and take control of their governments to keep the religious nuts in the United States, Iran, etc. from destroying the world. And I thought Maher and director Larry Charles made that point very effectively.

Andrew

Andrew, I got the same point.