2008 inquiryRating: 11/20
Plot: Funnyman Bill Maher travels the world to have some of his questions about religion answered. Or maybe he's traveling on the world because he's a superior human being who was sent to earth by something (Note: Not a deity) to tell us all what's what in a very smug way.
Points deducted because my research shows that this contains possible misinformation. More points deducted because of the amount of stereotyping and generalizing that Maher does. Not to say this wasn't entertaining because it was. I enjoy when people are made fun of because of their beliefs. I really do. But there was just something about Maher's approach here that rubbed me the wrong way. Part of the problem is that his stated goal with this is so far from what he's trying to do. He claims he's asking these questions because he really wants answers, preaching the "Gospel of I-Don't-Know." He doesn't. He's asking these questions because it gives him the opportunity to be funny and show how much smarter he is than the average person. His well-written diatribe at the end of this, a biased faux-summary of his discoveries, could easily have been written prior to production. As a documentary, this lacks cohesion. I laughed out loud a few times, and if that was his main goal (he is, after all, a comedian), then he succeeded. Somehow, I doubt Bill Maher's main goal was to make Shane laugh, however. If nothing else, this reinforces my belief that I need to visit the Creation Museum. They have animatronic dinosaurs there!
5 comments:
"Points deducted because my research shows that this contains possible misinformation"... that's an awfully vague criticism. Details, please.
I'm going to watch this again today because even though I only saw it a year ago, not many details have stuck with me. Not really a ringing endorsement, but I liked it a lot more than an 11.
I was referring specifically to the parallelisms between Jesus and the Egyptian Horus.
I'd like this enough to give it a 14, but it was a mess and seemed to have no real purpose. He's preaching to the choir and pushing buttons, and the smug way in which he does it bugs me.
Let me say up front that I am part of the choir. I am biased. One's religious views and tolerance for Maher will definitely dictate how the movie is perceived. I do understand your views and your grade (more so a 14). Maher's smugness and attempts at humor occassionally fall flat, but I think he is suprisingly restrained most of the time, and very funny considering it is all off the cuff and considering the type of people he is dealing with.
The direction and style of the film are kind of scattershot, with some of the targets too easy, but he makes a great number of points in a mostly wry way. This is not an easy topic to tackle, and considering how sensitive the issue is, I understand why he approached it in a less confrontational way. The sad thing is that there is a great movie that could be made, but that it would be extremely dangerous, literally and from a business standpoint. Maher is like a lightweight who is forced to win on points by making a ton of jabs, instead of throwing hard punches ala Michael Moore.
I laughed a lot and effective points about religious intolerance, the logic of belief, hypocrisy, and the danger of mixing politics and religion were made. The film could have been better constructed and much more informative and hard-hitting, but I found it very entertaining just the same, and give Maher a lot of credit for even going there. The fact that going further could be so risky may be the most damning statement of all about religion. A 16.
I'd accuse him of cowardice then. It all goes back to the mixed-up purpose behind this thing. I just don't understand the need of somebody like Maher to attack the beliefs of others, no matter how silly those beliefs are. Intolerance? Sure! So, I don't understand the point of scenes like the one with the truck drivers in the truckers chapel. Those guys were harmless. They also aren't as smart as Maher, so I really thought he seemed like a bully in that scene. In his defense, he did show a snippet of an interview with a scientist (read: smart guy) who was also a Christian. So he does pick on somebody his own size, but is he really going after the right people if he wants to expose the dangers of religion? And is anybody going to watch that and say, "Huh. I didn't know religion was that dangerous...Thanks, Bill!" I doubt it.
My favorite interview was the one with the skeptical priest (or whatever he was) at the Vatican. That guy was great.
Do you think this would have been a lot better as a t.v. show? It was a mess of a movie, but having Maher focus on two interviews or places per episode might have worked better. There's definitely enough material out there for the show to go on for years and years.
A TV show is a very interesting idea. The nine viewers, including myself, might really enjoy it.
The reason behind all of this, including interviewing ignorant truckers, is the point that religion can be dangerous and destructive, and can be harmful to a society. The truckers vote, they promote their views, and I'm not convinced they would be harmless or innocent at all given the right circumstances. I thought he was very restrained and polite, considering some of the garbage that they were spewing (though that could also be because he was outnumbered in a closed room... with truckers). I agree he could have eliminated some stuff, and I would have loved for him to have added a lot of other things, but he covers a wide range of subjects in an entertaining and often thought-provoking way. Calling him a coward is totally unfair. It took guts to even touch this subject, and I think he is doing it for admirable reasons. Like his political views, his purpose is to improve our society. That's courageous and honorable, even if you don't agree with what he is saying.
Is the movie you took a break from "...Garp"? I am very curious.
Post a Comment