Religulous is a documentary by Bill Maher, and it’s pretty much about Bill Maher, too.
“Plot”:
Bill Maher asks the question “Why are people religious? Why do people believe?”. His search takes him through the USA, to the Vatican, Amsterdam and finally to Jerusalem. He talks to people about their religions, mostly Christians, but also some Jews and Muslims, there’s a little bit about Scientology and that’s pretty much it (except for a guy who has the religion of Cannabis). [So, no Hinduism or Buddhism or anything further east or south than Islam.]
Religulous is not a very good documentary. [For those who don’t know me: this is not a reflection of some kind of hurt belief system, I’m an atheist.] Bill Maher has two issues which are the death to anyone trying to shoot a documentary (apart from him being strongly biased, that is): He doesn’t really care about what his interview partners have to say and he doesn’t listen to them. [Interestingly enough, there are only two moments in the entire documentary when the things being said to him seem to arrive in his brain, and both times it’s “simple believers” speaking, not professional priests. (Unless you count the guy who plays Jesus in the Holy Land Amusement Park or something a pro.)]
In fact, I felt the whole time like it was just a platform for Maher to make some jokes about how stupid people are who believe in… well, pretty much anything. But actually, it wasn’t really funny. It was disturbing sometimes, and sometimes it was very sad. But I didn’t laugh out loud once.
And seriously, that the Bible/the Qu’ran/the Torah is not an historical account and that there are people who believe it is anyway is not really much to base your documentary on.
Waste of time.
kalafudra's Stuff 
Er… I beg to differ. I had a blast watching Religulous. Its a documentary about religion as much as Borat is a documentary about American prejudices.
I dont think it poses or even tries to be anything more. To criticize it for what it’s not seems as moot as the pope saying ‘no condoms’ (man, could that retard be any more irrelevant?).
I haven’t seen Borat, so I can’t really draw any parallels. But from what I know, Borat pretends to point out prejudices while mocking the same stereotypes it presumably wants to clear up. Honestly, I don’t think that that’s a good concept.
I don’t think I’m criticising it for what it’s not. It is shot as a documentary, it gets marketed as a documentary and people see it as a documentary. So I can very well hold it up to the standards of a documentary.
And the pope saying “no condoms” is unfortunately not irrelevant at all.
ganz ehrlich?
ich hab gelacht. sogar laut.
und doch.. danach hatte ich einen bitteren geschmack im mund, der mich nicht los ließ, und ich hab mich geschaemt. ich wuenschte ich haette nicht gelacht, denn ich kann mich inhaltlich nur deiner meinung anschließen. maher hat es sich so verdammt leicht gemacht, hat keinen einen echten, gebildeten theologen gefragt, und seine fragen ansich waren schon so respektlos und peinlich, dass ich… also ich haette es gerne gesehn, wenn diese freundlichen trucker-katholiken maher mal ordentlich durchgeruettelt haetten. aber egal.
so oder so- deine review tut gut, auch wenn ich, wie gesagt, mich teils sehr wohl amuesiert habe.
diese kritik und die kommentare darunter:
http://fm4.orf.at/stories/1602114/
sind nur zum kotzen, ich wusste garnicht was ich antworten soll, soviel bullshit steht dort.
danke, dass du atheistin bist und trotzdem glauebige menschen akzeptieren kannst. das ist naemlich mittlerweile eine seltenheit- frueher hieß es immer, dass die hardcore-katholiken andere zum glauben zwingen wollen; mittlerweile ist es umgekehrt. als glauebiger mensch hat man es schwer in unserer gesellschaft… und die doku von maher hat das nur fein saueberlich unterstrichen.
Du, ich kann nachvollziehen, dass du gelacht hast, ein Teil von mir war auch amüsiert. Aber der Teil von mir, der schnell brüskiert ist, wird scheinbar immer größer und hat mehr oder weniger gleich auf Maher losgeschimpft. Da vergeht einem dann das Lachen. :)
Ich denk mir, es ist gerade sehr modern in gewissen Kreisen, wenn man Atheist oder Agnostiker ist – Religion ist voll out. Und der Mensch ist ein Herdentier, der alles auf seinem Weg zum neuen Sammelpunkt zertrampelt.
Ich steh da auch nicht komplett drüber – auch ich möcht die Leute manchmal am liebsten watschen, besonders wenn’s um so Dinge wie Kreationismus oder Intelligent Design geht.
Aber im Endeffekt glaube ich, dass es sehr wohl gute Gründe für Religion gibt und dass jeder Mensch für sich entscheiden soll, woran er glaubt.
Das einzige, was ich so gar nicht aushalt, ist wenn jemanden ein anderer Glauben aufokktruiert wird – sei das jetzt das mich jemand bekehren möchte, oder dass religiöse Leute für ihren Glauben lächerlich gemacht werden.
I think you took the documentary a bit too seriously. And you were right about him not listening to everybody. I don’t think he ever wanted to.
But it was definitively funny .. lol funny.
No, he never wanted to listen. That was not the point of the movie. The point was to make belief ridiculous. And I’m not saying that you can’t make fun of religion – or atheism – but it should be done with respect. And he lacked that.
Maybe in a different context, his jokes would have been funny. As it was, I couldn’t laugh.
Probably I’m just a humourless bitch. ;)
I agree. He did not interview people like Tim Keller, William Lane Craig, Ravi Zacharias, or R. Albert Mohler (to name a few protestant thinkers).
Be careful with atheism. Darwin once said, “The horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would anyone trust the conviction of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?” The point being, if we are just evolved, and if religion is something that we will soon evolve out of, then why trust my thoughts concerning atheism? Will we evolve from atheism as well? Atheism cannot prove reason/epistemology (nor purpose, nor morality).
Why should I trust your thoughts concerning atheism indeed? I don’t know you, don’t know the least thing about you, your education, background, general status in life, etc. I don’t trust people just because they tell me to. (And neither do you, I hope.)
And maybe we’ll evolve from atheism as well. Who’s to know? I certainly don’t.
And atheism may not be able to prove reason/epistemology/purpose/morality (though I personally do believe that it does at least explain them more conclusively than anything else I know), but neither can religion.
I don’t mean to come across as rude, but if somebody who doesn’t know me at all tells me to be careful with my view of the world or my belief, I tend to get a little cross.
I agree with Kalafudra’s reply.
Darwin’s quote was taken out of context here. He was referring to religion, not Atheism. Atheism is born out of doubt and the capacity to self-evaluate which is not something that a monkey’s mind is capable of (or is capable to a lesser extent from that of homo sapiens).
Atheism cannot prove reason/epistemology. Nor does religion. But unlike religion, Atheism does not claim that purpose, morality, reason/epistemology comes from belief in an imaginary super-being.
It’s only natural that religion will be something we will evolve out of.
I also beg to differ! It was the funniest thing i have seen for a long time and being an athiest myself even more so… Your review is crap