# Re: "Religulous looks interesting" **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [February 24, 2009, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148 "2009-02-24T02:58:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Klif](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f08c70/32.png) [@Klif](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Klif)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/1 "2009-02-24T02:58:58Z")
But it’s not, Joel! It’s not interesting at all. Bill Maher interviews only those he can make fun of – those with less knowledge or those who speak in the awful language of metaphor (or even worse, the metaphorors who don’t even themselves understand the comparisons they’re making!) It’s edited horribly, too. Nearly every interview ends with Bill Maher making what he believes to be a good point or a good jab, and then the camera cuts to the subject looking at Maher either dumbfoundedly or blankly. And it’s so obvious (to me, anyway?) that these are cuts from an entirely different part of the interview. Roger Ebert said: “I report faithfully that I laughed frequently. You may very well hate it, but at least you’ve been informed.” I beg to differ; I laughed maybe twice, and I was not informed! Ebert continues with " Perhaps you could enjoy the material about other religions, and tune out when yours is being discussed. That’s only human nature." While I agree with the sentiment of the humans and the blocking out, I disagree with the sentiment (also stated elsewhere by Maher) that the film was a range of views on various world religions. It sure seemed Christianity-centric until the last fifteen minutes or so. I like to hear differing opinions on matters that are important to me. It’s the reason I used my free redbox code on this movie (while my partner here at work wasted his on “Tropic Thunder” (ugh), “The Happening” (ugher), and “Max Payne” (ughest) – but that’s a story for another time). But I didn’t get that out of this movie. It just wasn’t worth it. I wish there were more comedic, well-versed, intelligent, wise people willing to give a proper treatment to BOTH sides of the matter of Faith. It’s unfortunate, too, that Bill Maher can be really funny! But in this movie, he’s – something else entirely. Take, for instance, the closing monologue, wherein he says basically that he doesn’t do religion because he thinks religious people can have no special insights that he doesn’t already have. Really? That’s his argument against Faith? That if he doesn’t understand it, nobody can? ---
**Author:** ![quixotic78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/3ab097/32.png) [@quixotic78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/quixotic78)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/2 "2009-02-24T03:27:36Z")
> [@Klif](#): > > Take, for instance, the closing monologue, wherein he says basically that he doesn’t do religion because he thinks religious people can have no special insights that he doesn’t already have. Really? That’s his argument against Faith? That if he doesn’t understand it, nobody can? I haven’t seen the movie since it premiered, but I don’t recall this being part of his closing monologue, like, at all. As I recall, the main thrust of his final word was that these people (i.e., the religulous) should be taken seriously – not because they’re right (because they obviously can’t _all_ be right, after all), but rather because they’re dangerous and they have power. If you want to maintain that there was some petulant, whiny “I don’t get it, so no one can!” aspect to the closing bit (or any bit, really), I’m afraid I’m going to have to ask you to back that up. Because your characterization seems glib at best and just flat-out wrong at worst. P.S. I laughed pretty heartily at the movie, but then again, I was the target audience. ---
**Author:** ![quixotic78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/3ab097/32.png) [@quixotic78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/quixotic78)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/3 "2009-02-24T03:44:40Z")
Sorry to do a double-post, but I found some subtitles for the movie online and did your homework for you, **Klif**. Here’s what you claimed Maher said: > [@](#): > > he doesn’t do religion because he thinks religious people can have no special insights that he doesn’t already have. Really? That’s his argument against Faith? That if he doesn’t understand it, nobody can? And here’s the closest I could find in the end bit addressing the point > [@Bill Maher](#): > > Faith means making a virtue out of not thinking. It’s nothing to brag about. And those who preach faith and enable and elevate it are our intellectual slaveholders, keeping mankind in a bondage to fantasy and nonsense that has spawned and justified so much lunacy and destruction. Religion is dangerous because it allows human beings who don’t have all the answers to think that they do. Most people would think it’s wonderful when someone says, “I’m willing, Lord. I’ll do whatever You want me to do.” Except that since there are no gods actually talking to us, that void is filled in by people with their own corruptions… And anyone who tells you they know… they just know what happens when you die, I promise you, you don’t. > > How can I be so sure? Because I don’t know, and you do not possess mental powers that I do not. The only appropriate attitude for man to have about the big questions is not the arrogant certitude that is the hallmark of religion, but doubt. Doubt is humble, and that’s what > man needs to be, considering that human history is just a litany of getting shit dead wrong. I think you kinda missed his point here. I don’t think he’s saying that religion is bunk because he, personally, Bill Maher doesn’t get it. He’s saying that no one “gets it,” that no one could _possibly_ get it, and those who say they do… don’t. ---
**Author:** ![Baldwin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baldwin/32/7264_2.png) [@Baldwin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baldwin)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/4 "2009-02-24T03:47:49Z")
Your OP consists of somebody’s blog, in its entirety. Are you the blogger? ---
**Author:** ![Klif](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f08c70/32.png) [@Klif](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Klif)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/5 "2009-02-24T03:54:44Z")
> [@Baldwin](#): > > Your OP consists of somebody’s blog, in its entirety. Are you the blogger? I am, my apologies. Thanks for the quoting, quix: > [@](#): > > How can I be so sure? Because I don’t know, and you do not possess mental powers that I do not. I will agree that nobody can completely “get it”. But this is the line that makes Maher sound like he’s saying nobody less than him can get it. ---
**Author:** ![Equipoise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/equipoise/32/151_2.png) [@Equipoise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Equipoise)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/6 "2009-02-24T04:16:05Z")
> [@Klif](#): > > (while my partner here at work wasted his on “Tropic Thunder” (ugh), :eek: Reasonable people can disagree on whether **Religulous** is funny or not (I thought it was hilarious) but to “ugh” **Tropic Thunder**?? The hands-down funniest movie of last year and one of the funniest movies ever? Oh, we’re probably never going to agree on much of anything. ---
**Author:** ![Klif](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f08c70/32.png) [@Klif](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Klif)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/7 "2009-02-24T04:25:00Z")
> [@Equipoise](#): > > :eek: Reasonable people can disagree on whether **Religulous** is funny or not (I thought it was hilarious) but to “ugh” **Tropic Thunder**?? The hands-down funniest movie of last year and one of the funniest movies ever? Oh, we’re probably never going to agree on much of anything. While I will admit to putting Tropic Thunder first on my short list for a reason – because, well, look at the other two in the list! – and I might admit to it being marginally funny… “Funniest movies ever”? Double-:eek:! ---
**Author:** ![quixotic78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/3ab097/32.png) [@quixotic78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/quixotic78)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/8 "2009-02-24T04:30:12Z")
> [@Klif](#): > > I will agree that nobody can completely “get it”. But this is the line that makes Maher sound like he’s saying nobody less than him can get it. You seem to be inferring that he’s saying he’s smart, and so if he doesn’t get it (being smart), no one does. I read it as him saying that he’s human, and so if he doesn’t get it (being human), no one does. You yourself say right up there that nobody can completely “get it.” That seems to be his take as well! (IMO) And don’t we all do something similar all the time? When John Edward says that he can talk to dead people, we say, “No you can’t, because I can’t, and you don’t have any special mental powers that I lack.” When Miss Cleo says that she can tell us the future, mon, we say, “No, you can’t because I can’t, and you don’t have any special mental powers that I lack.” He’s just extending it from John Edward and Miss Cleo to, say, Jerry Falwell. But that’s getting a little GD-y, so I’m fine going back to the merits of the movie, not the merits of the movie’s arguments (if they can be decoupled). ---
**Author:** ![Equipoise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/equipoise/32/151_2.png) [@Equipoise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Equipoise)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/9 "2009-02-24T04:32:57Z")
I can’t speak for anyone else, but it is to me. I’ve seen it 5 times and it kept getting funnier and funnier. While there’s something special about that first viewing, where some things are funny just because they’re so out of the blue and you-can’t-believe-you-just-heard-that, it’s also one of those movies, to me, that keeps getting funnier because the more you see it, the more you get to know the characters, and then straight-ahead jokes become character humor, and their humor (and sometimes pathos) makes you like the characters even more, which makes the character humor ever sharper, making it even more funny. Hard to explain, but I’m pretty confident that this movie will always be one of my favorite comedies, for the jokes and for the characters, and is one I’ll be able to watch over and over and over again Edit to add, talking **Tropic Thunder** here, not Religulous. ---
**Author:** ![Klif](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f08c70/32.png) [@Klif](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Klif)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/10 "2009-02-24T04:42:30Z")
> [@Equipoise](#): > > Edit to add, talking **Tropic Thunder** here, not Religulous. OH DEAR, thank you for the clarification! For a moment, I was scared of/for you. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/11 "2009-02-24T04:52:16Z")
> [@Klif](#): > > I am, my apologies. > > Thanks for the quoting, quix:I will agree that nobody can completely “get it”. But this is the line that makes Maher sound like he’s saying nobody less than him can get it. He’s saying that nobody else has any special informtion or powers that he doesn’t have. He isn’t saying that he, Bill Maher, is anything special, he’s just using himself as an example of any random person. And when yous ay “getting it,” you’re implying that there’s something to “get.” There isn’t the slightest evidence that such is the case. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/12 "2009-02-24T04:52:31Z")
> [@Klif](#): > > I am, my apologies. Please don’t do that. You’ve posted the whole entry here anyway, so I’m removing the link. ---
**Author:** ![Darryl\_Lict](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7cd45c/32.png) [@Darryl\_Lict](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darryl_Lict)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/13 "2009-02-24T04:58:34Z")
I always thought that Bill Maher was pretty funny and fairly astute. Then I found out that he was an [anti-vaxxer](http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2005/12/drinking_the_an.html#comments). I suspect that I’d find _Religulous_ amusing, but I think he’s pretty much a hypocrite if he’s going to denounce people without critical thinking abilities. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 5:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/14 "2009-02-24T05:51:14Z")
I wished he had spent MORE time talking to fringe types. To me, part of losing my belief in God was seeing so many people that were obviously bat-shit insane but believed in their religion just as much as I believed in mine. ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 5:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/15 "2009-02-24T05:54:22Z")
I remember liking it, but if I could describe it with one word, it would probably be “forgetable.” I literally remember almost nothing about it. ---
**Author:** ![Peanut\_Gallery](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/838e76/32.png) [@Peanut\_Gallery](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peanut_Gallery)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2009, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/16 "2009-02-24T23:37:48Z")
I’m a fan of Maher, and agree completely with his point of view on religion. That said, I wasn’t impressed with the movie. I think it is my own fault. Like Maher, I find religion to be incredibly stupid, but I think I’ve gone past finding it funny. People who go for the talking snake and burning bush don’t deserve to be taken even as seriously as he took them. It makes me more mad than amused. He seemed to have a hard time containing it also. Sometimes he looked like he was not in the mood to be jovial with the nutjobs he was dealing with, and I can’t blame him. It made some scenes too awkward, and you could tell they had to over-edit. ---
**Author:** ![RikWriter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/49beb7/32.png) [@RikWriter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RikWriter)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/17 "2009-02-25T03:40:02Z")
> [@Darryl\_Lict](#): > > I always thought that Bill Maher was pretty funny and fairly astute. Then I found out that he was an [anti-vaxxer](http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2005/12/drinking_the_an.html#comments). Wow…just when I thought my opinion of him couldn’t go any lower. ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/18 "2009-02-25T04:10:16Z")
I did remember one thing after posting here. Did anyone not absolutely love that Catholic guy (bishop? cardinal?) outside the Vatican toward the end? Is there a clip of him on Youtube? ---
**Author:** ![Klif](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f08c70/32.png) [@Klif](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Klif)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/19 "2009-02-25T04:16:54Z")
> [@Cisco](#): > > I did remember one thing after posting here. Did anyone not absolutely love that Catholic guy (bishop? cardinal?) outside the Vatican toward the end? Is there a clip of him on Youtube? I Did! I loved him! ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2009, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148/20 "2009-02-25T04:17:07Z")
I loved that guy. My favorite person in the movie. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-religulous-looks-interesting/487148.md?page=2)