"Religulous" (Documentary) (2008) - Movie Review

Roger Ebert begins the review of “Religulous” by these sentences, “I'm going to try to review Bill Maher's "Religulous" without getting into religion. Is that OK with everybody? Good. I don't want to fan the flames of a holy war.” A man of such stature with a constant attempt and lot of success over being a fair critic and honest in his reviews with millions of fan following and taking his word for the films they see and he has to take a step of those lines to be safe within the region. Such is the power of religion which has become uncontrollable. It touches the softest part of people invoking the wrath of hate and defense in no time. Hence Bill Maher got to be applauded for openly coming on to the screen even with some unfairness to say aloud on the ridiculed nature of ardent organized religion.

Granted that it is a festival for atheists (“I do not know” mantra of Bill Maher seems a little too muddy for me), it is funny and I mean down right funny. Regardless of your religion when some of the condescending questions of interruptions are imposed by Maher to the people, it pricks and yet laugh on how seriously baseless is this concept of religion branching out and been passed on forever. Rarely does a discussion happen in the film because Maher is humoured and astonished by the people’s blind belief. But what did he expect out of them? Obviously those answers are to make the joke out of it, which of no surprise works and you will laugh, hands down.

Director Larry Charles crisply edits, places mock subtitles, clippings and the surprise reaction of absolute flat out illogical outburst in the people. Maher takes shots at every religion possible. It is too bad Hinduism, Buddhism and rest of other-ism gets missed but he takes the biggest and threatening predominant three religions to wrestle with. Those are Christianity, Judaism and Islam which is now the epicenter of the global terror in one form or other. Each religion proclaims its goodness and branding the enemy the evil which would work well in war and standing tall and stubborn on their ground.

Maher says these are the products of the long last belief. “It is all politics” says the rational believers or softly the moderately religious. As the review of mine for “The Clay Bird” had nice discussions, the film summarizes in its own tune. Religion said as a tool rather than an organism of killing each other wherein it is the tool for hope, forgiveness and love. Naivety at its best can be said in those circumstances. It is claimed as the hope for the poor and less fortunate people who are damned in despair is used in the favour for the sustenance and need for religion and honestly what has improved in their condition based on this belief? What kind of a hope built on falsified notions of miracles would save them? It is not a cure for a cold but a placebo treatment for a much horrible disease.

As a film, it is hilarious and uses the medium of placement of the frames in its maximized use in excellence. I am sure people of corresponding religion would cringe because of the way Maher bullies around and condescends and mainly be concerned on the outlook of how they will be perceived even if they are “moderately religious”. Yet they forget the fact that the faith is a ticking bomb in them waiting for that opportunity to explode. As open and daring the film is, Maher takes a jabbing approach on the concept of “doubt” and does not go for the atheism because his concern of that being a religion of its own is no wonder. The religious people asks the question “What if you are wrong?” many times when Maher takes on the irrationality and blindness over them as if a mode of threaten that burning hell is waiting. It has come down to it where grown people resort the idea of damning the non-believers as their approval of upper acceptance. Maher while adds his cynical, satirical and sarcastic tongue to it, the mere video is good enough for the situation being awkward and scary of rationality and conscience going out of the window.

The complaint I would have towards the film is the denial of taking it to more regular people or the “spiritual not religious” politically safe people. Talk amongst them on how much the fragments of the faith pricks them when something said against it would have enlightened a lot more subtle approaches of the religion in every day life of those. The same goes for country or sports team or music or anything which crosses the margin of admiration into fanaticism.

Religion has now spread its wings so deep and so farther into the world that removing it is not a near hope but an effort to try for. The greatest tragedy of this would be as Maher mentions of the rational and brilliant people saying things which on camera and on mirror would utterly show how deep the concept of it has gotten them. It is not easy to see that part clinically and it would take immense ripping of their long ingrained thoughts and open into the wide world. Maher’s funny attempt is an entertaining concept in field of documentary and also inspiring for some one to be vocal with a bold face on sensitive issue as religion which mostly takes a sacred free pass in escaping in the name of offending. “Religulous” pinches hard on the funny bone of religion which is not aware that it carries that property.