Review: Religulous

I saw Bill Maher’s “Religulous” at the River Oaks Theatre earlier this week and I loved it. I must note though that I am an avid fan of Bill Maher and enjoy his sense of humor, so my opinions may be bias to some extent.

Nonetheless, I highly recommend you watch the film instead of some of the crap that Hollywood likes to produce for the masses.

Religulous is not a documentary. It is Maher’s personal quest to answer some questions that he has had for a while about religion (particularly Christianity) but he does entertain the other major religions as well.

Do not expect this to be a neutral film about the different religions. It is the opposite. As the title implies … religion + ridiculous = Religulous.

It does not matter what branch of Christianity you may prefer or if you are Muslim or Jewish, they all state some crazy things that we have accepted as normal over time. Maher argues this point throughout the film like the talking snake or people living 900 years etc.

The movie is fast paced and has hilarious clips every 5 minutes. This aids in developing the story and allowing those that cannot sit for a 2-hour movie about religion to be at least amused throughout the film.

Maher never intended to persuade people that they are wrong about their faith; he just claims that they should not claim to know something they do not know. He interviews several people to gain a diverse opinion and viewpoint on the different religions.

Bill Maher does not intend to make people become non-believers when they conclude the film. Instead, he wants people to understand that perhaps there are some archaic text, rules or laws that accompany a given religion. It is those old customs, which Maher argues, may need some updating for the 21st century.

"What we're saying," Maher said, "is we insist that we do have a rational conversation about the irrational, and these questions. Like 'Why is faith good?' And 'Why doesn't God get rid of evil?' And 'Why doesn't he speak to all of us?' And 'How do we benefit from having multiple warring religions?”

The questions that Maher poses are never clearly answered. One quickly learns that Maher employs a Socratic method of dialogue to legitimize his opinions. His position that “I do not know” ends up sounding more rational then offering an answer for every question.

This is not a movie against religion … it is a movie against “crazy” typically found in religion.