absentpresence

I was curious about a new adaptation of this classic story. After all, there is nothing like a good old story to sustain a movie. As i watched, i was more and more surprised. I kept wondering how can a film maker do such a bad job and let it out for the public to see... I tried to give it a chance, hoping that it will improve, but i was too optimistic. I wouldn't want to criticize something to the point of convincing others to avoid it, but in this case it felt like a civic duty. To put it briefly, bad scenario, awful dialogues, unremarkable camera work, unbelievably bad cinema; a pittiful adaptation. I'm sorry to say such bad stuff about other people's work. I'm sure they didn't want to do a bad job, but sometimes that's how things go. Wish them better luck next time. OK now. Time to forget this disappointment. Don't waste time on this one.

The mediocrity of this movie brought me sadness and desolation. "Religulous", as the title suggests, is a shallow try to appear intelligent, by mocking people's religious beliefs.

Of course, picking easy targets (uninformed people, people with poor intellectual abilities or just hateful people who use misunderstood concepts from the Bible to back up their discrimination against others) could be an effective strategy. Pick an idiot from the US who wishes the death of all homosexuals and make him a representative Christian. Then do the same with a Muslim. And so on. Then, once the movie is done, you hope for a little scandal, to make your bank account happy.

This movie shows distorted aspects of sociological realities, mixed with true ones, examines peripheral aberrations around the phenomena of faith, in order to push the viewer to a pre-established conclusion: believers (Christians and Muslims that is) are stupid; or primitive; or maybe both. Of course, no one says that in the movie; it's what all the movie is about. The script and editing speak for themselves and more.

Another strategy this movie employs is lying to make a point. For example, the fact that Mithra, Krishna and Horus are all born (like Jesus Christ) on the 25th of December from virgin mothers and they rise 3 days after their death (and so on) is simply false. It is a lie. Of course, we, as viewers, could search Wikipedia or any other source of information, to see if there's any truth in that proposition, but unfortunately, very few of us do. That is why manipulation often works. We see a documentary and we imagine that the guys who made it are relatively honest, or at least they mean well...

It would take too much time to write about the other lies and cheap speculations in "Religulous" and I guess no one would really be interested in analyzing all of them.

Whatever perspective on truth and decency is emphasized in this movie remains elusive. And that is why this movie fails. One cannot really set himself up by trying to bring others down. No decent person - Muslim, Jewish, Atheist, Christian or other - could rely on Bill Maher's speculations. Not because he's bad, but because he didn't understand.

Could have been a good animation, if it wasn't manipulative, especially towards the end. The only murderers in this war who seem to have religion are 'the Christian Phalangists'. One is ignorant if one cannot see that these abominations that we, as species, are capable of have nothing to do with religion or cultural identity, but with hatred and vanity concealed under ideological justifications. I trust the director could have done a much better work, if words like 'us and them' didn't resonate in his mind.

Now a little quote, to whom it may concern :)

'Please allow me to introduce myself / I'm a man of wealth and taste. / I've been around for a long, long year / Stole many a mans soul and faith. / And I was round when Jesus Christ had his moment of doubt and pain. / Made damn sure that Pilate washed his hands and sealed his fate. / Pleased to meet you, Hope you guess my name / But whats puzzling you is the nature of my game'

Sympathy for the Devil, The Rolling Stones