The Unbelievers

I saw a test screening of this movie at Arizona State University, and it's possible there may be slight changes before the official release. However there is little or nothing I would want to see changed. It's a very well put together movie, fast paced and engrossing. When it was over, I was very surprised that 90 minutes had elapsed - it seemed like less than an hour.

From a brief description, it might sound very boring - Dawkins and Krauss criss-crossing the world, giving speeches at atheist conferences, debating religious apologists and so on. But the film is very well edited and has a very fast-paced feel, as well as capturing human moments like Richard Dawkins nodding off to sleep on a train, or sitting in a hotel room holding a phone to his ear, frustratedly trying to get a word in edgewise as an unseen person on the other end lectures him on morality.

Most of all, this film captures the passion and intensity of two men at the top of their respective scientific fields, who are awed by the beauty and complexity of nature and have an almost messianic zeal to share that beauty and awe - so much more satisfying and inspiring in my opinion than the petty just-so stories of religion - with the general public.

You also get the sense that atheism is a movement whose time has finally come. Even in religion-saturated America, more and more people are coming out of the closet and connecting with each other, turning up at atheism conferences in large numbers though so far ignored by the media.

But this is not as much of a religion-bashing film as you might expect. It's basically an intimate portrait of two friends with a shared passion for knowledge, who are driven to share that knowledge with the world. As such, any viewer can enjoy this movie.

Renowned scientists Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss cross the globe as they speak publicly about the importance of science and reason in the modern world.

The film starts off with some unusual interviews, such as Woody Allen and Cameron Diaz. Ricky Gervais is a bit more well-known for his views. Then we go to Lawrence Krauss on tour, and it is odd to see empty lecture halls (maybe this is normal and it would just be odd for places like Madison).

What this film shows is that atheism needs a new face, as Richard Dawkins and the late Christopher Hitchens are such divisive figures. Lawrence Krauss is an improvement, as he is not nearly as polarizing. This is evident when they share a stage and Krauss is more compromising. The approach, if it is to be successful, ought to be pro-evolution, pro-science and not anti-religion. Religion is not the enemy.

Dawkins makes an interesting parallel between the idea of a middle-aged person turning old and a species becoming another: when does one end and another begin? This is, of course, the big question. If a pre-human did not give birth to a modern man, what was the process? To top off the film, the "Rally for Reason" is an incredible sight and must have been one heck of an event, with all the usual faces (like Penn Gillette) plus some special guests like Eddie Izzard, Adam Savage and James Randi. Where else can college professors be treated like rock stars?

Being an atheist in the public is really an interesting subject. Especially in the US it's a sensitive area, so I was told that this movie would be about this.

Well, it's not really, but the bigger problem is, that instead we get a 70 minute self-hooray, which was even for me as an atheist just too annoying after a while.

I would've loved to see in the movie deep thoughts, which I could show to a religious person and make him think. Instead we get a lot of pointless montages with bad cuts, where someone says something and the crowd goes nuts.

What exactly was this movie made for? Atheists watching this won't get really more connected to the subject, religious persons won't even have the interest to keep watching after latest 10 minutes.

The movie had the potential to make something good, it had 2 good personas, but it was ruined by a really bad concept/directing.

Just considering the main movie (without the off-speaking of guest-stars) doesn't even reach 70 minutes, just shows how low on ideas they were.

It's very funny to read "reviews" of religious zealots who --I'm pretty sure-- haven't even seen this movie. But the most hilarious part is them claiming that being an atheist is a "belief system." Yeah, as much as being bald is a hair style, as Bill Maher aptly said. And it's interesting that you will hear that very same argument (or lack thereof...) from the science-haters throughout the entire movie, as the base to criticize rationality is, obviously, sheer irrationality. And it's so rewarding and intellectually stimulating to watch two great scientific minds mercilessly destroy the childish make-believe world of religious people with arguments that can only be attacked from a very irrational and nonsensical perspective.

Despite being an ardent admirer of these two gentlemen --not to mention a scientist myself-- I was hesitant to watch this movie, because I assumed it was going to be a tad on the boring side. We all know the argument and we all know what the irrational minds (and I'm generous about that last word...) keep saying in their endless battle against reason, so I wasn't really in the mood for another round. Surprisingly, this movie is more of a "behind the scene" look at these men and only occasionally shows a debate with the anti-science crowd, though I must say that the scene with the Archbishop of Sydney was hilarious.

In other words, it's no so much about the reason vs. religion debate as much as it is about these two extraordinary men, their subtle sense of humor and a slice of their daily lives. All in all, a very enjoyable documentary which only the religious zealots can hate.

This film is a documentary that captures a road trip of two prominent spokesmen of atheism around the world. It does not try to convince non-atheists to become atheists or try to argue anything (or even make a point), it merely shows the road trip these guys made and the growing interest in atheism.

That said, I see a lot of reviews here which are just blatant attempts from religious people to rate this movie as low as possible, and take cheap shots at atheists in the process. I've seen people argue that atheism is a mental disease, supposedly actually written down in the DSM. Don't take these clowns seriously. They probably mean that sometimes atheism is seen as a symptom. People with autism, for example, are more convinced by things they can see and touch than invisible beings like God. Therefore, a lot of them don't believe in God.

The film itself is pretty entertaining. If you're a fan of Dawkins and/or Krauss, this is a fun to watch experience that shows them basically on a road trip. If you're not, this might not interest you that much.