The Unbelievers

Like the previous reviewer, I was lucky enough to be one of the 3000 in attendance for the test-screening of this movie on March 29th. I could have rushed to write a review, but thought that giving myself awhile to digest it all and really think on it would be the best thing.

I left the screening with a buzz, almost a high, and perhaps it was partially due to being in a room with so many like-minded individuals. Upon waking the next morning, that buzz had subsided a bit, and was replaced by questions. GOOD questions. I wanted to know more, to research, to research, to learn and understand and seek out new things.

This film touches on so many subjects - from getting something from nothing, to evolution and our inability to comprehend long time, to arguments for reason in a world with very little of it, to the importance of making decisions based on reality, to the dangers of religion in society, to snippets of historical science trivia – that it would be literally impossible to fully explain any one of those issues without turning the movie in to a 24-hour-long miniseries. Maybe that was the point. Spark the interest, pique the curiosity, and let the viewer take it from there. The snippets of celebrity interviews were just enough to season the movie and give some different angles without taking away from the focus on the film, and as always, Ricky Gervais didn't fail to disappoint.

The directors described this movie as a rock-and-roll-tour-film about scientists. While that definitely came across, especially through the beautiful shots of packed audiences in several different locations and multiple countries, what I got more out of this movie was the human aspect of these two men. Anyone in this community knows the names of Professors Dawkins and Krauss. We've all got our favorite quotes, our favorite arguments, our favorite books (and passages therein), but we know them only in that regard. What I think we fail to understand much of the time is that these two are people (and hard-working people, at that!). They travel and sight-see and take pictures and eat ice cream and work on their laptops and get tired. They really are human, and it seems they really are friends, and I feel like I'm more familiar with them now than I ever could have been reading all of their books or watching all of their lectures. While I won't claim to feel like I was on the road with them, the beautifully captured scenes of auditoriums, backstage areas, crowds, cityscapes, and close-ups of various objects of interest, makes me feel much more connected and like a part of these two lives.

One thing worth mentioning is that this film treads somewhat lightly. It's not as in-your-face as I would have expected, and looking back, I think that's probably for the best, and was more than likely a choice made by the directors, as (if I heard correctly) they had some 250 hours of footage to sift through. Knowing RD, LK, and their cohorts, it definitely could have turned into something brash and abrasive that would immediately turn off any even slightly believing or sensitive viewers. As it stands, it's really more of a conversation starter, and with all of the topics I mentioned above, can start the conversation about any number of subjects, depending on the viewer and their interests.

And lest I forget, this movie is FUNNY! To anyone in fear that a 90-minute documentary about an evolutionary biologist and theoretical physicist may be drab, I assure you that couldn't be further from the case. There were several parts of the movie I couldn't hear because there was so much laughter in the auditorium.

That leads me to my one major complaint: the sound quality. While I understand that with a documentary, you're simply there on the scene and can only get the sound that was originally produced, there were many times that voices were muffled, lines were indiscernible, or that the music was simply too much for the dialogue. As the previous reviewer stated, this was a test screening only and much may change before the first official release. If the sound quality is the only thing that changes, I think this will be a near-perfect film and one that I would be proud to recommend to friends of all faiths, beliefs, and convictions.

This movie has been criticized for its lack of entertainment value and also because it's not convincing. I disagree with the entertainment part, because it entertained me. The only thing I found annoying was the sound-mixing.

It's a short period of the lives of Dawkins and Krauss, and was not meant to make people stop believing in god. It is more about what these two guys are trying to do, how they do it and why they do it. It's basically promotion for their movement, and I see no problem with that. I was a bit disappointed though, for various personal reasons and expectations, but the overall thing is kinda good at what it does. If you don't know about Dawkins and Krauss, this is the movie for you, because it is what the movie's about. Don't expect religious vs atheist debates in this documentary, like I did, because these are not included. They are all over the internet by the plenty though, so if you want you can check them out.

It's an interesting documentary to understand what atheism is about, what it is willing to do and who are the big names of the movement. Not necessary, but you can still watch it and learn something out of it. I know I did and I'm a atheist.

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.

How ever much I may agree with Dawkins and Krauss, it was hard to watch their story because of the film maker. The two are edited to represent atheist rock stars without the actual footage to back it up. Loud music and some inserts don't convince anyone these days.

Just show, don't tell by overdoing your edits. Besides, the locations visited weren't put to use to tell an overarching story. It was basically just following them. The only scene I actually appreciated as a documentary-like scene was the one where Krauss is constantly harassed for a picture or a question. That is fun, and brings the character to life. Putting them in one room and hoping something unique will happen isn't enough to make an interesting movie.

Luckily, Krauss and Dawkins are full of witty remarks and interesting insights, and that's what pulled me through it.

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.