Analysis and Review: Bill Maher's Religulous
Religulous Provides Laughter, but Fails to Deliver Answers
Oct 13, 2009
In Religulous (2008), Bill Maher travels the world attempting to dispute and rebuke the heresy that he calls “religion.” In his comedic style, Maher poses his burning question to viewers; “How did we get so serious, and where is it taking us?”
Maher's Thesis
Maher’s main qualm with organized religion (among many) is that he believes religious leaders and fanatics are dragging us blindly into a self-fulfilling prophecy of world-ending destruction. This point is well made during the film, as Maher mostly focuses on the social and political ramifications of intense religious belief. The direction of his film is admirable and many can agree with his thesis. However, Maher’s arrival at these points is in poor taste. Maher represents a class of comic that should have delivered more, and audiences are left with a broken faith, not towards religion, but towards the standard of his satire.
In a 101 minute time-frame, Maher tackles conservative Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Scientology, Mormonism, and other fringe religions. With that hit-list, Maher is required to create a caricature of each faith, and does not succeed in convincing the audience that these faiths are as simple as he paints them. If he had chosen just one religion, he could have easily filled the time, and have made a higher-class of comedy.
Religulous in Action
During the film, Maher rubs shoulders with the likes of Francis Collins, Aki Nawaz, and Ken Ham. Within these interviews, each person attempts to give their own perspective and voice their opinion, but are instead consistently cut-off by Maher and his own remarks. In a way, Maher becomes dogmatic about his own atheistic beliefs, and ends up appearing as fanatical as the individuals he interviews. Instead of letting the religious gurus walk themselves into a foolish pit, Maher pulls them in, and both parties end up looking ridiculous.
Maher also discredits his own intellect in clearly choosing some “small minds” as his targets in the film. He essentially picks his own straw-men, and then tears them to shreds and expects the audience to be impressed. A David and Goliath tale, where Maher is dwarfed by some religious mind, and then miraculously comes out on top would be much more appealing, and frankly, more comic. Instead of laughing at the expense of religious conservative Ken Ham (who runs a museum portraying dinosaurs and humans co-existing) Maher should rise to the occasion and pick a more challenging target for his ridicule.
In addition to Maher being in poor form, the content of the film is clearly edited with his agenda. It becomes apparent to the viewer that Maher’s “mockumentary” is not made for accurate portrayal, but for smearing others reputations and creating sequences that turn some prolific religious activists into seemingly ignorant. It would be a real accomplishment to shoot a film with less bias, and still make the audience laugh, but Maher chooses a lesser road. He sacrifices dialogue at the altar of comedy, and the audience is left with more laughter wrapped up inside misinformation.
Although Religulous can stimulate some very poignant thought and succeed in making a few creative and hilarious situations, the viewer is left disappointed with Maher if they take any time to critique his criticism. In dragging down the religious interviewees with his supposed “superior intellect,” Maher sends his own comedic quality to the slaughter and ends up with no redemption.
 |
