Beyond belief

Bill Maher and Larry Charles on fundamentalism
the apocalypse, and their new faith-challenging
doc, Religulous

FAITH OFF: Maher with a theme park Jesus

by MARK SLUTSKY

Growing up with a mostly skeptical, secular perspective on the world, it was easy to believe that the forces of reason were slowly but gradually triumphing over fundamentalism, pseudo-science and irrational thought. That naïve adolescent belief seems like a dim hope now, with fanatics of pretty much every religious flavour doing their best to bring about the end of the world and with science and logic downgraded to just another competing opinion.

In fact, it seems at times that there’s a war going on between the powers of rational thought and the, shall we say, faith-based community. “I think there’s been a battle between those two forces from the beginning of civilization,” says Bill Maher. “But the difference, of course, in the United States is that reason is getting its ass kicked. Unfortunately. And that’s a problem.”

Maher’s obvious frustration with religious thought—and the way it shapes everything from education to geopolitics—is the impetus behind Religulous, a new film starring him and directed by Larry Charles. Maher is of course famous for his stand-up comedy and for hosting Comedy Central’s Politically Incorrect, which was cancelled in 2002 after he declared that the terrorists who hit the World Trade Center weren’t cowardly. His antipathy to religion is well known, and he’s no stranger to controversy. Neither is Charles, who directed the Borat movie, and who was a creative force on shows like Seinfeld, Curb Your Enthusiasm and Entourage.

Religulous takes a Borat-like approach, although the central character is, of course, not fictional—it’s Maher himself. But like Borat, the film has him travelling around America, and the world, meeting with people, chatting with them and trying to make them ridiculous. Maher talks to religious leaders and authorities, employees at a Christian theme park, scientists and ordinary people, trying to figure out why they believe what they do in the face of what he considers overwhelming empirical evidence to the contrary.

POUNCING ON THE PIOUS: Charles and Maher

Courting controversy

The movie’s skeptical and frequently mocking approach is already, predictably, attracting some negative attention. At the Toronto International Film Festival, where Maher and Charles sat down to chat with the Mirror, a small group of protesters calling themselves the Canadian Coalition for Organized Religion picketed the film’s premiere. “It’s very anti-religion, poking fun at fundamental values that people hold true to their hearts,” Bruno Jenkins, a spokesperson for the group, told the Mirror.

“Pretty lame,” responds Maher, when asked about the demonstration. “And one asked for my autograph! It really takes away from the message when they ask for your autograph. It’s like, ‘You’re going to burn in hell! But before you go, sign here...’”

“There’s been a lot of questioning of our tactics and techniques, which I’m happy to defend, there’s been questions about the balance of the movie, and there’s questions just about the subject itself,” says Charles. “We did not go in ignorant of that potential. I’m not trying to gratuitously create controversy. It’s funny, because just dealing with the subject creates controversy.”

With the various layers of deception that went on with the production of Borat—Charles and Sacha Baron Cohen famously didn’t tell their interview subjects they were talking to a fictional character—there’s been some questions about the making of Religulous. “People seem to think that we fooled people and snuck up on people and tricked people,” says Charles. “There was almost none of that kind of thing here. There were a couple of times where, if someone didn’t ask, I didn’t tell them that Bill was going to be the interviewer. But I didn’t feel obligated to tell them that. And they didn’t ask. Of the 400 hours that I shot, that’s maybe two or three interviews.”

In some cases, Charles added titles over the interview to point out when his subjects were less than truthful. “I wanted people ultimately to hang themselves. I wanted to use their words. When you edit your movie, you make choices, and I made choices in terms of what would be funniest and I tried to be fair-minded about that to some degree. When Jeremiah Cummings, the black minister, says he’s a doctor, and he’s not a doctor, it’s my job to go, ‘He’s not a doctor.’ I don’t have any issue with that, I don’t see that as being unfair to him. You lie on camera, and I point it out, that seems like a fair bargain.”

Ecumenical insanity

For both Charles and Maher, it seems the problem isn’t so much a specific religion or its tenets but the way of thinking that accompanies faith. “It does seem like my country has been sliding backwards on the reason and rationality front, it really has,” Maher says. “And I don’t know why that is. I guess it was always a religious country, but it just seems to have gotten more so. And they don’t seem to care what the religion is! There was a survey recently that said that 44 per cent of Americans have switched denominations in their lifetime at some point. This nudnik”—pointing to a picture of Sarah Palin—“I read the other day, is on her, like, third religion.

“For something that’s supposed to be the word of God, and for all time and eternal and infallible and everything about it is cast in stone, it’s like ‘I like this product, but I could eat this one. I like Jiffy, but I could eat Mr. Peanut.’ It’s just hysterical to me that they don’t see that contradiction. But there’s so many contradictions in religion.”

It’s safe to say, though, that the people Maher confronts aren’t entirely ignorant of the workings of their own faiths—well, for the most part. If Christianity, or Judaism, or Islam, can survive for thousands of years, despite their obvious scriptural contradictions and fuzzy logic, what’s Religulous going to change? Are Maher and Charles just preaching to the choir?

“Just a little bit of knowledge could wake people up,” Maher says. “Certainly it’ll get them debating. That alone would be a big thing. There are such basic questions that are asked in this movie. Why is faith good? It seems that’s a really basic question, and it just never gets answered.”

Race for reason

What it boils down to, Maher says, is this: “I’m very much trying to put forth that it is essential that mankind once again enshrine rational thinking and scientific inquiry and marginalize magical thought. Because it’s very, very dangerous in this day and age where so many people seem to be looking forward to the end of the world. It’s very scary. Twenty-five per cent of Americans think that not only will the world come to an end, but in their lifetimes. It’s also a little egotistical! ‘Of course he’s coming back when I’m here! He wants to see me!’”

Charles describes it as a “race” between two fundamentally different ways of thinking. “Can rational, reasonable people stop the irrational people from destroying the world, before we have the chance to evolve to the next level of consciousness?”

“I’m not against spirituality, I’m not against theology, I’m not saying this is all there is, I’m not a reductionist,” Charles says. “I believe in the infinite universe that’s beyond our understanding and that our job as humans is to evolve to a level of consciousness to figure out how the circle is squared. So I’m open to all those questions.

“The problem with organized religion is that it shuts down that debate. That’s the big issue. It’s really stopping our imagination from creating the new myths that we need to continue as a species.”

RELIGULOUS OPENS
FRIDAY, OCT. 3

>> Movie Listings