Religulous

User Score
7.6

Generally favorable reviews- based on 171 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 24 out of 171

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. JimG
    Oct 5, 2008
    6
    Maher is brave to take on such a touchy subject with humor. Unfortunately, while individual interviews hold interest and advance the point that "no one really knows" the ending gets muddled--it isn't clear that Maher even know how he wants to leave it. Lots of humor here, but Maher failed to address another important matter -- those who value mythology without fundamentalism.
  2. Aug 27, 2010
    6
    Lampooning religion isn't the most difficult thing to do, but with Bill Maher at the helm and use of fast-cut editing, the movie turns into a joyride of blasphemy. Still, it's not perfect, and has the usual flaws of a sensationalist documentary (i.e. Maher only goes for the lowest common denominators to argue with, most of it is comical and lighthearted until the unexpected doomsday ending, etc.)
  3. SteveO
    Oct 4, 2008
    5
    I've been a Christian for a while now, and I saw the movie just for the heck of it. Ok, so it was funny. Did my faith significantly change? No. Did I have an answer for most of Maher's retorts? Of course. It was entertaining and it really made me see how "in tune" I am on defending my faith.
  4. ColinB.
    Nov 2, 2008
    5
    I entirely agree with Arnold P. This film was entertaining enough, but it was too ludicrous and contrived to be taken seriously. Bill Maher is a comedian, not a philosopher. For a more intellectual and educational slam on religion, watch Richard Dawkins' "Root of All Evil. "
  5. TitaniumDragon
    Jun 5, 2009
    5
    While occaisionally amusing, the movie suffers greatly from inaccuracy. There is no "gay gene", as he claims; the claims of the scientist cited are heavily criticized, as are the claims of the "god gene". While it certainly is true that genetics affect them, the idea that we've "found them" is wrong. These inaccuracies continue throughout the movie - many of the comparisons of Jesus While occaisionally amusing, the movie suffers greatly from inaccuracy. There is no "gay gene", as he claims; the claims of the scientist cited are heavily criticized, as are the claims of the "god gene". While it certainly is true that genetics affect them, the idea that we've "found them" is wrong. These inaccuracies continue throughout the movie - many of the comparisons of Jesus with Horus are just plain old wrong, and many others are controversial. While true that some parts of Jesus's story have incredibly strong resemblances to other things from the same time period, and many are certainly because they have the same mythic sources, he greatly stretched it. Other things included also stretched the truth or were simply wrong. Moreover, many parts simply weren't entertaining, such as the part at the beginning with the truckers. More or less, it had snippets of interesting stuff in it, and it was funny at times, but his ranting, the unfunny parts, and the inaccuracies hurt the film. Religion does contain a lot of ridiculous stuff, but Maher didn't do a very good job on exposing it. The good about this movie: Some of the random clips, particularly the Adam and Eve stuff, were hilarious. Some of the music choices were amusing. Some of the interviews were very funny. Overall, the interviews with the Catholics were the most interesting part, and oddly probably the most sympathetic because the people he was interviewing were actually educated. They were, in the end, the only people in the entire movie who didn't end up looking like morons - including Bill Maher. Expand
  6. ArnoldP.
    Oct 13, 2008
    5
    Maher on TV is smart and sassy and I'm a fan. Although I laughed at loud, it was a cheesy movie, seemed often so set up, as Borat, and in no way should be be taken as anything but a juvenile attempt to question religion. Religion needs to be absolutely challenged but not as a comic rant for Maher.
  7. MikeD
    May 15, 2009
    4
    I'll give it a 3, and that is due to the humor, but seriously man Mahr is out with an agenda and all of the film editing done favors him. It does not show when the people actually made him shut up and think about his shallow questions. He in no way is a legitamate source for these kinds of documentaries because he has credibility in any religion. He basically does what most churches I'll give it a 3, and that is due to the humor, but seriously man Mahr is out with an agenda and all of the film editing done favors him. It does not show when the people actually made him shut up and think about his shallow questions. He in no way is a legitamate source for these kinds of documentaries because he has credibility in any religion. He basically does what most churches do these days by leaving out certain topics and choosing what to share and when in order to brainwash people (who do no investigating on their own) in sharing his beliefs. Expand
  8. Jun 11, 2013
    6
    Bill made his point, and I thought it was funny and interesting at times. Not just what he was saying, but what everybody else had to offer. However, that montage at the end of the world in flames and destruction made me irritated. Making your point using fear mongering diminished the believability of this documentary.
  9. Nov 12, 2012
    4
    Do you agree with Bill Maher that religion is illogical? Yes? You'll probably find this movie accurate and humorous. Do you disagree with Bill Maher? Yes? You'll probably find this movie frustrating and the funny moments may not be worth going through the rest of it.
  10. MattW
    Feb 17, 2009
    6
    I really wanted this movie to be good, I have the same beliefs of maher and i feel that those of us who are non-religious should stand up and be counted just as those who are religious are. The comedy just isn't that good in this and the jokes are pretty repetitive.
  11. Dec 24, 2012
    6
    I agree with the fundamental point of this documentary to question faith , I think it is important for people not to have blind faith in something because it encourages them to act in irrational and often hateful ways. The documentaries critique of the muslims as a culture is an expression of american xenophobic attitude, the muslim culture does not promote hate, and many American IdealsI agree with the fundamental point of this documentary to question faith , I think it is important for people not to have blind faith in something because it encourages them to act in irrational and often hateful ways. The documentaries critique of the muslims as a culture is an expression of american xenophobic attitude, the muslim culture does not promote hate, and many American Ideals are also flawed and lack morality, promoting hate towards the muslim community something which is not at all equally spoken about in reagards to Christians and Jews, perhaps for fear of offending people. The film should not insult ideals that it knows nothing about there is extremist in every religion and there is christian terrorists all around the world and Christians who did horrible things all throughout history this is not equally mentioned in the film. What gives this film to criticize the muslim culture as being flawed based on the extreme views of some individuals, it is extremely ignorant. This point was also manifested through the attack montages shown after islamic symbols there are terrorists and extremists in any religion, the reason it falsely appears more prominent for muslims is because it is imposed onto the citizens by corrupt politics just as disgusting consumerism is imposed onto us in our society. I'm not against people having faith what I'm against is people using there faith too infringe on the rights of others or inspire hate and ignorance. Although the premise of the film was great I think it's message was somewhat biased as it did not examine instances where faith and science could work together, hating religion for imposing there beliefs on others then imposing your own atheism onto others is hypocritical. However people should have the right to examine religion if they so choose but in my opinion it is not meant to be interpreted literally something which was not well emphasized in the movie. Not to mention the difference between spirituality and religion which was not talked about all. Therefore although the film brought up some key points and interesting points ultimately I don't feel as though it's examination of religion was thorough and complete and was mostly directed towards a anti-religious message not taking much effort to understand the oposite side of the spectrum. Expand
Metascore
56

Mixed or average reviews - based on 31 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 16 out of 31
  2. Negative: 4 out of 31
  1. By focusing so narrowly on religious fundamentalists and bigots while ignoring any spiritual dimension to religion, the film is not only being disingenuous but limits its audience to non-believers.
  2. Reviewed by: Robert Koehler
    70
    To the film's credit, Maher never engages in Michael Moore-style gotcha tactics, but rather asks questions that raise more questions, in the form of a Socratic dialogue. To believers expecting a blind hatchet job, this will prove both thought-provoking and a bit disarming; skeptics may be surprised (as Maher is) by the occasionally smart replies to his queries.
  3. 50
    The problem with the movie, whose title compresses "religious" and "ridiculous" into a single word, isn't that it milks more than one sacred cow but that it does so with minimal subtlety and intelligence.