The Unbelievers (2013) Reviews

• For the pursuit of reason

  bmurphy682013-04-30

  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.

  More

• Engrossing and inspiring.

  nospam782013-03-29

  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.

  More

• Great topic, very mediocre film

  looskuh2014-06-25

  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.

  More

• A well meaning effort lacking direction

  ruby-27-4449712014-06-14

  I recently saw this film at Filmbar in Phoenix, and I was left dissatisfied. I feel like the film wasn't sure what it wanted to be, ultimately causing it to fail on two fronts. IF the point of the film was to just show you the working life of Dawkins and Krauss, that's fine, but it seems to do a lot more than that and if a biased way. The directors are clearly fans and the film is edited with that influence. I am an Atheist with no argument to make for religion, and I was left feeling that we can do better. If the film IS trying to make an argument for Atheism and against religion, it's a pretty poor one. The film seems to imply that no one who is religious values sciences, the multiverse, physics - things any fair person should know is not true. It ignores that there are many scientists now and in history that had faith. The film behaves as if fundamentalism and Bible literalism are the bulk of religious opinion. I don't believe that is so. Also, there are some statements about history as it pertains to religion that are false, and easy to dispel. In short, I think Atheism is a positive embracing of secular ideals, but I don't think the way to inspire it in people is to parade celebrity endorsements, imply superiority, and belittle people who believe differently than you. When this is your method, it seems like the cult of non-belief instead of rational thought. We can do better than this.

  More

• ill-informed reviewers

  thenekassyni2014-05-11

  The two "bad" reviews here simply do not understand why this was made. They clearly do not follow or understand the cause and work of these two men, Dawkings and Krauss. To simply judge them by this movie is ignorant and does a disservice to public and to their credibility. I say this because if one bothers to research for 15mins they would have found that these two men have been outspoken about the evolutionary and mysteries of the universe via science over the course of MANY, MANY years. So long that one is already retired! Having said that, this movie is just one project to help bring attention to the public where they can find some relation with the subjects. Since the majority of the general will never look up to or recognize a scientist the hope was that maybe a celebrity would. That is not to say they will stray from science and facts but will help support the cause by illuminating the subject further. Debates have been done many, many times and are available for viewing on youtube. Lectures are also available. Presentations are available. Teaching and learning for kids to adults have been done. If you wanted any of these they are available for your digestion, and hopefully afterward, your would have learned and gather more FACTS to help you decide one way or another. They do not tell you to change but to accept what is 99.99999999% true vs absolutely NO FACTS argument such as religion. With the internet being so widely available for research I fail to even begin to understand why people would continually provide reviews without any prior knowledge of the subject or person(s) in reference.

  More