NOTE IMDb
6,6/10
14 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueLouis Theroux documents his investigation into what goes on behind the scenes of the infamous Church of Scientology.Louis Theroux documents his investigation into what goes on behind the scenes of the infamous Church of Scientology.Louis Theroux documents his investigation into what goes on behind the scenes of the infamous Church of Scientology.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 4 nominations au total
Tom Cruise
- Self - Actor & Scientologist
- (images d'archives)
Paz de la Huerta
- Self - Actress
- (as Paz)
David Miscavige
- Self - CEO, Religious Technology Center
- (images d'archives)
Ted Koppel
- Self - Interviewer
- (images d'archives)
Steven Mango
- Self - Scientologist, 2009-2012
- (as Steve Mango)
Jefferson Hawkins
- Self - Sea Org., 1967-2005
- (as Jeff Hawkins)
Avis à la une
Exposing Scientology has become something of a genre unto itself, and this doesn't really break any new ground. There are the usual stories of coercion, confrontations and creepy interactions we've come to expect from Scientologists. If you've seen Going Clear, the Leah Remini series, or even the South Park episode, you won't learn anything you didn't know.
Still, he manages to keep it interesting. The most unique thing he does is hire actors to play out various scenes, with guidance from former Scientologists - mostly Mark Rathbun, the former "Inspector General of the Religious Technology Center". Particular emphasis is given to correctly capturing the explosive temper of David Miscavige.
The biggest weakness in the movie is that Mark Rathbun is kind of an annoying guy. Whereas most former Scientologists are contrite about their own behavior in the cult, he really doesn't take ownership of his past at all. He continuously complains about the abusive tactics the Church uses against him and his family, but whenever Theroux politely points out that he certainly did similar things in the past, he goes into a snit. Weirdly, one of the things that seems to bother him the most is that the Church doesn't acknowledge what a "big shot" he was.
Not a bad way to pass a couple hours, but not likely to be remembered for long.
Still, he manages to keep it interesting. The most unique thing he does is hire actors to play out various scenes, with guidance from former Scientologists - mostly Mark Rathbun, the former "Inspector General of the Religious Technology Center". Particular emphasis is given to correctly capturing the explosive temper of David Miscavige.
The biggest weakness in the movie is that Mark Rathbun is kind of an annoying guy. Whereas most former Scientologists are contrite about their own behavior in the cult, he really doesn't take ownership of his past at all. He continuously complains about the abusive tactics the Church uses against him and his family, but whenever Theroux politely points out that he certainly did similar things in the past, he goes into a snit. Weirdly, one of the things that seems to bother him the most is that the Church doesn't acknowledge what a "big shot" he was.
Not a bad way to pass a couple hours, but not likely to be remembered for long.
I was so excited to finally see this documentary, however the lack of access Louis is able to gain into the church makes for a very boring and uncaptivating documentary.
apart from the odd confrontation with a church member which is somewhat entertaining, there is nothing of substance in this 'movie' no direction at all.
We all know they're a bunch of loonies but this being a theroux doco I wanted something more. Something that would really shock me.
Perhaps this is the reason for the delayed release of this film. With such little footage I can imagine this being a challenging piece to put together.
Why couldn't he go undercover and try to gain some sort of access into the church? Perhaps do an auditing session and turn it into an interview very subtly (which we know he's good at).
I'm a huge fan of this man's work but this this just doesn't do it for me. I rarely lose focus when watching anything louis. I just can;t find any sort of story in this. A strange movie that has left little impact, only repeating things we already knew about this psychotic church.
apart from the odd confrontation with a church member which is somewhat entertaining, there is nothing of substance in this 'movie' no direction at all.
We all know they're a bunch of loonies but this being a theroux doco I wanted something more. Something that would really shock me.
Perhaps this is the reason for the delayed release of this film. With such little footage I can imagine this being a challenging piece to put together.
Why couldn't he go undercover and try to gain some sort of access into the church? Perhaps do an auditing session and turn it into an interview very subtly (which we know he's good at).
I'm a huge fan of this man's work but this this just doesn't do it for me. I rarely lose focus when watching anything louis. I just can;t find any sort of story in this. A strange movie that has left little impact, only repeating things we already knew about this psychotic church.
I find Scientology and cults in general a fascinating subject and have watched most documentaries on the subject including the most recent one by Alex Gibney, Going Clear. Both this and Going Clear are excellent exposes but in different ways. As one reviewer said Going Clear is more factual whilst this one gives you a better feeling of Scientology is all about - a good description in my opinion.
I've often got the feeling that Scientology is somewhere between a cult and a religion but this film, more than any other, puts it squarely in the cult category.
Right from the outset you get a feel for this. Requests for interviews by Theroux are turned down by the church an almost unheard of response for an organisation that large. Most will have P.R departments ready to go to any and all media interests.
This makes it hard for Theroux of course. His usual film making style is subtle and he spends considerable time those involved, something impossible with this subject.
So he decides to use actors and actresses to re-enact some of the abuse by the organisation's head, David Miscavige. This is powerful stuff which is different to simply hearing reports of the same abuse.
But I found the real behaviour of the real Scientologists even more damning, particularly when coupled with commentary by ex-Scientologists. Near the end of the film the organisation sent a letter to Louis Theroux saying because he was making a documentary about them they intended to make a documentary about him. Such a response seemed just so totally infantile, like a young child's tit for tat: if you take mine I'll take yours kind of response. On top of the rest of the film this gave an insight into just how separated this group is from mainstream society - to even think that was an appropriate response.
All in all one comes away with the a real sense that Scientology is run by a powerful and paranoid sociopath who has somehow managed to get away with what he is doing for years. A great effort by Theroux that worked much better than his older documentary on another cult: the Westboro Baptist Church.
I've often got the feeling that Scientology is somewhere between a cult and a religion but this film, more than any other, puts it squarely in the cult category.
Right from the outset you get a feel for this. Requests for interviews by Theroux are turned down by the church an almost unheard of response for an organisation that large. Most will have P.R departments ready to go to any and all media interests.
This makes it hard for Theroux of course. His usual film making style is subtle and he spends considerable time those involved, something impossible with this subject.
So he decides to use actors and actresses to re-enact some of the abuse by the organisation's head, David Miscavige. This is powerful stuff which is different to simply hearing reports of the same abuse.
But I found the real behaviour of the real Scientologists even more damning, particularly when coupled with commentary by ex-Scientologists. Near the end of the film the organisation sent a letter to Louis Theroux saying because he was making a documentary about them they intended to make a documentary about him. Such a response seemed just so totally infantile, like a young child's tit for tat: if you take mine I'll take yours kind of response. On top of the rest of the film this gave an insight into just how separated this group is from mainstream society - to even think that was an appropriate response.
All in all one comes away with the a real sense that Scientology is run by a powerful and paranoid sociopath who has somehow managed to get away with what he is doing for years. A great effort by Theroux that worked much better than his older documentary on another cult: the Westboro Baptist Church.
This is another good Exposé on the cult of scientology. It's sad that people get brainwashed like this. Louis Theroux's very mild 'investigation' caused the paranoid Scientology machine to issue threatening legal letters, to film Louis & his team when he is near their HQ, AND when he's back in his LA studio, to deny them access to public roads, and to call the police on them several times for 'trespassing' (which they were not doing).
Definitely not the reactions of a kind & helpful 'church' (yet they are still able to be classified as a 'religious organisation' in most countries and hence retain their TAX- FREE status!).
Well done Louis!
Louis Theroux documents his investigation into what goes on behind the scenes of the infamous Church of Scientology.
As of right now (2017), there are two big documentaries on Scientology. This one, and the one made by HBO. Frankly, the HBO one is a bit better and definitely a must-see. This one is also good, and while it covers much of the same ground, it does go into other areas, too. Theroux, to his credit, seems to have very little fear of being arrested and gets some great footage near the base.
This film does have some strange narrative devices, such as casting actors in the roles of real Scientologists and then having them act out events that allegedly occurred. One scene in particular (in "the hole") is very effective. The casting of "Tom Cruise", unfortunately, never seems to go anywhere.
As of right now (2017), there are two big documentaries on Scientology. This one, and the one made by HBO. Frankly, the HBO one is a bit better and definitely a must-see. This one is also good, and while it covers much of the same ground, it does go into other areas, too. Theroux, to his credit, seems to have very little fear of being arrested and gets some great footage near the base.
This film does have some strange narrative devices, such as casting actors in the roles of real Scientologists and then having them act out events that allegedly occurred. One scene in particular (in "the hole") is very effective. The casting of "Tom Cruise", unfortunately, never seems to go anywhere.
Le saviez-vous
- Anecdotes"Enturbulated" is a Scientology term that the crew are using humorously.
- Citations
Louis Theroux: [Q&A] Marty Rathburn called me "a rimless zero". I suppose that's even less than zero because without the rim it's just the nothingness in the middle.
Adam Buxton: It sounds vaguely obscene, doesn't it? "Look at my rimless zero!" Ahem!
- ConnexionsReferenced in Film Junk Podcast: Episode 561: The Jungle Book and Everybody Wants Some!! (2016)
- Bandes originalesTannhäuser Overture
Composed by Richard Wagner
Performed by BBC National Orchestra of Wales
Conducted by Dan Jones
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is My Scientology Movie?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 22 936 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 11 180 $US
- 12 mars 2017
- Montant brut mondial
- 2 130 866 $US
- Durée
- 1h 39min(99 min)
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant