Louis Theroux' Scientology documentary to premiere

Ogsonofgroo

Crusader
...




If Scientology was a car dealership, the "Extreme Critics" would be customers who paid $500,000 cash for a brand new Rolls Royce Phantom Aviator. . .


rolls-royce-phantom-coupe-aviator.jpg



...and then never received any car. Nor a refund.

Who then complained when they had to hitchhike home.

Ha! :roflmao: More likely they'd get one of these~ The repairs are endless, the depreciation horrendous, mileage, hm, not so much...
3rGbvDW-655x491.jpg


A decent pair of shoes is more appropriate, and safer :p

:cheers:
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
...



LOLOLOL

Hey! Apparently, it seems quite normal (to an elite 30-year Sea Org member) to stalk people in airports, screaming "NOBODY GIVES A FUCK ABOUT YOU!"


definition


"Scientology Normal": 1. Extremely abnormal, abberated & abhorrent. 2. A condition brought into the world by the same clever folks who invented the universal solvent to critics--by slamming a video-cam in their face and screaming: "WHAT ARE YOUR CRIMES?!"​

scientology.jpg

hqdefault.jpg


Cringe.
 

Free to shine

Shiny & Free

Excellent review! It concludes:

Twice Theroux loiters on the boundaries of Gold Base, the church’s compound in Southern California, and gets in contretemps with a human guard dog called Catherine Fraser, which reach Pythonesque heights of gleeful weirdness: he milks these showdowns for all they’re worth.


The one truly disingenuous note is Theroux pretending to harbour a “dream” at the start that he might have been the one person to discover Scientology’s “more positive side”. Yeah, right. It's all wickedly tendentious mischief, but when it's this gloriously funny, the points score themselves.

That sounds more like Louis.
 

JustSheila

Crusader
...




If Scientology was a car dealership, the "Extreme Critics" would be customers who paid $500,000 cash for a brand new Rolls Royce Phantom Aviator. . .


rolls-royce-phantom-coupe-aviator.jpg



...and then never received any car. Nor a refund.

Who then complained when they had to hitchhike home.

Lol! :hysterical:

But did they get a Certificate stating they were an Amazing Incredible OT with SuperPowerz for purchasing one and get announced in front of a clapping audience with their picture taken with a picture of the car?

Cause that was the really valuable thing, you know. The car was just window dressing for the real status. DM loves Scientologists too much to have them risk becoming PTS to the middle class for owning anything nice. So really, keeping the car after they paid and not refunding the money was an act of absolute kindness so they wouldn't bar their own bridges to OT.
 

Boomima

Patron with Honors
He did not openly attack Westboro Baptist Church really when he did two documentaries about them. However, their hatred and family dysfunction shown through in both documentaries. Theroux sort of lets his own deadpan personality work with whatever subject he's filming.

I doubt the CoS will be able to spin this into a positive thing.

The Reddit threads about the documentary are attracting some ex's who are telling of their experiences, by the way. Folks are also suggesting Going Clear and Scientology and Me.
 

Veda

Sponsor
life-scientology-page1.jpg

Life magazine, 1968


Theroux's otherwise excellent essay ends on a discordant note. After describing several key aspects which clearly argue that Scientology is uniquely different from a Judeo-Christian ethos,
he seems to, at the last moment, upend his entire argument by concluding that "Scientology (is) not so different from other religions." How disappointing that he came so far, only to reach
an incorrect conclusion.

Sorry, but this is the problem I have with with those "Orthodox Secularists" like Theroux who view all religions with disdain and pronounce a pox upon all houses.

Other than paid or duped apologists, it has often been the "Orthodox Secularists"/atheists, etc., who, over the years, have been the ones who have, unintentionally, empowered Scientology by giving credence to its biggest lie: that it's a bona fide religious organization. Some excellent writing and/or video has been produced by these same persons - who are capable of being both brilliant and courageous - but they largely nullify their own work by affirming Scientology's primary empowering fraudulent assertion.

To them, calling Scientology a religion is a put down, so why not call it a religion?

Looking back on the media coverage of Scientology from decades ago, it was rarely, if ever, called a religion. Gradually, as Scientology repeated that it was a religion, a religion, a religion and, at the same time, sought to discredit the idea of mind control, mind manipulation, or brainwashing, more in the media began also calling Scientology a religion, and veering away from the topic of mind manipulation or brainwashing.

That's a victory for Scientology, no matter how many people are snickering at it.

I want to see his movie, hoping that I'm wrong.

But that last paragraph of his, I'm sorry to say, gives the wrong take-away.
 

Churchill

Gold Meritorious Patron
life-scientology-page1.jpg

Life magazine, 1968




Other than paid or duped apologists, it has often been the "Orthodox Secularists"/atheists, etc., who, over the years, have been the ones who have, unintentionally, empowered Scientology by giving credence to its biggest lie: that it's a bona fide religious organization. Some excellent writing and/or video has been produced by these same persons - who are capable of being both brilliant and courageous - but they largely nullify their own work by affirming Scientology's primary empowering fraudulent assertion.

To them, calling Scientology a religion is a put down, so why not call it a religion?

Looking back on the media coverage of Scientology from decades ago, it was rarely, if ever, called a religion. Gradually, as Scientology repeated that it was a religion, a religion, a religion and, at the same time, sought to discredit the idea of mind control, mind manipulation, or brainwashing, more in the media began also calling Scientology a religion, and veering away from the topic of mind manipulation or brainwashing.

That's a victory for Scientology, no matter how many people are snickering at it.

I agree with you that if one believes that all religions are essentially worthless, then calling Scientology a religion, while not intended as a compliment, yet conveys a false imprimateur whose unintended consequence confers legitimacy and thus empowerment of the subject.

Mainstream religious organizations have also fallen short by demonstrating a reluctance to criticize the proven abusive behavior of Scientology.

I was very pleased that Professor Jim Beverley, of Tyndall College, a Protestant Evangelical institution sponsored the Toronto Conference for this reason.

Jim Beverley is a man of immense courage and integrity.

Perhaps in the future Tyndale will have the courage and good sense to fully and publicly sponsor a Going Clear II Conference.

Bringing Scientology to heel will require sustained action on the part of all of us, which will include the god-fearing and the godless standing shoulder to shoulder.
 
Last edited:

George Layton

Silver Meritorious Patron
This is from The Underground Bunker

Cars17 minutes ago With so many comments tonight, I'm worried folks will miss Marc Headley's comments about My Scientology Movie. I got the impression there was concern or confusion about the effectiveness of this film due to so many people commenting/tweeting about the humor in it. This might be especially worrisome for those who might not be familiar with Theroux's oeuvre, but I think Marc's post will reassure everyone.
This link will take you directly to it http://tonyortega.org/2015/10/... But if any of you are suffering from severe *click* fatigue like I am right now, then here it is:
It shows the comical absurdity that COS is by letting them do most of the damage themselves. It is not better or worse than Going Clear. It is a completely different way of exposes the criminality and abuse. I am not sure there will ever be one book or one film that makes every single person everywhere decide that Scientology should be outlawed everywhere. The more projects get done the more will be exposed and the repeated exposure on the abuse and the criminal activities of the leadership will sink into into the fabric of society.

I really enjoyed the film and think that it will get seen by a lot of folks that might not have seen GC. I think that there are a lot of the same faces and facts repressed here but in a different way.

Both of these films were being produced at the exact same time. GC had the benefit of a very well researched book that years were spent on. Louis had none of the benefit of that although Scientology would inject themselves into the film mid-way.

Louis did not spend 25 years in scientology and 15 years at the Int Base so his view is not the same as mine. He spoke with Ex-members and Scientology sent him a lot of Legal notices. There are libel laws and they are much more strict in the UK than here in the US. I am sure there are limits to what Louis can say and not have the film banned.

If you know scientology is horrible and are not impressed by this film, who cares? You already know they are horrible people that ruin people's lives daily.

I would say after seeing both films that they are both useful in their own right. I think Louis did a great job making a film and I seriously doubt that one single person that watches this film will ever do a single service in Scientology or read a Scientology book. To me, that is the true yardstick of an "accurate" film on Scientology. That it makes you laugh while you watch is not a bad thing. Some people assimilate info better when they are not having a "sick to their stomach" feeling.

Bottom line, if you know nothing about Scientology and see this film, you will stay away.​
 

Gib

Crusader
life-scientology-page1.jpg

Life magazine, 1968




Other than paid or duped apologists, it has often been the "Orthodox Secularists"/atheists, etc., who, over the years, have been the ones who have, unintentionally, empowered Scientology by giving credence to its biggest lie: that it's a bona fide religious organization. Some excellent writing and/or video has been produced by these same persons - who are capable of being both brilliant and courageous - but they largely nullify their own work by affirming Scientology's primary empowering fraudulent assertion.

To them, calling Scientology a religion is a put down, so why not call it a religion?

Looking back on the media coverage of Scientology from decades ago, it was rarely, if ever, called a religion. Gradually, as Scientology repeated that it was a religion, a religion, a religion and, at the same time, sought to discredit the idea of mind control, mind manipulation, or brainwashing, more in the media began also calling Scientology a religion, and veering away from the topic of mind manipulation or brainwashing.

That's a victory for Scientology, no matter how many people are snickering at it.

couldn't agree more with what you wrote. I also offer as proof that is what Hubbard intended by reading Le Bon, which Hubbard read (see my tread), and we now see trying to be implemented as well as being implemented, ie court cases not wanting to step between the boundaries of religion.

From Le Bon:

"2. THE MEANS OF ACTION OF THE LEADERS: AFFIRMATION, REPETITION, CONTAGION

When it is wanted to stir up a crowd for a short space of time,
to induce it to commit an act of any nature--to pillage a palace,
or to die in defence of a stronghold or a barricade, for
instance--the crowd must be acted upon by rapid suggestion, among
which example is the most powerful in its effect. To attain this
end, however, it is necessary that the crowd should have been
previously prepared by certain circumstances, and, above all,
that he who wishes to work upon it should possess the quality to
be studied farther on, to which I give the name of prestige.

When, however, it is proposed to imbue the mind of a crowd with
ideas and beliefs--with modern social theories, for instance--the
leaders have recourse to different expedients. The principal of
them are three in number and clearly defined--affirmation,
repetition, and contagion. Their action is somewhat slow, but
its effects, once produced, are very lasting."

from http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/445/pg445.txt

and "crowd" here means the scientologist, a true believer.

It should be also known, that affirmation, repetition, contagion also works in the opposite direction.

For, the whole idea of scientology being a religion isn't it for want of being "clear" and then "OT", that the state of "clear" and "OT" can be achieved?

oh yah, the constant repetition of ex members that no clear or OT exists, the constant affirmation of that, and thus the contagion of that proves scientology is a hellvahoax.

No space cowboys free to roam the universe, no soul astronauts.

As Arnie Lerma would say, we wouldn't have any ESMB or critics or non believers, if one clear or OT existed.

It's all rhetoric, LOL, the art of persuasion.
 
Last edited:

Jump

Operating teatime
And one hell of a review it is!


In that review, Tony's disclosure took me by surprise. (Disclosure: Your proprietor appears in Going Clear, and also is thanked at the end of My Scientology Movie for providing some minor help answering background questions about Scientology. We received no payment in either project.)

I didn't think people did that these days. Cudos to Tony. :thumbsup: :hattip:
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation


I love Louis Theroux's work and can't wait to see this movie ... he gives people enough rope but its their choice whether or not to hang themselves.

His throw away line about scientology being the 'same as any other religion' shouldn't be taken too literally, I can't see a problem with it at all ... but Chris said it perfectly.


“Here is the point about myself and my co-thinkers. Our belief is not a belief. Our principles are not a faith.
We do not hold our convictions dogmatically. We believe with certainty that an ethical life can be lived without religion. And we know for a fact that the corollary holds true - that religion has caused innumerate people not just to conduct themselves no better than others, but to award themselves permission to behave in ways that would make a brothel-keeper or an ethnic cleanser raise an eyebrow.”
― Christopher Hitchens, God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything
 

Veda

Sponsor


I love Louis Theroux's work and can't wait to see this movie ... he gives people enough rope but its their choice whether or not to hang themselves.

His throw away line about scientology being the 'same as any other religion' shouldn't be taken too literally, I can't see a problem with it at all ... but Chris said it perfectly.

:) I'm fine with throwing away the line and all other self defeating references about Scientology being a "religion," but what's your point in then quoting Hitchens about how bad religion is?

Attributing the deceits and abuses of Scientology to "religion" misses the mark and, ultimately, helps Scientology.
 
Top