Louis Theroux' Scientology documentary to premiere

Free to shine

Shiny & Free
Good review:

Louis Theroux, with the involvement of shamed ex-communicated Scientologist Marty Rathbun, sheds light on the secretive world Scientology has created. World is the right word here, involving a completely different ethos to how the social hierarchy unbeknownst to most, based on fiscal commitment and a propagation of beliefs that takes on a biblical dialogue in the description of the fate of non-believers – that of an eternal fiery damnation. With Academy Award-winning producer Simon Chinn, who brought the world Searching for Sugarman and Man on Wire, this film gives an engaging and provocative look behind the Hollywood façade Scientology propagates itself from.

http://www.theupcoming.co.uk/2015/10/17/london-film-festival-2015-my-scientology-movie-review/
 

Gib

Crusader
You whip your clipboard out and go for it Gib but be aware that if these people know you are an ex scio (and if they're being polite) ... they'll probably word their responses extra carefully.

:whistling:

damn. I forgot about the clipboard tech. That means I have to go out and buy a clipboard. But that also got me thinking, I need to employ name badge tech, so I have to buy that as well. I'm not sure what to put on the name badge, I thought just "Surveyor" but that's too simple, so I'm thinking something like "American Religious vs non Religious Foundation, LLC", something pithy, significant, offical sounding, non threatening, neutral; if you have any ideas let me know.

And of course I do not want to let the person I'm asking questions know I was a scientologist, you silly girl. LOL
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation
damn. I forgot about the clipboard tech. That means I have to go out and buy a clipboard. But that also got me thinking, I need to employ name badge tech, so I have to buy that as well. I'm not sure what to put on the name badge, I thought just "Surveyor" but that's too simple, so I'm thinking something like "American Religious vs non Religious Foundation, LLC", something pithy, significant, offical sounding, non threatening, neutral; if you have any ideas let me know.

And of course I do not want to let the person I'm asking questions know I was a scientologist, you silly girl. LOL




Time-wasting wanker?


:coolwink:
 

Gib

Crusader


Time-wasting wanker?


:coolwink:

you're such a party pooper. LOL

seriously, I gonna survey. You gots a name badge I can mock up?

here's what is funny. Louis Theroux just did a documentary about scientology, and yet at the same time I am saying I am willing to do a survey. Didn't Louis do a similar thing?
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation
you're such a party pooper. LOL

seriously, I gonna survey. You gots a name badge I can mock up?

here's what is funny. Louis Theroux just did a documentary about scientology, and yet at the same time I am saying I am willing to do a survey. Didn't Louis do a similar thing?


I have no idea (whether he did a survey or not) but I doubt that he felt it was necessary.

:confused2:
 

DeeAnna

Patron Meritorious
damn. I forgot about the clipboard tech. That means I have to go out and buy a clipboard. But that also got me thinking, I need to employ name badge tech, so I have to buy that as well. I'm not sure what to put on the name badge, I thought just "Surveyor" but that's too simple, so I'm thinking something like "American Religious vs non Religious Foundation, LLC", something pithy, significant, offical sounding, non threatening, neutral; if you have any ideas let me know.

And of course I do not want to let the person I'm asking questions know I was a scientologist, you silly girl. LOL

Gib: Refer to yourself as a "Pollster". People are being inundated right now with the results of polls. As for the badge, use all initials as in: A.R.V.N.R.F., LLC". That way if someone asks what the initials stand for you can get a kind of silly grin on your face and roll your eyes, saying, "Umm...American Foundation for...Uh, American, uhh..." Hey, you're just some guy with a clipboard who was hired to do a poll. Then ask your next question.
 

Gib

Crusader
Gib: Refer to yourself as a "Pollster". People are being inundated right now with the results of polls. As for the badge, use all initials as in: A.R.V.N.R.F., LLC". That way if someone asks what the initials stand for you can get a kind of silly grin on your face and roll your eyes, saying, "Umm...American Foundation for...Uh, American, uhh..." Hey, you're just some guy with a clipboard who was hired to do a poll. Then ask your next question.

ahh, good idea, I like that. :thumbsup:

your second part is spot on, :thumbsup: I just want to be a hired hand, and I know nothing, to get real answers.
 

Soul of Ginnungagab

Patron with Honors
Overall great article but this last sentence bothers me somewhat. :ohmy:

But I also see Scientology as not so different from other religions: a set of beliefs and practices that, at their very heart, are mysterious and have to be taken on faith – and which, for that reason, can be life-giving and offer people hope in ways that reasoning and logic cannot.

"But I also see Scientology as not so different from other religions: a set of beliefs and practices that, at their very heart, are mysterious and have to be taken on faith – and which, for that reason, can be life-giving and offer people hope in ways that reasoning and logic cannot."

Yeah, unfortunately it leans on the misconception that reason and logic can't offer people hope and be life-giving and used with compassion.

[
But I also see Scientology as not so different from other religions: a set of beliefs and practices that, at their very heart, are mysterious and have to be taken on faith – and which, for that reason, can be life-giving and offer people hope in ways that reasoning and logic cannot.


Yeah, it bothers me too--a lot, LOL.

Because it is amateurish bullshit, written by someone who doesn't have a clue about Scientology's "set of beliefs and practices" that are, in fact, something quite horribly different than other religions "taken on faith".

For starters, one can take any belief "on faith" from any religion and it does not cost a half-million dollars. That's a business, not a religion. Religions don't charge people a half-million dollars to find out what their beliefs are. Insanity.

I hardly know where to begin on the other utter lack of comprehension about Scientology that would be required to not know that they threaten, intimidate, lie, defame, criminally frame, trick, imprison, beat, terrorize and destroy people simply for disagreeing or exposing the lies/fraud of L. Ron Hubbard and his assigns.

If someone is going to go to the trouble of writing about Scientology or creating a film about it, they should spend the first few hours of their research listening and understanding what EX SCIENTOLOGISTS have to say before they foolishly think they can decipher the cult's black ops, facades, front groups and lofty sounding codes and creeds. If you miss that intimidation, terrorism, crimes, lying, black ops & fair game are the actual and core "beliefs & practices" of the Scientology religion, then you have missed the entire point of the exercise.

That statement (above in blue) is ludicrous and evidences a reckless disregard for first learning about the subject one is touting their scholarship on.

Here are some words on Louis Theroux's last sentence from a different angle:

Personally I think Louis Theroux's last sentence is spot on especially regarding faith; and I think that you, HelluvaHoax!, actually underlined that faith is a crucial part, because the matters you mentioned was only possible if faith was an important part of it.

The subject is lot about faith despite that it is supposed to be about knowing. An example: Scientologists do not know what the OT-levels are about, because the levels are confidential until you are doing them. But the scientologist is nevertheless willing to spend huge sums of money on those levels and put him/her-self in financial troubles in order to make it. That is not done without a strong faith. Another example: Other scientologists are willing to totally give up their normal life and join the Sea Org which is a complete and utterly full time activity. Also that is not done without a strong faith. I was in the Sea Org myself, and that would never have been possible for me without a strong faith.

Is it life-giving? Of course, otherwise the scientologist wouldn't be devoted to the subject.

Does it offer hope? Certainly. Scientologists believe there is hope not just for themselves but for the whole of mankind.

Is it life-giving and offer hope beyond reasoning and logic? Well, it can depend on what you mean by reasoning and logic. Scientology includes the idea that you are an immortal soul; that is actually a very important part of the whole thing. The OT-levels definitely wouldn't make sense without that idea. Scientology's version of what the soul is, and which powers is latent in the soul, is what makes it different from other philosophies that includes the existence of an immortal soul. Scientologists probably do engage in a lot of reasoning and logic, but I think it is fair to say that the scientologists' belief in the powers and capacities of the soul goes beyond what you would normally think of when talking about reasoning and logic.

All in all I think that that sentence by Louis Theroux is a rather accurate evaluation. It is an important aspect in order to understand why scientologists keep being scientologists.

Of course Louis Theroux doesn't know everything about Scientology. There are a lot of aspect connected to the subject. Those aspects can only be covered with a lot of different inputs from different people which calls for many books, Internet sites and documentaries with the subject covered from different angles. And that is actually happening.

***
 
Last edited:

Veda

Sponsor
-snip-

All in all I think that that sentence by Louis Theroux is a rather accurate evaluation. It is an important aspect in order to understand why scientologists keep being scientologists.

It's almost as though all the insight and understanding about deceptive persuasion, undue influence, and "brainwashing," had never been; and almost as though Hubbard's religion angle and Miscavige's religious cloaking had never been exposed.

Louis Theroux doesn't know everything about Scientology. There are a lot of aspect connected to the subject. Those aspects can only be covered with a lot of different inputs from different people which calls for many books, Internet sites and documentaries with the subject covered from different angles.

It's not that complicated.

And that is actually happening.

***

It happened, mostly decades ago, and has since been obfuscated.

Theroux is a talented videographer, and a good interviewer, but he's out of his depth with Scientology. That's not really his fault. People assume he must be an expert on the topic since he's done a movie about it, and he mostly plays along with their assumption - but it's a foolish assumption.
 

strativarius

Inveterate gnashnab & snoutband
Not a particularily revealing video unfortunately, and call me a colossal snob, but when an interviewer peppers his speech with glottal stops and pronounces other as 'uvver' I quickly lose interest, I don't know why. Blame the BBC for spoiling me maybe? :biggrin:
 

Leland

Crusader
Not a particularily revealing video unfortunately, and call me a colossal snob, but when an interviewer peppers his speech with glottal stops and pronounces other as 'uvver' I quickly lose interest, I don't know why. Blame the BBC for spoiling me maybe? :biggrin:

Strativarius, you are a colossal snob.

In truth, I really don't think so.....but your invitation was so appealing....I couldn't help myself...

:p
 

Soul of Ginnungagab

Patron with Honors
It's almost as though all the insight and understanding about deceptive persuasion, undue influence, and "brainwashing," had never been; and almost as though Hubbard's religion angle and Miscavige's religious cloaking had never been exposed.

He has a point regarding faith. Faith is a big thing. If you don't believe in the subject, don't trust the teachings, don't agree with what you see and hear, you won't be brainwashed, you will leave. But if you trust it all you are vulnerable. Thus faith is a big thing.

It's not that complicated.
That was an answer to this remark:
Louis Theroux doesn't know everything about Scientology. There are a lot of aspect connected to the subject. Those aspects can only be covered with a lot of different inputs from different people which calls for many books, Internet sites and documentaries with the subject covered from different angles.
Well, we see a lot of different inputs in this forum. Lots of books has been published and they do cover different angles. The amount of TV/movie ducomentaries are smaller but they are there.

Kids grown up in the Sea Org has a different experience compared with adults who signed a contract when they were actually grown up. Staff in non Sea Orgs have a different experience compared with Sea Org members. One difference is that part of their life is outside of the Scientology orgs. Public or paying customers have another different experience. The viewpoints of scientologist in the orgs are very different from the viewpoints of exscientologists and then there are the free zoners. There are also those who do use some Scientology after they left they orgs but are not connected with free zoners. And then there are all those who never did Scientology, relatives, jornalists and others. Well, my point is just that there are in fact many angles.

It happened, mostly decades ago, and has since been obfuscated.

That was a reply to my remark
And that is actually happening.
which was a part of this paragraph:
Of course Louis Theroux doesn't know everything about Scientology. There are a lot of aspect connected to the subject. Those aspects can only be covered with a lot of different inputs from different people which calls for many books, Internet sites and documentaries with the subject covered from different angles. And that is actually happening.
I don't know why you said it mostly happened decades ago. There have been more information published in recent years than ever. On Internet in books and documentaries. Especially books by former scientologist have been published every other day so to speak.

Theroux is a talented videographer, and a good interviewer, but he's out of his depth with Scientology. That's not really his fault. People assume he must be an expert on the topic since he's done a movie about it, and he mostly plays along with their assumption - but it's a foolish assumption.
I didn't say that this was the most important thing, certainly not. I just pointed out that he did have an important point.

***
 
Last edited:

strativarius

Inveterate gnashnab & snoutband
Strativarius, you are a colossal snob.

In truth, I really don't think so.....but your invitation was so appealing....I couldn't help myself...

:p

Really it's a big mistake to judge somebody by how they speak. Richard Feynman was one of the most brilliant physicists the world has ever known, but according to some of his peers he 'spoke like a bum'. You can take a man out of the Bronx but you can't take the Bronx out of a man apparently. LOL.
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
Here are some words on Louis Theroux's last sentence from a different angle:

Personally I think Louis Theroux's last sentence is spot on especially regarding faith; and I think that you, HelluvaHoax!, actually underlined that faith is a crucial part, because the matters you mentioned was only possible if faith was an important part of it.


On that one point of Theroux's conclusion that Scientology is just another "faith based religion" like the rest:

--I readily admit that I held filmmaker Theroux up to the standard of knowing what he was talking about--rather than simply whether his documentary was entertaining.


--A more reasoned approach would be to judge the film, in total, by its net effectiveness in further turning public opinion against our fanatic planet-clearing and sector-salvaging little cult buddies.

A note to Soul of Ginnungagab. I don't understand how you concluded this about my post:

"HelluvaHoax!, actually underlined that faith is a crucial part.."

Actually, I actually never posted that. I don't even think that.

But I will concede that "faith" (as in religious faith or belief) can be perversely manipulated by unscrupulous charlatans, hucksters and other avaricious cult predators, in order that unsuspecting good folks be victimized. In such elaborate scams (Islamic terrorist sects, Scientology, Ponzi Schemes, et al) the perpetrator fully relies on the fact that they are able to hijack that hardwired human instinct (to have "faith" in something of a grander, more universal and majestic or sacred nature than simply themselves) and re-direct it towards their own nefarious ends.

The trick is that a sociopathic con man or cult leader can re-direct the trajectory of the gullible's "faith"--and darkly re-purpose it for their own insatiable craving for fame, power and money.

However, the lofty aspirations of spiritual "faith" (e.g. hoping to raise oneself towards higher levels of love, kindness, service to other, et al)--although bearing some resemblance to the "faith" that con men solicit in their criminal enterprises--is entirely different.

Example: A person who "invests" their hard-earned money in a Ponzi Scheme has "faith" that a) they will recoup their principal; and b) they will realize huge financial gains. But, that is a definition of "faith" that is quite different than religious faith. The "faith" of a duped Ponzi victim is actually just the lies of the perpetrator, crystalized & embedded in another's mind.

Example: When Scientology promises (in fact, guarantees!) that for $500,000, and a few dedicated years of auditing/training, one will attain the ability to "go exterior" at will and with full perception, it is not "religious faith" that causes the Scientology victim to hand over their charge cards. It has no slightest connection to "religion" or "faith" any more than if a businessman visiting Las Vegas believes (has "faith") in the seductive body language and words of a sexy temptress at the bar--after which he happily takes her to his room. Yes, he believed her, but it was not "religious faith" when she spiked his drink with coma-inducing drugs and stole his wallet, cash & Rolex.

Perhaps a simpler way to sum all this up is this--People can "believe" things that are not always "religious" in nature. Especially when they are lied to or tricked. The fact that Scientology is able to trick so many people so often does not mean anything religious. It just means that Scientologists are deviously skilled at their dark arts.
 
Last edited:

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation
I'm aware that I see things very differently to many and that I have a tendency to simplify (often due to sheer boredom) but looking back at something that had such a huge effect on our lives was always going to be hard to justify and explain even to each other and there may be a tendency to try and make it seem more complicated than it was.

I always remove generational scientologists from any of my more serious thoughts on the cofs because they were in a different situation entirely.

From where I now see things the cult was only as complicated as we each made it and whether we call it faith based, fear based, brainwashing and lies based or gullibility based (or a combination of all) in the end it adds up to the same thing ... it was and it remains a ridiculous cult which sadly we all got sucked in to for our own individual reasons and in the main (as far as I can tell) were at a young, tender and vulnerable age when it happened ... but I doubt if many (in the real world) care about the details and nuances (and especially when making a documentary or movie) and neither should they because it isn't about us or being made for us, people are able and allowed to form an opinion based on what they do know or even feel to be the truth, they will hopefully never become obsessive over thinkers concerning scientology ... there are so many really serious things going on in the world that actually matter.

To try now to make others (especially those in the business of entertainment) understand things from our viewpoints just makes us look ridiculous after a certain point ... the movie sounds brilliant, it will do what we all want it to do and based in part on what Karen (who was involved) said in an earlier post I don't buy that Louis Theroux was out of his depth, he just made choices based on the time he had available and on what he felt it was important to cover ... for his paying audience.

Come at me bro (I've always wanted to say that).


:biggrin:




 

JustSheila

Crusader
:goodposting:

What I love most about your post, Tro, is it's about letting go. Spot on.

You don't oversimplify. Sometimes you summarize a situation with piercing clarity, which is sometimes uncomfortable, as it always is when we see things more fluffy than they actually are.

But this post I particularly like, because you've pointed out how stupid and petty it is for us to worry about minor incorrect perceptions others may have about us as exes. Who cares?

Who has ever gotten a group of people to perceive them the same way as they perceive themselves? Or even ONE other person?

Cool stuff. Thanks. Now I don't give a hoot, either. :biggrin:
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
SPs ON A PLANE...

I'm aware that I see things very differently to many and that I have a tendency to simplify (often due to sheer boredom) but looking back at something that had such a huge effect on our lives was always going to be hard to justify and explain even to each other and there may be a tendency to try and make it seem more complicated than it was.

I always remove generational scientologists from any of my more serious thoughts on the cofs because they were in a different situation entirely.

From where I now see things the cult was only as complicated as we each made it and whether we call it faith based, fear based, brainwashing and lies based or gullibility based (or a combination of all) in the end it adds up to the same thing ... it was and it remains a ridiculous cult which sadly we all got sucked in to for our own individual reasons and in the main (as far as I can tell) were at a young, tender and vulnerable age when it happened ... but I doubt if many (in the real world) care about the details and nuances (and especially when making a documentary or movie) and neither should they because it isn't about us or being made for us, people are able and allowed to form an opinion based on what they do know or even feel to be the truth, they will hopefully never become obsessive over thinkers concerning scientology ... there are so many really serious things going on in the world that actually matter.

To try now to make others (especially those in the business of entertainment) understand things from our viewpoints just makes us look ridiculous after a certain point ... the movie sounds brilliant, it will do what we all want it to do and based in part on what Karen (who was involved) said in an earlier post I don't buy that Louis Theroux was out of his depth, he just made choices based on the time he had available and on what he felt it was important to cover ... for his paying audience.

Come at me bro (I've always wanted to say that).


:biggrin:




Nice! Me like simple, thx!



Ergo, here is my view of an IDEAL CONVERSATION:


EX SCIENTOLOGIST
Hey, I noticed that all during the flight
you've been reading "GOING CLEAR"

WOG
Yeah. It's really unbelievable.

EX SCIENTOLOGIST
Ya know, I was once a Scientologist.

WOG
Dumb-ass! LOL

EX SCIENTOLOGIST
I know, right?
 

Karen#1

Gold Meritorious Patron
I'm aware that I see things very differently to many and that I have a tendency to simplify (often due to sheer boredom) but looking back at something that had such a huge effect on our lives was always going to be hard to justify and explain even to each other and there may be a tendency to try and make it seem more complicated than it was.

I always remove generational scientologists from any of my more serious thoughts on the cofs because they were in a different situation entirely.

From where I now see things the cult was only as complicated as we each made it and whether we call it faith based, fear based, brainwashing and lies based or gullibility based (or a combination of all) in the end it adds up to the same thing ... it was and it remains a ridiculous cult which sadly we all got sucked in to for our own individual reasons and in the main (as far as I can tell) were at a young, tender and vulnerable age when it happened ... but I doubt if many (in the real world) care about the details and nuances (and especially when making a documentary or movie) and neither should they because it isn't about us or being made for us, people are able and allowed to form an opinion based on what they do know or even feel to be the truth, they will hopefully never become obsessive over thinkers concerning scientology ... there are so many really serious things going on in the world that actually matter.

To try now to make others (especially those in the business of entertainment) understand things from our viewpoints just makes us look ridiculous after a certain point ... the movie sounds brilliant, it will do what we all want it to do and based in part on what Karen (who was involved) said in an earlier post I don't buy that Louis Theroux was out of his depth, he just made choices based on the time he had available and on what he felt it was important to cover ... for his paying audience.

Come at me bro (I've always wanted to say that).


:biggrin:





Because every media in the world has nothing but highly negative even crucifying exposes, Louis Theroux from the beginning wanted to show some postiive to be *different* than any other authors/journalists/Media. He particularly wanted some WHYs as to why people stayed on and why they donated gobs of money.

It not only proved difficult, it was nigh impossible. The cult stalking and having a melt down when Louis visited INT base did not help with Katherine Frasier lying through her teeth about property lines even when Louis had a filming permit.
Her visceral hate and contempt was on par with Jenny Linsen at LAX, (Katherine was worse) giving you the impression that the CULT is either is staffed by lunatics or the Cult makes them certifiably insane.
Here's the thing with Louis, he has you laughing with your belly actually heaving with laughter and in a nano second the scene turns to madness and revulsion so you are pendulum swinging in your emotions, thinking * WTF @#$!** "How can I laugh ? This is no laughing matter."
The actor who role play David Miscavige channeled DM according to Marty. Marty was given the Casting Director's role on who played who in the re-enactments. Even Marty explaining why he was doing the selection as he did was a treat to watch.

The back and forth between Marty and Louis are spellbinding. You WANT Louis to give a witty backflash answer but there is a pregnant pause and silence while your mind is percolating and digesting on what just happened. These are priceless Louis Theroux moments.

Please see how many followers Louis has on Twitter ( 1 Million +)
Louis.Twitter.jpg



Please see how many Followers Louis has on Facebook. (well over 1/2 a million)
Louis.FB.jpg


And the Cult is going to trash him in their own documentary on him !
:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:
 
Last edited:
Top