The Root of All Evil?

2006

Seasons & Episodes

  • 2
  • 1
  • 0

8.2| 0h30m| en
Synopsis

The Root of All Evil?, later retitled The God Delusion, is a television documentary written and presented by Richard Dawkins in which he argues that humanity would be better off without religion or belief in God. The documentary was first broadcast in January 2006, in the form of two 45-minute episodes, on Channel 4 in the UK. Dawkins has said that the title The Root of All Evil? was not his preferred choice, but that Channel 4 had insisted on it to create controversy. The sole concession from the producers on the title was the addition of the question mark. Dawkins has stated that the notion of anything being the root of all evil is ridiculous. Dawkins' book The God Delusion, released in September 2006, goes on to examine the topics raised in the documentary in greater detail. The documentary was rebroadcast on the More4 channel on the 25 August 2010 under the title of The God Delusion.

Director

Producted By

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

Mischa Redfern I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.
Lidia Draper Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.
Kinley This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows
Yazmin Close shines in drama with strong language, adult themes.
Lomedin Let's put the facts right: I am an antitheist. I consider somehow important to state that at the beginning of my review. The reason behind it, to put it simple, is that if everybody would let his/her belief dictate his/her actions, the world would be even a worse place. Alright, most people are like that anyway. Although, still, it's silly to follow any belief when humans -generally- can use common sense, and can acquire a great deal of knowledge if desired. I suppose belief and knowledge are contradictory terms. I'll try to simplify further: If it's OK to belief in god, it's also OK for me to belief that, instead of a brain, you have a worm in your head sitting at the controls. Or that anybody but me deserves the worst. For example. For A LOT of people, these beliefs are actual realities, no matter how absurd. Also, a faith is not needed for doing good deeds.As for the movie itself, there's not much to say about it, since it's self-explanatory. I wish Dawkins would have taken more time to explain why no form of belief whatsoever is appropriate, since there're many people who think that it's OK to worship as long as it's "harmless".I'd also like to say that science is, in many instances, as dangerous as religion. Let's not forget that many scientists BELIEVE that certain theories are actual truths, and that the creation of weapons, vivisection, environmental destruction and other forms of abhorrent acts are thought of or directly perpetrated by so-called scientists. Science always sold itself for the right price, and will also have an absurd excuse to justify the damage it causes. This is another point shared with religion.And so, even though it's outrageous to be wasting physical and brain resources (if it can be called that) believing that there're imaginary beings with divine powers floating around when that time could be used for learning practical knowledge to help save the Earth from human destruction, let's keep in mind that people of science are actually part of the problem too.Alas, the best one can do is get away from any religious or scientific dogma and simply live by taking common sense and reason as a guide for your actions.
Christine Religious fanatics forget one thing. To question what they believe in. While I was watching this documentary it came screaming to me that not just the religious fanatics forget to question but also Richard Dawkins seems to forget to question the "evidence".The evidence we use to explain evolution for example is based on samples that we found. We are developing a theory based on these evidences. There are several weaknesses in this sentence already. It is the same with religion. if you just believe in this theories whether it is a religious theory or a scientific theory without questioning you become blinded. I agree with Dawkins who says that religion is blindingly wrong. But if we would raise our children in all our religions to become questioning persons. We don't have to kill ourselves. People have to believe in a reason for being. I do not agree with Dawkins whose ending words in this documentary were that the only way of really enjoying our live is not to believe that after death there is heaven or hell. I don't believe in hell anyway, but the pure thought that there is no real sense in my being and that after I die I go into the big not existence makes me panic. I rather believe that I have to learn some things in this life and that there is a reason for me being here, is more calming. I believe but I thought long and hard in what I believe and what I believe the priests or reverends or pastors tell me might be true and I will never become a fanatic because if you question your believes and especially question the people who supposedly have all the answer, then you might have a chance.There is a reason why Jesus did not agree with churches!
Brian Bagnall I'm an Atheist, but I found Richard Dawkin's behavior around religious people in this series to be disrespectful. He visited an evangelical church in the US, similar to the type in my city, and he was just rude. The pastor has 3 sins against an elitist like Dawkins: 1) He has a southern accent 2) He was religious 3) He was positive and outgoing. I noticed Dawkins lip trembling through the conversation in apparent anger, and he did *not* approach the conversation coolly as he should have. It is possible to remain friendly and have a debate, something the minister realized but Dawkins seemed oblivious to.I also noticed he seemed to favor bashing Islam and Christianity, but when he visits Jerusalem he is extremely sympathetic to the Jews, even though they behave like the Third Reich when it comes to Palestinians.When he meets with a New York Jew who converted to Islam and now lives in Palestine, he seems curiously relaxed at first, then when he realizes the fundamentalist is hard core he loses his temperament again. The fundamentalist raises good issues - in our lands (the Western world) we are seeing more and more human degradation on TV, on the Internet, and in our daily lives. He argues that our women are dressing and acting like whores, and Dawkins doesn't seem to have an answer to this and doesn't seem concerned about this, saying women are deciding to do it themselves. The truth is these young girls are being fed these messages from TV and society - it isn't coming from within these young girls. The culture is becoming bankrupt, and the people foisting these values on the Western world certainly are not Islamic, and they are not devout Christian. Why isn't Dawkins concerned about what Atheists are doing? Overall, I was not impressed with his supposed free thinking. He seems very leftist establishment oriented to me.
Jose Maria Norton This documentary provides a great view at religion and its contradictory evilness. As we live in a world that's threatened by religious fanatics and almost all major conflicts are based on religion, shouldn't it be time we start questioning religion? Dawkins does question religion and everything else. And he continually stresses that as opposed to faith, science tries to discover the world and congratulates everyone who makes theories obsolete.There's a common word used against people like Dawkins - arrogance. But isn't arrogant the one who says he knows everything? Dawkins says he knows nothing but what the facts reveal him.Fear the one who offers all knowledge for he is lying.