Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Ensofter Overrated and overhyped

ThedevilChoose When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

Kimball Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

classicalsteve If there's anything I gleaned from this film, it's that the people in the Church of Scientology seem to be anything but compassionate and open. Vindictiveness appears to be their modus operandi. The film is an improvised documentary in which spontaneous encounters demonstrate the twisted world of the Church of the Scientology. Even those among the Church of Latter Day Saints, i.e. the Mormons, were more magnanimous about the musical "The Book of Mormon". PBS did an exposé on the Mormons in which many Mormons and ex-Mormons were interviewed. To their credit they didn't seem to be frightened some skeletons would be unearthed from their closets, although they did draw the line in terms of allowing outsiders access to their ceremonies inside their temples. (They did offer some footage showing the inside of one temple without people.) By contrast, the Church of Scientology doesn't merely decline; they literally put up roadblocks in public areas near some of their facilities! They have continually rejected to participate in any kind of documentary about them. They won't give interviews, they dislike outsiders questioning their practices, and they seem most loath to let anyone research their history. If former members claim any kind of shortcoming or social infraction, large or small, they are labeled as liars and transgressors.In one of their most telling responses to allegations of impropriety at the hands of David Miscavige, the Church's absolute ruler, the Church claimed that any such allegations "were extremely false." I didn't know there were gradations of falsifications! I thought something was true or untrue. Saying that such allegations were "extremely false" seems to me a red flag that something must be true. Of course they offer no explanation as to why someone who left the Church might make such accusations, except to call them all liars. Interestingly, so many of ex-Scientologists make the same accusations. It must be a conspiracy to threaten the survival of the Church. Of course, such accusations if proved true will threaten the survival of the Church! Is there an irony here? The writer, producer and narrator, Louis Theroux solicits the help of Mark "Marty" Rathbun, a former inner-circle "cabinet" member whose job had been to protect the doctrine, essentially both from within and without. During the documentary, Rathburn claims he not only witnessed but participated in punishments upon members who had transgressed against either the Church itself or its leader David Miscavige. One of their main punishments was to humiliate "guilty" members in front of others. A bigger punishment was to send transgressors to "The Hole", a kind of Scientology detention center. He says he also engaged in harassment of outsiders whom Miscavige believed might undermine the Church's mission. Rathburn then found himself on the receiving end of such discipline and promptly left the Church. Members who leave the Church and criticize it are labeled PTS (Potential Trouble Sources) and SP (Suppressive Persons). As far as I could tell, Rathburn has been labeled both.Aside from Rathburn, the really telling scenes are the confrontations between Theroux with people who refuse to identify themselves but are clearly acting under orders from the Church. During one such conflict, the filmmakers come to the outskirts of a Scientology outpost called "The Hole" where Rathburn and other ex-Scientologists claim punishments have been enacted. They don't enter private property but are simply on a public street near a sign which says "Road Closed". They are immediately confronted by Scientology "guards" who order them to disperse as if they have governmental authority. Theroux counters that they are on a public road, and they have a permit to film. A woman who confronts the filmmakers won't even look at the permit, but simply keeps reiterating they have must leave or face criminal consequences. It should be pointed out that no non-governmental civilian has the authority to arrest someone outright except in the event of a felonious crime, a.k.a. a citizen's arrest. Trespassing is not a felony, probably only a misdemeanor in California. If they were truly egregiously trespassing, they should have called the police, not confront the trespassers and threaten them with arrest.During every confrontation, the Scientologists and gatekeepers won't engage in a discussion but either claim they are being trespassed upon or simply remain silent. Another former member explains that their behavior is to impress David Miscavige, an audience essentially of one. The other aspect of the documentary is auditioning actors to play key roles of the prominent members, primarily David Miscavige and Tom Cruise, probably the most famous Scientologist on the planet. In the irony of ironies, every confrontation scene just proved to me over and over again that the Church of Scientology is clearly guilty of the things of which they are being accused. It's like the person harboring illegal weapons in their house who refuse to let their house be searched without a warrant. My first thought is, what are they hiding and being so adamant about their secrecy?

gavin6942 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.

kiz-i-iz I have always found the subject matters of Louis documentaries to be fascinating, but his interview "technique" seems to be standing silently looking rather puzzled & having nothing insightful to ask or say. This documentary is probably his finest example of that technique. Despite having unfiltered & unrestricted access to one of the most interesting & high ranking ex members of this destructive cult, Louis failed to ask even one interesting or revealing question. He only succeeds in upsetting & compromising his subject, with his complete lack of intelligence or understanding. The entire film revolves around trying to produce an "improvised" scene that only might have happened, & the only location scouted was an access road to the back of Gold Studios. Considering the access Louis had to such high ranking Ex members & his undoubted knowledge on the subject (just listen to his interview on the Joe Rogan podcast to understand the in depth research he has completed on the subject), the entire film fails to either make any revelations, or give us any insight into this insidious cult, that we don't already know. So... disappointing & vacuous...no surprise there then.

jadavix "My Scientology Movie" is an interesting documentary. It's certainly not the movie I expected it to be, and nor is it really the movie I wanted. I was thrown by the approach Theroux took, casting actors to play key Scientology figures David Miscavige and Tom Cruise, and having them act out allegedly violent incidents. On a second watch, the pieces fell into place somewhat. Casting actors to play Scientologists is, after all, what made the Church famous! It seemed a deliberate artifice, but as the documentary explains, that was deliberate on behalf of L. Ron Hubbard, who at first tried to convert the top movie stars of the day - Jimmy Stewart and Greta Garbo - knowing that this was the best possible route for exposure of his religion.The "artifice", therefore, only brings you closer to understanding what may have happened behind closed doors, especially when you hear ex-Scientology hatchet man Marty Rathbun instructing the actors in how to sound more like the modern-day emperor, David Miscavige.For a movie with a great deal of deliberate invention, the film also has a few bizarre, unscripted moments, such as the chance appearance of Hollywood party girl Paz de la Huerta, who supposedly thinks Theroux's camera crew are there to film her, and an explosive moment where Marty Rathbun loses his temper with Louis that all fans will want to see for themselves.The overall impression of the movie is that it's not as much of a Louis Theroux documentary as you might expect. He seems like someone lost at sea around all the conflicting information, the allegations, the stalking and newspeak. He doesn't know who to trust, and neither do we.It's an unsettling viewing experience, but a worthwhile one, as long as you don't expect any easy answers.