Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Louis Theroux vs Westboro Baptists

Cloo said:
spanglechick said:
i would have liked to hear from someone who had left the family.
I wonder if perhaps they only allowed filming on condition that they didn't speak to the people who'd left.

I wonder if perhaps they only allowed filming on condition that they didn't speak to the people who'd left.

It may well have something to do with the fact that Phelps is a lawyer. Disbarred in Kansas and agreed to stop practising in Federal court, but a lawyer still.
 
It was fascinating viewing and Louis made some excellent, very important points in disussion with Shirley and the former documentary maker, but I thought he missed quite a few things, and it was a bit of a wasted opportunity.

* Why didn't he talk to anyone who'd left the family? If he'd tried and failed, he should have mentioned it. Why didn't he talk to any of the family members about why people had left the family? There was a huge story there I think, and one that would have helped him get past the wall of rhetoric/dogma that he kept banging his head against.
* Why didn't he talk to people from the community about how the church is viewed? All we got was the same story again and again - they went to school, but were ostracised. It would have been useful to get a local perspective on what people think of the church and how they interact with them.
* Louis is usually the bumbling, affable guy who manages to charm his way past his interviewees' defences. But he wasn't able to do that this time, and he was lost a little. His questioning was a bit random, and very repetitious. It felt like he was out of his depth with this one.

It was a good documentary, and as I say he made some excellent points, but I can't help feelling it could have been a lot lot better.
 
Idaho said:
That those who claim to be taking religion literally, are always the most extreme?

They seem to ignore the milder elements as soon as they claim to be literal.
I'd say it's because any religion, by definition, must include mystical elements. They can only be incuded in the writings in as metaphor and symbolism, so literalism is a rejection of the mystical core, leaving just a self-supporting and otherwise meaningless rulebook. Ideal for cults and extremists.
 
ianw said:
* Louis is usually the bumbling, affable guy who manages to charm his way past his interviewees' defences. But he wasn't able to do that this time, and he was lost a little. His questioning was a bit random, and very repetitious. It felt like he was out of his depth with this one.

It was a good documentary, and as I say he made some excellent points, but I can't help feelling it could have been a lot lot better.
i think balbi touched on it - louis theroux is usually smarter in spades than his subjects. he can disingenuously lead them to condemn themselves with their own words and deeds.

these people were clever. really clever (if ignorant) - and he wasn't able to use his usual tricks on them.
 
ianw said:
It was fascinating viewing and Louis made some excellent, very important points in disussion with Shirley and the former documentary maker, but I thought he missed quite a few things, and it was a bit of a wasted opportunity.

* Why didn't he talk to anyone who'd left the family? If he'd tried and failed, he should have mentioned it. Why didn't he talk to any of the family members about why people had left the family? There was a huge story there I think, and one that would have helped him get past the wall of rhetoric/dogma that he kept banging his head against.
* Why didn't he talk to people from the community about how the church is viewed? All we got was the same story again and again - they went to school, but were ostracised. It would have been useful to get a local perspective on what people think of the church and how they interact with them.
* Louis is usually the bumbling, affable guy who manages to charm his way past his interviewees' defences. But he wasn't able to do that this time, and he was lost a little. His questioning was a bit random, and very repetitious. It felt like he was out of his depth with this one.

It was a good documentary, and as I say he made some excellent points, but I can't help feelling it could have been a lot lot better.
agreed ...
 
I don't think it needed input from the community or ex-members.

That lot were fucking shocking. Poor bloody kids, how fucked up are they going to be in the long term?
 
gnoriac said:
I'd say it's because any religion, by definition, must include mystical elements. They can only be incuded in the writings in as metaphor and symbolism, so literalism is a rejection of the mystical core, leaving just a self-supporting and otherwise meaningless rulebook. Ideal for cults and extremists.
Interesting answer. I'll have to think about that :)
 
Plus you really can't argue effectively with that kind of mind. The skinheads, Savile and all of them had clear doubts and misgivings about their choices in life, and accepted the criticisms of their ways of life. With the Westboro lot, it's an unshakeable indoctrination which starts at such a young age that by the time they reach the years when traditionally a person questions their way of life they aren't equipped with the tools to properly express themselves and have such a deep fear of going against the culture which influences everything about their way of life.

Teenage rebellion's alright when it's listening to rock music and dressing stupid, but it must be almost unthinkable when there's only one thing in your life and it's everywhere.

I noticed a stereo in the teenage daughters room, what kind of music would they listen to? The mind, she boggles :confused:
 
Dubversion said:
i'm seriously considering starting an email correspondence with them, on a kind of "well, here in the UK we KNOW what a faglover Louis is, he tried to make you look stupid but your message came through", dunno if they'd fall for it, they are - scarily - fairly sussed in some ways

I've tried it. Ended up having an exchange of emails with Tim Phelps, whichever one he may be. Horribly, icily polite, whilst being utterly mad.

Don't bother trying to engage them. Mad and twisted they might be, but they're not stupid. Just closed-minded, to the point where there's no chance of finding a chink in the defences they've erected to protect them against anything outside their warped little mindset.

I understand the programme's repeated during the week. I didn't see it 'cos I was in the pub with another disgusting filthy faggot. :cool:
 
Which is why he needed to think around his subject a little more than he did. The problem with coming up against people who live their lives by dogma is that they have an answer for everything - a preprepared, cast iron answer. And they don't accept any criticism - they just trot out the answer again and again, sticking to the script.

Louis did a good job of exposing this for what it is by talking to the children - gettin them to admit that they didn't understand the signs they were holding or the arguments they were parroting. But even so...I feel like there were loads of unanswered questions...or rather, loads of unasked questions.
 
That was fascinating and scary and very sad. I'd like to have heard from ex-members too.

SO much hate. All coming from one man. That evil old bastard needs to pop his clogs asap.
 
Theroux's ability to mix with utter cunts and keep a straight face can only be admired
Too true, but this was the closest I've seen him to passing a genuine judgement on them. Usually, be they gangsta rappers or the Klu Klux Klan (or even the Hamiltons :) ), he manages to indulge them as eccentric, but he actually exhibited a sense of exasperation with them. He matched the woman's stubbornness, but I think he was taken aback by them passing judgement on his marital and paternal status. His subjects normally welcome him with a certain naivity but it wasn't so much the case here. This wasn't humourous like a lot of his work, but essential viewing nonetheless.
 
Balbi said:
Plus you really can't argue effectively with that kind of mind. The skinheads, Savile and all of them had clear doubts and misgivings about their choices in life, and accepted the criticisms of their ways of life. With the Westboro lot, it's an unshakeable indoctrination which starts at such a young age that by the time they reach the years when traditionally a person questions their way of life they aren't equipped with the tools to properly express themselves and have such a deep fear of going against the culture which influences everything about their way of life.

Teenage rebellion's alright when it's listening to rock music and dressing stupid, but it must be almost unthinkable when there's only one thing in your life and it's everywhere.

I noticed a stereo in the teenage daughters room, what kind of music would they listen to? The mind, she boggles :confused:
She had earphones in at some stage too (or was that another of them?) I assumed she'd be listening to an audio recording of Gramps's mad ranting.
 
stavros said:
Too true, but this was the closest I've seen him to passing a genuine judgement on them. Usually, be they gangsta rappers or the Klu Klux Klan (or even the Hamiltons :) ), he manages to indulge them as eccentric, but he actually exhibited a sense of exasperation with them. He matched the woman's stubbornness, but I think he was taken aback by them passing judgement on his marital and paternal status. His subjects normally welcome him with a certain naivity but it wasn't so much the case here. This wasn't humourous like a lot of his work, but essential viewing nonetheless.

I agree with this. He clearly communicated his distaste for their views and actions. Which is the human thing to do, and something we as viewers could directly connect with. But I think that distaste created a barrier between him and his subjects. It's a tricky balance to strike, but I think he should have been more objective - at least to begin with.
 
Well that and the fact that Fred Phelps and his daughter had clearly organised an effective offensive strategy towards Theroux more interesting lines on enquiry. This was best summed up by the two encounters with Fred, but I thought the responses from the ex-documentary maker and some others were coached somewhat.

ianw is spot on, but I don't think Therouxs' benefit of experience from his previous shows could have prepared him for the Westboro Baptist Church. Although possibly it would have made sense to contact others who had done similar in order to get some point of reference.
 
I agree with this. He clearly communicated his distaste for their views and actions. Which is the human thing to do, and something we as viewers could directly connect with. But I think that distaste created a barrier between him and his subjects. It's a tricky balance to strike, but I think he should have been more objective - at least to begin with.


There is a school of thought that thinks secularists can only engage with the religious if they prove to the religious that they are also spiritual.

Otherwise, their attempts at discussion will prove, ultimately, to be pointless.

I am not of that school of thought.:D
 
LilMissHissyFit said:
I was also surprised about the homeschooling aspect. I had assumed that she would insist on keeping them home and insisiting that they not be exposed to evil

Indeed, it implies an assumption of indoctrination so absolute, that it's worrying.
 
I've never seen Theroux so close to cracking, even with the skinheads/KKK... It was clear these people were getting to him. He recognised that the younger women had a lot of potential in them, especially the 21 year old who was sometimes frustratingly on the verge of revealing her humanity... I think the kids really got to him as well - with lamb and lynx (the white nationalist girls) it almost seemed like a passing phase that he knew they might start to see around when they were older, but he could see the strength of the Phelps indoctrination here and the hypocrisy of the whole thing.

I think this issue was too much for him, and that's no criticism - I doubt anyone could handle it as well as he did. He seemed to communicate well with the younger members of the family and there was a genuine liking for some of them. It seemed to really get to him when he realised that he couldn't get to them, although they were still nice to him. Again, I think the 21 year old really affected him - when she was was talking about the guy who'd asked her out and later in the show she seemed on the brink of tears and I think Louis recognises severe repression when he sees it.

Here's to Phelps getting really severe cancer and dying horribly, not because i wish that kind of pain on anyone, but because if he did it might just make some of them realise that they do not follow the path of god.
 
There is some really interesting articles in links from bbc 2 website about the 'church' in their local paper...letters from one of the sons who left an open letter from fred, the laws being made to attempt to stop them.......interesting stuff.

Theroux did appear to flounder, but i do think that he thought he would be able to pull it off like he normally does, only the depth of indoctrination was too deep.

good viewing though.........and when the 21 year old was asked to go for coffee, with a camera crew and her mother said no.....well that really threw him.
 
yeah his gig is to go live with the people not to do a complete documentary...

damn good revealing

they were so courteus but with misplaced hate
 
I felt sorry for the kids. They didnt seem to really understand why they were there and that kid that got hit with the soft drink carton. :( As Theroux said in all of this, their kids were also the victims.
 
I'm not gonna read this thread. I've got it on me skybox.

Looking forward to it with unbridled glee.
 
Grandma Death said:
I felt sorry for the kids. They didnt seem to really understand why they were there and that kid that got hit with the soft drink carton. :( As Theroux said in all of this, their kids were also the victims.

Yup, That was what I was left feeling... those poor kids. They had no concept of any other life or a future that we are all entitled to with partnerships , happiness and children of our own because like everyone has said the indoctrination was so deep.

It was completely cultish
 
It was an incredible programme. I tried, and failed to get my head around their biblical logic, but then I suppose most people would. As an ex-JW myself I did flinch at some of it being a bit too familiar (references to not mixing with 'the world' and the casting out/disfellowshipping of ex members.) I thought Theroux did a good job, as others have pointed its pretty much impossible to argue against closed logic like this, but I thought we did see a few vulnerabilities, especially with the 21 year old girl, who I thought was almost flirting with him at times! I did feel sorry for the kids though, what the hell are their parents thinking? I wouldn't be surprised if someone (ex military perhaps) did a drive by on the whole lot of them.
 
anyone else suprised at the lack of actual scripture that was quoted, despite them claiming they rely on the bible for their 'orders' from God??

MRfit made a good point- If they had started quoting any of it then it would be very very easy to say ah but (Insert alternative contradictory quote)
 
I didnt think the smaller ones even understood what 'fags' did which the mother objected to nor what the link was between them and dead soldiers....
Sooo fucked up
 
LilMissHissyFit said:
anyone else suprised at the lack of actual scripture that was quoted, despite them claiming they rely on the bible for their 'orders' from God??

MRfit made a good point- If they had started quoting any of it then it would be very very easy to say ah but (Insert alternative contradictory quote)

I noticed that too, I think it's rather they had a closed system in which the only 'wisdom' was that received from Gramps and everything else was validated in terms of this.
 
Back
Top Bottom