Review: Going Clear: Scientology and the Prison of Belief

Based primarily on a Lawrence Wright book, documentary filmmaker Alex Gibney (“Mea Maxima Culpa: Silence in the House of God”) has another fascinating and disturbing winner with this 2015 look at the secretive Church of Scientology. To be perfectly honest, I have pretty mixed feelings on Scientology myself. I’m an Agnostic Atheist, so I neither believe in God nor do I believe we’ll ever really know the truth, nor do I think it’s necessarily an important line of questioning in the first place. I’m all about the here and now, basically and try to be equally sceptical of all forms of religion, as well as trying to be equally respectful of believers of any religion. There’s too much depression, confusion, and sadness in the world, so I’m in favour of people finding what works for them in understanding things like ‘The Ultimate Question’ (the answer, of course is 42!), so long as it doesn’t hurt anyone. That’s where Scientology (and some other religious off-shoots) ends up a bit tricky for me. Based on what little of it I’ve been exposed to (probably the same stuff you’ve seen over the years) prior to this film, it comes across like crazy alien cult stuff mixed with psychobabble. In fact, since I’ve heard Scientologists don’t believe in psychiatry, Scientology seems like their alternative to it. It seems like psychobabble (indeed, Scientology’s precursor/forefather, Dianetics is essentially Mr. Hubbard’s own take on psychology) with a self-help seminar bent wrapped in a cheap-arse science-fiction novel bow. I’m not sure if that makes it any more or less useful than religion, but founder L. Ron Hubbard’s prior career as a sci-fi writer sure does cast a bizarro shadow over his subsequent teachings that makes it awfully hard for me to maintain my equal respect for all religions.

Is Scientology a religion, though? Gibney’s film does posit that notion, questioning whether its status as religion is merely financial convenience. He also delves into the darker side of the religion/organisation, suggesting that there is indeed something potentially harmful or destructive going on inside the Church, a religion which many allege was really only founded to get a tax break through claiming a religious exemption status. I’m sure Scientologists would like it to be mentioned that the film is told from the point of view of mostly ex-Scientologists like filmmaker Paul Haggis, actor Jason Beghe, and former Scientology spokesman Mike Rinder, a possibly unstable man who may have an axe or two to grind. From my (possibly biased, hence why I explained my thoughts/beliefs at the outset) point of view, however, Gibney and co are really onto something here, even if I find it a little hard to believe that a religion (or pseudo-religion if you prefer) seemingly founded on Edward D. Wood Jr. sci-fi plotting, could be a truly dangerous threat. It says a helluva lot that Leonard Cohen and The Grateful Dead were involved in Scientology if you ask me. It’s real hippy-dippy space cadet stuff, and so far, the only crime that has been committed in the name of Scientology is “Battlefield Earth”. I find it a little hard not to mock an organisation with a member (now ex-member) named Spanky. I mean, come on her name is Spanky (Except it isn’t, it’s just what she prefers to be called, apparently, which is possibly even worse). If any of the celebs involved with the Church had met L. Ron Hubbard and, as John Travolta claims at one point think he’s ‘brilliant’, then they are nuttier than Hubbard himself. It’s so inane and insane from an outsider’s perspective (if it’s all meant to be allegorical, it makes Noah’s ark seem like a David Attenborough special) that you wonder how so many seemingly smart people gave this nonsense even a moment’s giveashit. I’m no fan of any religion to be honest (and that is not meant as any disrespect), but this is “Plan 9 From Outer Space” as theology (Yeah, that one might be disrespectful). Self-help is great if you need it, but I had to wonder is it worth swallowing all the other BS?

But then I started to think that this was the kind of derisive, dismissive attitude that allowed the Heaven’s Gate cult mass suicide to happen. It’s happened before, so perhaps I should be more cautious and not so dismissive/derisive in case something like that ever happens again with this organisation. At the very least, there just seems to be something not quite right going on, if not with the faith/teachings themselves (some seemingly pretty normal people are known to be Scientologists), then with the organisation and its current leader David Miscavige. Whereas L. Ron Hubbard to me came across more like an inept sci-fi writer turned shameless huckster/promoter (P.T. Anderson’s “The Master” seems a barely veiled Hubbard biopic), Miscavige seems far more sinister. It’s when we get to the controlling and intimidation factor that things with this organisation and their current leader get awfully murky, potentially dangerous, and like the most well-funded, endorsed cult you’ve ever seen. Sure, all religions have crazy, cult-like sects that generally misuse the texts/teachings of those religions, but that’s a discussion for another time. The fact that there’s so many people (axes to grind or not) willing to talk about this and claiming such negative things about the Church and Miscavige, says to me that there’s at least gotta be some truth to it. There’s more going on here than Tom Cruise maniacally laughing and carrying on like a zombified pod person (By contrast, “Battlefield Earth” star John Travolta seems for the most part to be a really nice, friendly sort of guy and not just for the duration of a movie shoot, apparently). Whilst punishment in the Church of Scientology seems like mostly frat house bullshit (licking the bathroom floor clean? Really? Xenu sounds like a douchebag to me), all of the stuff about disconnecting with your non-believing family and friends is very cult-like to me. All this talk of ‘suppressive’ people is scary and worrisome, and there’s enough smoke to believe there’s probably fire.

However, I have to say that the crazy/hilarious stuff seems far more prevalent than the scary/sinister stuff. I mean, if Scientology is a religion (and I’m not sure if it really is one) this is seriously the most uncool religion of all-time. The Tom Cruise bit where he’s at the ‘Freedom Medal of Valour’ awards ceremony sounds like something out of a parody. It’s the most insane and laughable thing you’re gonna see, and Cruise comes across as both crazy and incredibly arrogant (Remember that awful Matt Lauer interview? Even Tom knew how badly that went and eventually apologised). I’ve heard he’s a truly great guy and a super accommodating and hard-working actor on set, but in that interview and in the ‘awards ceremony’ he comes across as completely insane. I’m aware of this film’s agenda, but there’s no context that Gibney could’ve removed to make it seem remotely sane. It’s plainly nucking futs, as Dickie Roberts might say.

You’re really only getting one side of the story in this documentary, as the filmmaker and participants clearly have issues with the Church of Scientology, and especially with David Miscavige. However, a) You do get to hear L. Ron Hubbard himself speak and his words do not help the pro-Scientology cause one bit, and b) There’s no way active Scientologists still connected with the Church would’ve agreed to talk about their religion, even outside of a film like this, more than likely. So just watch the film knowing what it is and where it comes from, making up your own mind. I found it mostly amusing and interesting, and even a bit scary once you look past all of the pulp sci-fi silliness. You can’t help but feel something sinister is going on here, and for me it’s not just my general suspicion of all religion. Whether you agree with the film’s agenda or not, it’s still really fascinating stuff that’ll have you wanting to talk about it afterwards. I’d consider that a success.

Rating: B