What the bleep do we know?

What the Bleep Do We Know!? (also written What the #$*! Do We Know!?) is a controversial 2004 film that combines documentary interviews and a fictional narrative to posit a connection between science and spirituality based upon the teachings of JZ Knight/Ramtha, of whom the three directors are devotees.There is also an extended 2006 version, What the Bleep!?: Down the Rabbit Hole.

W HAT THE #$*! DO WE KNOW?! is a radical departure from convention. It demands a freedom of view and greatness of thought so far unknown, indeed, not even dreamed of since Copernicus. It's a documentary. It's a story. It's mind-blowing special effects. This film plunges you into a world where quantum uncertainty is demonstrated - where neurological processes, and perceptual shifts are engaged and lived by its protagonist - where everything is alive, and reality is changed by every thought. The unlikeliest cult hit of 2004 was What the (Bleep) Do We Know?, a lecture on mysticism and science mixed into a sort-of narrative. Marlee Matlin stars in the dramatic thread, about a sourpuss photographer who begins to question her perceptions. Interviews with quantum physics experts and New Age authors are cut into this story, offering a vaguely convincing (and certainly mind-provoking) theory about... well, actually, it sounds a lot like the Power of Positive Thinking, when you get down to it. Talking heads (not identified until film's end) include JZ Knight, who appears in the movie channeling Ramtha, the ancient sage she claims communicates through her (other speakers are also associated with Knight's organization). What she says actually makes pretty good common sense--Ramtha's wiggier notions are not included--and would be easy to accept were it not being credited to a 35,000-year-old mystic from Atlantis. WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW?! is a new type of film. It is part documentary, part story, and part elaborate and inspiring visual effects and animations. The protagonist, Amanda, played by Marlee Matlin, finds herself in a fantastic Alice in Wonderland experience when her daily, uninspired life literally begins to unravel, revealing the uncertain world of the quantum field hidden behind what we consider to be our normal, waking reality. She is literally plunged into a swirl of chaotic occurrences, while the characters she encounters on this odyssey reveal the deeper, hidden knowledge she doesn?t even realize she has asked for. Like every hero, Amanda is thrown into crisis, questioning the fundamental premises of her life ? that the reality she has believed in about how men are, how relationships with others should be, and how her emotions are affecting her work isn?t reality at all!

The topics discussed in What the Bleep Do We Know!? include neurology, quantum physics, psychology, epistemology, ontology, metaphysics, magical thinking and spirituality. The film features interviews with individuals presented as experts in science and spirituality, interspersed with the story of a deaf photographer as she struggles with her situation. Computer-animated graphics feature heavily in the film. The film has received widespread criticism from the scientific community. Physicists, in particular, claim that the film grossly misrepresents the meaning of various principles of quantum mechanics, and is in fact pseudoscience.

Filmed on location in Portland, Oregon, What the Bleep Do We Know (according to the makers "Bleep" is a bowdlerization of "fuck" - William Arntz has referred to the film as "WTFDWK" in a message to Bleeps' "Street Team") blends a fictional story line, documentary-style discussion, and computer animation to present a view of the physical universe and human life within it, with purported connections to neuroscience and quantum physics. Some ideas discussed in the film are:

* The universe is best seen as constructed from thought (or ideas) rather than from substance (see idealism);

* What has long been considered "empty space" is anything but empty (see vacuum energy);

* Our beliefs about who we are and what is real are not simply observations, but rather form ourselves and our realities (see solipsism).

* Peptides manufactured in the brain can cause a bodily reaction to an emotion, resulting in a new perspective to old adages such as "think positively" and "be careful what you wish for."

In the fictional part, Amanda, a deaf photographer (played by Marlee Matlin) acts as the viewer's avatar as she experiences her life from startlingly new and different perspectives. In the documentary part of the film, a number of purported scientific experts in quantum physics, biology, medicine, psychiatry, and theology discuss the roots and meaning of Amanda's experiences. However, viewers are not told the credentials of the experts until the credits at the end of the film. The comments of the scientific experts converge on a single theme: "We all create our own reality." Although not widely held by the scientific community, this point of view correlates with the subjective experience. Authors arguing related viewpoints include Jane Roberts (the Seth books), Richard Bach (Jonathan Livingston Seagull and Illusions), the writings of Abraham-Hicks, and of Deepak Chopra, Dr. Wayne Dyer, and Dr. David R. Hawkins.

Lacking the funding and resources of the typical Hollywood film, the filmmakers relied on "guerrilla marketing" first to get the film into theaters, then to attract audiences. This has led to accusations, both formal and informal, against the film's proponents of spamming online message boards and forums with many thinly veiled promotional posts. Initially, the film was released in only two theaters: one in Yelm, Washington (the home of the producers), and the other (The Bagdad Theater) in Portland, Oregon, where it was filmed. Within several weeks, it was in a dozen more theaters (mostly in the western United States), and within six months it had made its way into 200 theaters from coast to coast .

The critics offered fairly mixed reviews as seen on the movie review website Rotten Tomatoes. Dave Kehr of the New York Times described in his review of the movie, the "transition from quantum mechanics to cognitive therapy" as "plausible", but went on to state that "the subsequent leap — from cognitive therapy into large, hazy spiritual beliefs - isn't as effectively executed. Suddenly people who were talking about subatomic particles are alluding to alternate universes and cosmic forces, all of which can be harnessed in the interest of making Ms. Matlin's character feel better about her thighs.

Comments (0)

Title
Comment	smaller | bigger
Name
Email
Website
	Subscribe via email (registered users only)
	I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.
Write the displayed characters
	Add Comment Preview