The Golden Compass

[phoenix_fire]

A children’s fantasy film that stars Nicole Kidman and features a little girl on a quest to kill God has some Christian groups upset over what they believe is a ploy to promote atheism to kids. The movie, “The Golden Compass,” is adapted from the first novel in a trilogy called “His Dark Materials” by English author Philip Pullman, an outspoken atheist. Critics fear that the film, due out in December, will encourage children to read the anti-Church series. <snip> "'The Golden Compass' is an entertaining fantasy about love, courage, responsibility and freedom," a New Line spokesman said. "We look forward to the Dec. 7 opening." But the removal of the Godless themes from the movie has some Christian organizations seething. "They’re intentionally watering down the most offensive element,” Donohue said. “I'm not really concerned about the movie, [which] looks fairly innocuous. The movie is made for the books. ... It's a deceitful, stealth campaign. Pullman is hoping his books will fly off the shelves at Christmastime." Some atheists and fans of the books aren't happy, either. They say the studio has caved to pressure from the Christian right by sanitizing the tale for the big screen. In "Compass," the curious 12-year-old protagonist, Lyra (played by British newcomer Dakota Blue Richards), stumbles on an adventure very close to home when she overhears talk of an amazing substance called Dust, which can unite the world but is so feared that many are scrambling to eradicate it. Lyra travels to an alternative universe where everyone has a spiritual alter-ego, or demon, in animal form — and she goes there not knowing what she'll find or what her role will be. In her quest for the truth, she receives a magical golden compass that has the answers for those savvy enough to decipher it. Kidman plays Mrs. Coulter, who turns out to be Lyra's mother; Daniel Craig (the current James Bond) co-stars as her "uncle" Lord Asriel — who is really her dad. The anti-religious themes get progressively stronger with each book in the trilogy; in the final installment, the characters succeed in killing a character called God — who turns out to be a phony, and not God after all. The series has soared to the top of bestseller lists in the U.K. and other countries but has not caught on in the United States. <snip> New Line "expressed worry about the possibility of perceived anti-religiosity" and instructed those making the movie that if the Godless themes stayed put, the project would turn "unviable, financially," Weitz wrote in December 2004 on Bridgetothestars.net. In those discussions, he said, Pullman suggested that the Church and God in his trilogy could become "any arbitrary establishment that curtails the freedom of the individual." "You will probably not hear of the 'Church,'" the director wrote, sparking one fan to retort that Hollywood had engaged in a "blatant cop-out to the Bible Belt of America." Pullman has not been shy in the past about verbalizing his beliefs — or, some might say, nonbeliefs — and his intentions in writing the "Dark Materials" novels. The novelist has said they are in response to C.S. Lewis' "The Chronicles of Narnia," the popular children's fantasy series of which "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" is the first book — written by Lewis to teach Christian ideals to kids. "I loathe the 'Narnia' books," Pullman has said in previous press interviews. "I hate them with a deep and bitter passion, with their view of childhood as a golden age from which sexuality and adulthood are a falling away." He has called the series "one of the most ugly and poisonous things" he's ever read. In spite of complaints about the forthcoming film, Pullman fans and atheists are still excited about the exposure it will give his novels. They say the American literary market is sorely lacking material for those who don't believe in God, and they scoff at the idea that the series is hazardous to children.

FOXNews.com - Christian Groups Claim Pro-Atheist 'Stealth Campaign' in Nicole Kidman Fantasy Film 'The Golden Compass' - Celebrity Gossip | Entertainment News | Arts And Entertainment

Move back Harry Potter! In what might be a far more legitimate effigy for religion-motivated movie naysayers, New Line gets ready for the release of The Golden Compass, based on the book of the same name by Philip Pullman. This brings up some interesting questions.

*How much can we really credit novels like this in altering the thinking of children?

*Is this another extremist false alarm?

*Should the messages of movies like this be compromised to increase profit?

*Is this just another kind of child indoctrination presented from a new source?

*If so, does an opposite indoctrination really cancel out the other one and establish an atmosphere of free thought or is it yet another detrimental blow against the establishment of individual thought in children?

*For anyone who's read the books, what do you think of "Dark Materials" as a kind of anti-Narnia?

Discuss. Feel free to add more questions.

[phoenix_fire]

Personally, I've read the entire trilogy. I liked the first book alright. There were a few places that I didn't care for, but I suspend a certain amount of reality when I read fiction anyway. I will have to say, however, that there were some themes in there that I thought might not be appropriate for children. The other two books, however, absolutely disgusted me. They reeked of personal vendetta. And the idea of someone writing about deicide chills me to the very core of my fiery being. Reading the final book seriously made me gag. I know most of you will disagree, but that was my personal opinion. The first book would have been tons better if it had not been followed by the other two.

[Suburbanite]

This movie has me interested, I'll be seeing it. I love that a kid kills God, how hilarious, very interesting. I'm getting the books, too. This thread got me interested.

[HelioPrime]

If people can bring films to the nation about christianity then what right do people have to exclude an atheists rant film?

[another day]

A story about a child killing god is a ploy to promote atheism?

How can that be true when atheists don't believe in god?

As for the argument, I don't think it's good for kids to be indoctrinated into atheism of course because they won't have a real understanding of why they should disbelieve. They will still have the same simple minded understanding of the universe just like religious people and will probably justify their belief with weak, brainless explanations like "If theres a god how come he doesn't cure cancer".

Real atheism, should come about as part of a deeper understanding and philosophy of life, people, and the universe as a whole, not taught based on the ideas of how church and religion corrupts people and so they should be shunned.

As for the book, I've had the first one since i was about 14...never got around to reading it...maybe i'll give it a shot.

[shawmutt]

I think that, like the book, there will be a few levels of comprehension available. The "aw cool check out the armored bear" and the religious message of the book. I'll have to read it again, but it didn't seem to me to be overly vindictive of God--it's fiction. I think his expressed personal views of religion has some folks up in arms more than the actual book--it's just fiction folks.

Did I mention that, like the Davinci Code, it's fiction?

I will definitely be going to see the film, but I reserve judgement--something was "off" in the previews, there was a part in there that wasn't supposed to happen until the second book.

And they botched up the review, by the way. Lyra starts off with a daemon (which is a different word than demon), she doesn't travel to an alternate reality with "demons".

[phoenix_fire]

Quote by: another day A story about a child killing god is a ploy to promote atheism? How can that be true when atheists don't believe in god? As for the argument, I don't think it's good for kids to be indoctrinated into atheism of course because they won't have a real understanding of why they should disbelieve. They will still have the same simple minded understanding of the universe just like religious people and will probably justify their belief with weak, brainless explanations like "If theres a god how come he doesn't cure cancer". Real atheism, should come about as part of a deeper understanding and philosophy of life, people, and the universe as a whole, not taught based on the ideas of how church and religion corrupts people and so they should be shunned. As for the book, I've had the first one since i was about 14...never got around to reading it...maybe i'll give it a shot.

Well, it also paints the Church as an evil, grasping organization that engages in all kinds of mutilations and likes to literally rip the souls from children for fun and profit. God is said to have gone senile, and has been "replaced" for quite a while by an angel named Metatron. The deicide could be considered more symbolic than literal...even though it is literal in the story.

[phoenix_fire]

Quote by: shawmutt I think that, like the book, there will be a few levels of comprehension available. The "aw cool check out the armored bear" and the religious message of the book. I'll have to read it again, but it didn't seem to me to be overly vindictive of God--it's fiction. I think his expressed personal views of religion has some folks up in arms more than the actual book--it's just fiction folks. Did I mention that, like the Davinci Code, it's fiction? I will definitely be going to see the film, but I reserve judgement--something was "off" in the previews, there was a part in there that wasn't supposed to happen until the second book. And they botched up the review, by the way. Lyra starts off with a daemon (which is a different word than demon), she doesn't travel to an alternate reality with "demons".

It's a kids' story, and that's the big thing. Da Vinci Code was cosmology parading as fiction, but that's a point for another thread.

Maybe they changed that in the movie. But she's not supposed to make it to another reality until the end of the first book. And you're right, she does start off with Pan, who is her "soul".

[Athena]

At first I thought it great that a non Christian movie establish that non Christians have a sense of morality too, and we do not need the religious myth, to have a moral society. But then the further explanation of the books as repulsive, is a big turn off to me. That would ruin the attempt to demonstrate that non Christians can also be moral people.

Interesting that our TV viewing and the movie industry geared for young men, tends to be repulsive to me, and there isn't a public outcry for better entertainment. Some nights there isn't one channel on the TV that is not about about someone victimizing someone else. Like how many ways can the basically the same story be told, and still be interesting?

Anyway, we have Christians fighting science, and Christians fighting freedom of speech, and I sure wish they had the education to know better. That would be knowing the history of the founding of the US, when our forefathers were not only Protestants (rebellion from the origin church), but were Protestants protesting Protestantism. It would be, understanding Deism and why we have constitutionally protected freedom of religion and freedom of speech. My concern is the harm these Christians do to democracy and liberty.

[ItsDarts]

Daemon = Chiefly British, a variant of Demon.

In computer science Daemon = A program or process that sits idly in the background until it is invoked to perform its task.

Stirring up any controversy about a movie should be seen as an attempt to get more viewers and hence money. All the hub bub about the De Vinci Code prompted a lot of attention and a lot of money. I watched Narnia and never really thought about it being a Christian story, I saw it as fantasy like any other movie. For some reason, people like to read in too much to a "story" and take unnecessay offense if it goes against their beliefs. Who remembers the Exorcist? I saw that movie when I was 13 (my mom took me to my first R rated movie) and I laughed through out the entire movie. The projectile vomiting scene was hilarious :)

Point being, no matter what your beliefs are, it's ONLY A MOVIE PEOPLE. If it goes against your beliefs, so what? Is your faith in your beliefs that rocky that it can't stand a little merriment in entertainment?

[shawmutt]

Quote by: ItsDarts Daemon = Chiefly British, a variant of Demon. In computer science Daemon = A program or process that sits idly in the background until it is invoked to perform its task.

<offtopic>Sorry, off topic, me and my OCD with words. Daemon, as used in this book, follows the definition in the American Heritage Dictionary, that is, a mythical inferior deity, such as a deified hero, or an attendant spirit; a genius. The distinction is important, as most Christian types will have a certain image of Satan on her shoulder</offtopic>

Is your faith in your beliefs that rocky that it can't stand a little merriment in entertainment?

That's a great quote.

[phoenix_fire]

Meh. My faith is solid. Otherwise I wouldn't have read the entire series...and the first one multiple times. But the issue, as stated above in the OP, is whether it is yet another way by which adults try to tell kids what to think.

[J. Askiloupos]

What Wicked was to The Wonderful Wizard Of Oz, the His Dark Materials series is to the modern application of Scripture- the story behind the scenes, what "really" happened. An opposing viewpoint on the order of the spiritual world. I was fascinated by the books, and eagerly await the film (and hopefully both sequels- unabridged by paranoid social demagogues).

[ItsDarts]

Quote by: phoenix_fire Meh. My faith is solid. Otherwise I wouldn't have read the entire series...and the first one multiple times. But the issue, as stated above in the OP, is whether it is yet another way by which adults try to tell kids what to think.

Probably no more so than any other movie that has some kind of perceived message. The movie is rated PG13, so obviously parents will give their guidence, right? Maybe the movie (book? never heard of the books) is the antithesis of The Chronicles of Narnia?

[phoenix_fire]

Quote by: ItsDarts Probably no more so than any other movie that has some kind of perceived message. The movie is rated PG13, so obviously parents will give their guidence, right? Maybe the movie (book? never heard of the books) is the antithesis of The Chronicles of Narnia?

Well, that was exactly the idea, since you mention it. Part of the OP regarded whether opposing indoctrination really set the stage for free thought or if it was just another antagonist to it.

[shawmutt]

I just hope it's better than the Chronicles movie, they really botched up the movie in my humble opinion. Of course, I now measure all movies based on books to Lord of the Rings--and the extended versions no less.

[another day]

Quote by: Athena At first I thought it great that a non Christian movie establish that non Christians have a sense of morality too, and we do not need the religious myth, to have a moral society. But then the further explanation of the books as repulsive, is a big turn off to me. That would ruin the attempt to demonstrate that non Christians can also be moral people. .

Well I think it's only the belief of the Christians that the book is "repulsive" because it lampoons Christianity and god.

[Athena]

Quote by: another day Well I think it's only the belief of the Christians that the book is "repulsive" because it lampoons Christianity and god.

Hum, may be I should put much importance on the words people use, and take the time to ask what they mean by that word.

[Praxius]

Oh yeah, they whine and complain about this, yet Devil's Advocate came out and I don't remember much bickering about that movie.

What about Jesus Christ Superstar? What about Mel Gibson's super pump up christianity movie which portrayed the Jewish community as not to nice?

Sorry but if the faith was true and strong, they wouldn't have to worry about "trivial movies" such as this taking their faith down a notch.

it's a fictional story/movie..... for entertainment purposes, man I friggin hate organizations which filter out who's movies can be made and who's can't due to some level of offense.

Gonna get offended by a book or movie? Don't read or watch it.

I'd be interested in watching the movie in it's original design prior to being filtered and watered down, but now, meh.... it maybe interesting to watch still.

[The Bacon Guy]

To be honest, I didn't see the book as overly anti-theistic. The main enemy in the book was the Church; not the belief in God. As such, I see it as more anti-authoritarian than anti-theistic.