Here's what CNN says about The Golden Compass:
Culture: A star-studded, big-budget fantasy film released for Christmastime features religion as the villain. Hollywood is collaborating with a militant atheist British children's book author to indoctrinate children.
Gregg Easterbrook (you already know to expect drooling idiocy) babbles without comprehension. Bill Donohue, of course, thinks it is a plot to corrupt children.
Get real. This movie isn't going to convert anyone to atheism. It's a fantasy story. It's got witches and talking bears in it. It's going to generate about as many new atheists as Tolkien's Middle Earth trilogy generated converts to worship of Eru and the Ainur. It has the nicely appreciated sop to secular interest that the author is an atheist who has no respect for Christian mythology, but this is not a propaganda film — it's entertainment. If your child's beliefs can be shattered by a CGI polar bear on a movie screen, you've got bigger problems than this one film.
I'm going to go see The Golden Compass this weekend. If it's a philosophical tract rather than an adventure story, I'm not going to enjoy it much.
And those of you who are upset that religion is one of the villains in this movie — get used to it. Religion is a villain in real life, too.
- Log in to post comments
Actually, I am kind of hoping people's beliefs can be shattered by a CGI polar bear on screen. He talks, he wears armour, he throws down with other polar bears and drinks a lot...
It would be nice to have more people believe in wonder and creativity (and kick-ass polar bears) than censorship.
"It's going to generate about as many new atheists as Tolkien's Middle Earth trilogy generated converts to worship of Eru and the Ainur."
As one of the few people living who read The Silmarillion, and managed to finish it, I object to your heavy-handed treatment of my (fictional) Gods! :)
"If your child's beliefs can be shattered by a CGI polar bear on a movie screen, you've got bigger problems than this one film."
It's funny you should mention that, because the final death-knell(s) of any theism in my life came from Legos and Peanuts.
Make sure you wear some running shoes when you go see it, PZ. You'll need them to keep up with the pace of the movie.
Gonna go see it this weekend too, I hope however, it does have at least a bit of philosophy in it, to give the parents in the audience something to think (or more likely, squirm) about.
Excuse me but isn't one fantasy (movie) as good as another (bible, torah, book of mormom, koran)?
Chuck Norris pans The Golden Compass - sight unseen. You could be taking your life in your hands by defying Chuck.
Just how insecure are christians? Really. Here in America they have an 85% hold on the population, and more believe in the invisible guy up in the sky than think that evolution is an acceptable description of reality, yet they think that a movie threatens christianity.
My theory on this is that they are afraid of any idea. Why? Christianity basically invented orthodoxy (prior to christianity, religion depended more on correct actions (sacrifices, etc.) than correct thought). They came up with the idea that, in order to go to heaven, you must believe EXACTLY THE RIGHT THING (query: does this mean that all 'christians' who lived before the Nicaean (sp?) Creed was promulgated (including the apotles and whoever wrote the gospels) ended up in hell?). If going to heaven can be threatened by believing the wrong thing, then no (k)new thoughts are allowed. Opening your mind to new ideas threatens your eternal life.
Anyway, that's my theory as to why christians freak out when their 'religion' is portrayed in a less than worshipful fashion.
Sorry for the long post. Occupational hazard.
Am I going to lose my job and my friends if I watch this movie as well?
Ya know, I'd like to see a study done which shows how effective Hollywood has been in changing people's spiritual beliefs (or lack thereof) over the years.
I saw it last Saturday and admit to mild disappointment, only because I loved the books so much that no mere movie could capture all I loved about them. But I think the one thing the movie actually got right was its criticism of authoritarian ideologies. It is, even in the movie, pretty obviously a religious institution, but it could also be a stand-in for any such system, including, say Communism. But most specific references, such as that there are worlds in which "the Authority" (for which, "God") does not exist, will be lost on nearly all children.
These critics are quite frankly asses. I went to see their crappy "Lion" movie and even the boring horror movie "The Passion of the Christ" (one victim? WTF?), and it didn't make me want to drink their wine-flovored Koolade. They can watch one movie from a book by an atheist and see that we, too, can tell compelling stories of loyalty, courage, principle, and sacrifice--with the added dimension of self-reliance and reason.
In fact, we can tell two such stories, because atheist Ian McEwan's book, "The Atonement," has been made into a movie opening the same day.
This whining by Christards is a very good sign. It is weak and kitteny. The gasping death rattle of an unsupportable brainwash being threatened by silver-tongued littel girl and her daemon. Atheism was never so threatened by taffy-addled lion-lovers in Lewis's world.
I saw the movie Michael once. It didn't make me believe in Angels. Neither did Angels in the Outfield. I doubt very much this movie will actually make anyone change their beliefs.
I love how this movie is a "plot to corrupt children" yet the religious have been corrupting children for over 2000 years.
Boy, they sure do make a stink when someone talks mean about their pwecious widdle stowies, huh?
Fuck 'em.
"The Catholic League wants Christians to stay away from this movie precisely because it knows that the film is bait for the books: unsuspecting parents who take their children to see the movie may be impelled to buy the three books as a Christmas present. And no parent who wants to bring their children up in the faith will want any part of these books."
Wait... I thought Christianity was the One True whatever? If it's so strong and true, why are you worried? You should be going to see this in order to point and laugh at the silly polar bears these mean militant atheists are using to push their propaganda. Please, by being afraid to watch this movie, you've just let slip that you're not as Christian as you might like us to think.
The problem is that most people who comment, for or against, haven't read the books.
The books are somewhat preachy.
Reginald Selkirk @Chuck Norris pans The Golden Compass - sight unseen. You could be taking your life in your hands by defying Chuck.
Chuck says ""The Golden Compass" is more than enough proof to demonstrate the Christmas culture wars are alive and well. We've drifted so far way from the innocence of Christmas movies like Jimmy Stewart's "It's a Wonderful Life." We've shifted from celebrating a savior to crying out for more secularism.". This is coming from a man who makes movies about people kicking each other in the head. That's a nice plank you got in your' eye Chuck.
Frankly, I hope they keep it up, as I hope that Sen. Larry Craig continues to fight new allegations of his sexual improprieties. (Yeah, that's going to make the Republican Convention a fun time!) Why put them out of their misery? They are making fools of themselves over this - good, I say! I hope they latch on to other literary works and areas to exploit! The public will eventually tire of all this atheist-baiting when they see how groundless the "danger" is, and this film was the wrong battle for them to fight. I would call it a "Godsend" if I weren't, you know... ;-)
DO NOT MOCK THE VALAR!
(Though, in all seriousness, I usually replace "God" with "Eru" in everyday speech to see who notices. ;-) )
My contribution to Money.CNN via the "Contact Us" :
"We've drifted so far way from the innocence of Christmas movies like Jimmy Stewart's "It's a Wonderful Life.""
teehee! I'm pretty sure the "Chuck Norris" that writes these is a comedy character, like the TV Stephen Colbert. "It's a Wonderful Life" is beautiful but it's about an suicide attempt. Nobody can seriously call it "innocent".
The third book in the trilogy does have some pretty preachy passages, that is true. The good thing about that is, they are so obvious and unnecessary that if a movie is made from that book, they can be excised without doing mischief to the central story. And the main points will abide: think for yourself, act with courage, be loyal to friends, seek knowledge rather than comformity. Even absent its most propogandistic moments, the story is a threat to religious fundamentalism. And the worst kind of threat, too, because it actively demonstrates how attractive real life can be (via a fantasy) in contrast to how cramped, crabbed, and tawdry their beliefs are.
Exactly. I think PZ is actually wrong on this one -- movies like this, with messages of personal empowerment and questioning of authority (or "the Authority") can get people thinking, and perhaps make a difference. I wouldn't dismiss it as mere entertainment.
(The same is true for the complaints about role-playing games -- once you start to wonder how many hit points Jesus would have, it's tough to take Christianity seriously.)
PZ wrote:
Not by itself. But it is part of a slight change in culture that is opening up to atheism. It isn't really new. Before there was "The Golden Compass" there was another somewhat atheistic/agnostic writer of children's books; L. Frank Baum. He wrote The Wizard of Oz.
The Wizard of Oz, a popular "family" film, has a subversive message. And its stronger in the books too. Remember when Toto, the dog, pulls the curtain back to reveal that there is no real wizard? It was a hoax, an illusion to inspire fear and trembling. The wizard is a veiled reference to a Christian understanding of God. That scene was meant to undermine traditional religious orthodoxy.
No, it doesn't convert you, but it stays with you. It gives you a metaphoric reference point you'll wind up using when you think of religion in the future.
C.S. Lewis wrote his Narnia books to promote his understanding of his Christian religion, why shouldn't atheists do the same? I've got no gripe with people writing Narnia or making that into a film. Let the Christians offer critiques as others critique Narnia.
And I'd love to see a Buddhist children's story.
PZ<
On that we can agree. I'm looking forward to seeing the movie.
Can anyone explain to me why this article is in the CNN Money section?
And don't be too hard on Mel Gibson's flick. My Christian wife made me see it, and I'm glad she did. I had a great time, though I think my frequent laughter annoyed the other movie patrons.
I've long held that Christians are afraid of fantasy movies and novels and role playing games because they are afraid of competing fantasies that are more compelling. All Jesus has to offer is some parlor tricks with zombies. How can that compare to armored bears, vampires, wizards and the Death Star?
People were a lot easier to impress 2000 years ago. Making wine out of some septic water pretty much got you a standing ovation back then. These days, David Blaine can do better standing on the street corner with just a pack of cards, never mind a novel with talking trees and goblins or a system of magic that works with 20 sided dice.
I note that Wally World has a prominent display of "The Golden Compass" movie tie-in picture books, as well as the trilogy itself. If WalMart carries it, the nay-sayers have already lost.
And Coca-Cola would miss a great advertising coup if they don't have a panzerbjorn sipping a Coke.
-- CV
I'd far, far rather see converts to the worship of Eru and the Ainur than to any religion this world has produced. As deities go, he seems alright.
Remember, Ilúvatar has a grand cosmic plan for each and every one of us, in which his themes shall be played aright! Nor can any alter the music in his despite.
As one of the few people living who read The Silmarillion, and managed to finish it
You are so asking for trouble there... ;)
Oh, they're just all upset that the villain is a blonde woman named Coulter. They think we're making fun of their spokesmodel. Buncha babies.
Seriosuly, though, I hope this movie "corrupts" the hell (or at least the fear of hell) out of every kid who sees it.
Wow, just... wow.
I mean, I know Chuck Norris' tears can cure cancer (too bad Chuck Norris has never cried) and all that, but I had no idea Chuck was psychic, too. Panning a movie before you've had the chance to see it -- that is a demonstration of phenomenal mind powers.
Well, maybe not, since everybody seems to be doing it lately :^/
--Raynfala
I'm not familiar with the author and had never heard of "Compass" before this movie. However I'm definitely interested in seeing it - I absolutely love Tolkien.
What gets me is the complaints from the religious nutters that this movie is an attempt at atheist indoctrination.
For one thing, I doubt any of these twits has even seen a trailer or read the book - it's just a knee jerk reaction from hearing that author is *GASP* an atheist.
Another thing, just what the hell does every preacher in the pulpit do every Sunday? Religion is in the business of recruitment, indoctrination and subjugation. That's a big, fat bloated pot calling the kettle black.
If religion can't compete fairly in the marketplace of ideas it should get the fuck off the playing field.
Aaah, one can dream......
Look closely... that's not a CNN article. It's Investors Business Daily -- noted for its rightwing slant (at least editorially). It's on CNN as a feed from Newstex, an aggregator service. I don't think it necessarily means CNN is endorsing the article anymore than, say, the NYTimes endorses the AP/Reuters feeds on its website. I could be wrong.
Hey, that Easterbrook guy sounds just like PZ...
(please fix the link, I want to read the stupid!)
The Easterbrook link doesn't go anywhere.
And I am grateful for that.
Forgot to mention, just in case:
I'm not claiming that the movie is an attempt at indoctrination, rather that it's obviously how the religious nutters see it. Their projection is obvious.
Responding to comment #23:
I've had similar thoughts. We have much better stories these days than ancient peoples could have ever dreamed up, and better media for telling them. Children have so many conscious hours in a day, and the time taken up by Harry Potter, Halo, His Dark Materials, etc., has to come at the expense of time devoted to learning about the tribal gods. If only we could figure out how to introduce children's fantasy stories into Islamic societies to compete with memorizing the Qu'ran in Arabic (regardless of the local spoken language!) and the brainwashing about martyrdom & the 72 virgins . . .
Oddly enough, a Fox News report on the issue is pretty "fair and balanced", with the reporter hammering on the fact that Donohue hasn't even seen the film.
>(prior to christianity, religion depended more on correct actions >(sacrifices, etc.) than correct thought)
The Persian magicians (zoroastrians) were already
pretty big on that long before christianity.
Golden Compass is as overtly Athiest as The Matrix. According to TGC *SPOILERS, IF YOU CARE* says that God is actually a rogue angel who corrupted how death works and gave himself supreme power. There is quite a bit about spirituality and "dust" in the books, but just shows how "supreme power religions" use this to control the populace. At most, the movie is anti-organized religion, which quite a few christians are ok with saying. Who out there is still standing by the Inquisition, child molestation, payments to get out of hell, etc etc. Every single religion can point to TGC and say "well, he's not talking about MY religion." I don't understand these people.
This guy is an asshole.
How disgusting.
How apt.
#6, whenever anyone mentions Chuck Norris these days, I happily think about this (with PZ as Bruce Lee of course) and all is well.
I read the three books when they were relatively new, and mostly from a proclivity to alternative history. (A serving of Harry Turtledove, anyone?)
One of the interesting aspects is the interweaving of religion and science. Physical research is conducted by priests in cathedrals. The separation of children from their "souls" is done at least partly for scientific reasons.
Biologists may be interested that some of the large animals in the third book, "The Amber Spyglass," are not vertebrates, but have sort of a diamond-shaped structure with a leg at each corner of the four major bones. One might wonder whether such a structure could evolve. And, more significantly, how well or poorly it would work.
You also have to wait until the third book to see evil mother Marisa Coulter turn around and sacrifice her life for her daughter Lyra, the heroine of the trilogy. An interesting twist.
Yes, because ethics and law are always in perfect harmony.
Bill Donohue, of course, thinks it is a plot to corrupt children
If Donahue is worried about children being corrupted, he can always entrust them to the priests of his cult. I'm sure they'd be perfectly safe then.
As soon as Spore is released, I'm gonna make one and see.
Chuck Norris is a fuckwit. I wonder how many people he converted to Texan with Walker: Texas Ranger.
Anyways, if these religiots are so keen on Atheism being Another Religion™, then we have every right to indoctrinate the little kiddies into our One True Faith™.
Of course, stuff like this just shows how all those believers in religion's Absolute Morality™ happily change the rules whenever it suits them.
Fuck but I despise such cowardly lying weasels.
# 37:
Yeah, I like how this article totally hits all the points: "Hay Guyz he hate God and he uh Devil and teh Bill Clinton and stuff."
And their feet have evolved an "axle" to use the large round seed pods of the local trees as wheels. Pretty bizarre, but pretty inventive.
Having read the story, I think the religious nuts are missing the mark. We can see, by our own reading, that he does not directly attack personal religious beliefs.
Rather, he's authoritarianism, and the authoritarians who do terrible things, under the guise of religion.
Or, in the author's own words: "Religion is at its best when it's far from power, when a religion gains power, it goes bad." And, apparently, except for the bleating authoritarians in religion, it doesn't seem to be offending the moderately religious. Heck, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' Office for Film and Broadcasting gave the film, which is rated PG-13, a warm review. The film is not blatantly anti-Catholic but a "generalized rejection of authoritarianism," it said.
While noting the story's "spirit of rebellion and stark individualism," the office said Lyra and her allies' stand for free will in opposition to the coercive force of the Magisterium is "entirely in harmony with Catholic teaching."
Kind of like how the flat-earthers freak-out about Evolution and mainstream Catholicism is like "so what?" Same with this movie.
The religionists are just upset because atheists are now encroaching upon an area in which their beliefs have long dominated: fantasy.
Having read a lot of the anti-Christian polemic, I would say that a person's negative reponse to the Golden Compass is in direct proportion to their ignorance of liturature, history, mythology, psychology, comparative religion, philosophy - well you get the picture. The greater your own breadth and depth, the more you will find in Pullman, though that is true of every piece of good literature. I've read the entire His Dark Materials trilogy and I find Pullman's understanding of children to be a lot more accurate than the "protect their innocence" crowd. No, Pullman is not going to subvert anyone to atheism but presenting the possibility of a different take on the nature of things is important. Maybe the big daddy in the sky is not so big after all. Maybe you shouldn't trust Authority just because it is in a position of power.
I look forward to seeing the movie this weekend with my son (who is 24 and came to atheism without the benefit of reading Pullman) and his father. I hear it has some problems as far as movie production values are concerned. But I hope it is a hit anyway as a slap in the face to those who are whining about it challenging their faith. I also can't help but notice that the reviews coming out of Britain are much more positive than those from the US. Some unarticulated bias perhaps? And as a last shot from fan of fantasy, if the Catholic League knew what a staple of fantasy worlds an antagonistic, authoritarian religious hierarchy is, their heads would proabably spin.
Bears talk? That's all the proof I need, I'm convinced.
Ah, a troll who still can't get over Clinton's penis. How banal and yet so projective. Time to move on, he's not going to let you get any use of it...
Oh, no. Panserbjørne drink CarlsbergTuborg.
Bob
"Well, where is God," said Mrs. Coulter, "if he's alive? And why doesn't he speak anymore? At the beginning of the world, God walked in the Garden and spoke with Adam and Eve. Then he began to withdraw, and he forbade Moses to look at his face. Later, in the time of Daniel, he was aged--he was the Ancient of Days. Where is he now? Is he still alive, at some inconceivable age, decrepit and demented, unable to think or act or speak and unable to die, a rotten hulk? And if that is his condition, wouldn't it be the most merciful thing, the truest proof of our love for God, to seek him out and give him the gift of death?"
Kill the decrepit, demented bastard! Death to the rotten hulk!
My letter using the CNN.Money contact Us link. I think that just like a political movement, we have a duty to counteract this kind of nonsense and corrupt portrayals of atheists.
I am writing in response to the article entitled, "Liars and kidnappers" found on the CNN.Money site by the semi-anonymous author Investor's Business Daily. I am quite perplexed at why such a biased, opinionated article appeared in the financial section of the website. Secondly I wonder why it wasn't in the opinion/editorial section because this article is definitely not the result of objective journalism. The author(s) clearly have a chip on their shoulder and don't mind taking quotes out of context, creating straw-men to do battle with all in the glorious goal of suppressing any kind of dissent against their religious beliefs. Please explain to me how Phillip Pullman is a militant, "fire-breathing" atheist. Does he use violence to promote his ideas, does he brainwash cult-like followers in to believing that if they don't follow him they will suffer for eternity, that they should die for the atheist cause? The answer is No. In fact he has done work with many religious leaders (many of whom have endorsed the books and movie) and he simply writes books that attempt to empower people and children to think for themselves and question dogmatic authoritarianism which can be found in many organizations including communism, fascism and many religious organizations. I personally am an atheist and I see no problem not forcing absurd ancient mythologies to explain the modern world on my children. Having said that, I (like Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens) will not push our atheism on our kids but we will explain our beliefs and the evidence, open them up to all the religions of the world, teach them critical thinking skills and let them become their own person. What these authors complain about is childhood indoctrination to the point where kids are labelled with their religious identity before they have developed critical thinking skills, or studied all the worlds religions and all that science has to offer. This kind of labelling of children in to different camps has been a driving force in much violent strife as is witnessed in Northern Ireland between the catholics and the protestants and in Iraq between the Shia and the Sunnis. These authors never suggested the state taking children away from their parents, as this article implied, instead they want to start a dialogue that questions this indoctrination for the reasons stated above. Is it alright to call your 6-month old a baptist child, what about your 1 year old, 3 year old, 11 year old, etc? Let them decide for themself. For example, why is it that christians are allowed to indoctrinate their children to believe that they are born evil and must be saved by accepting a jewish man from pre-scientific societies who had himself martyred, that if they are bad they will go to a place of unmistakable pain and that there are certain rules that are fixed only because they are written in a 2,000 year old book of mythology. I respect christians right to have these beliefs, but is it absurd to suggest otherwise? Lastly, for him to imply that the millions of atheists don't have ethics is despicable and wouldn't be tolerated if he was talking about african americans, baptists, jews, conservatives, democrats for example. Would it be alright for an objective journalist to rail against the foreign policy of conservatives and then say, "maybe killing innocent Iraqi children is par for the course in conservative circles", or writing an article on christians who bomb abortion clinics with the term, "maybe christians enjoy killing doctors". I will gladly see this movie just as I would gladly see an entertaining and well thought out movie about religion and I would have no problem taking my child along to either. I am confident in the human ability to critically analyze and not be dissuaded simply by talking polar bears.
It would be odd if a movie _didn't_ have an influence. Anything we experience can influence us--why not movies, then? Still, the influence of any one movie will be small, which is why these panicked cultists seem so laughable. Besides, what is the value of one's 'chosen' faith when in fact there were no alternatives from which to 'choose'? My students have just finished reading John Milton's Areopagitica, that defense of free expression, wherein he writes, "I cannot praise a fugitive and cloistered virtue, unexercised and unbreathed, that never sallies out and sees her adversary." Is the 'faith' of these cultists so tenuous that they cannot be exposed to other perspectives? a peculiarly puny faith, that.
If Willey doesn't think the religious lie at the drop of a hat, he should really read the transcripts of Kitzmiller V Dover.
Bill Donohugh could be a high-ranking member of the Magisterium.
"While noting the story's "spirit of rebellion and stark individualism," the office said Lyra and her allies' stand for free will in opposition to the coercive force of the Magisterium is "entirely in harmony with Catholic teaching.""
I can't buy this at all. Are "liberal" Catholics just as deluded as the William Donahues (albeit from a more positive direction?) The history of Catholicism certainly does not suggest these ideas are at all in harmony with Catholicism's teachings.
Actually, it says right at the top that it's an Investors Business Daily article, so why should anyone be surprised? IBD is like the romper-room for sociopaths who'll grow up to be frustrated supply-siders and rapists, living in perpetual fear of The Black Dick.
It's like the cloaca maximus of the suburban id.
.
Pz and guys:
Another picture highly critical of religion is "the Mist", any comments on it?
"Oh, they're just all upset that the villain is a blonde woman named Coulter."
I remember from the books that she was dark-haired, can anyone confirm while I'm waiting on my library hold on The Subtle Knife?
Q: I read a comment today about America's bible belt being outraged at your work, and the Catholic Herald describing it is "worthy of the bonfire". Putting aside the alarming spectre of book-burning for a moment, do you experience any satisfaction in managing to get quite so far up such people's noses? I know I would.
PP: Well, I don't set out to annoy, but I don't hold back from fear of doing so. There are plenty of people who actually like to be annoyed, don't forget; it gives them a sense of importance and righteousness. It's an act of charity to help them feel so excited, I think.
http://books.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,4358299-99930,00.html
Heehee! Go, Pullman, go!
I really don't know why they called it the Golden compass it still gets on my nerves, the original book is called Northern Lights and the "compass" is called the Alethiometer.
NO COMPASSES!
It's going to generate about as many new atheists as Tolkien's Middle Earth trilogy generated converts to worship of Eru and the Ainur.
You aren't very familiar with the NewAge (rhymes with "sewage"), are you ;-) ?
Let's put it this way, if you think something is just too bugfuck insane for people to believe, there's a message board devoted to it. Just Google "otaku-kin".
I remember from the books that she was dark-haired, can anyone confirm while I'm waiting on my library hold on The Subtle Knife?
Yes, in the book, she was dark haired, but if Lyra is blonde, a blonde mother seems to fit better. Regarding the mulefa - the beings that employ wheels and evolved limbs arranged in a diamond pattern - while they may seem improbable at first glance, Pullman gives a nice exposition about how they and their environment exist as a continuum with all the various parts evolving together. While it may not be an accurate evolutionary possibility, it does show that there are alternative possible arrangements of existence and that worlds are the way they are because of their own internal consistencies not because some external force created them that way. So in addition to challenging anthrpomorphic representations of a paternalistic god, Pullman also champions the evolutionary process. Wow, how subversive is that. Donohue must have missed that part. His Dark Materials is not only atheist, it's not creationist either. The blackest heresy.
Re: #38
Willey, you've been undone by HTML.
Folks, the "Perjury..." sentence is part of the quote, and not Willey's opinion.
"Preview" is your friend!
-- CV
Celebrity Deathmatch:
Chuck Norris vs Iorek Byrnison
Let's fight!
Pullman:
But when you look at organised religion of whatever sort - whether it's Christianity in all its variants, or whether it's Islam or some forms of extreme Hinduism - wherever you see organised religion and priesthoods and power, you see cruelty and tyranny and repression. It's almost a universal law.
Yup.
Our home is not somewhere else. There is no elsewhere. This is a physical universe and we are physical beings made of material stuff. This is where we live.
Yup.
http://www.surefish.co.uk/culture/features/pullman_interview.htm
Rolando, re: "The Mist"--
It's true that religion comes out bad in the movie, but nothing comes out good. Government and science create the problem, human nature worsens the problems, and religion exacerbates things beyond the breaking point. It's as nihilistic a movie as I've ever seen. It's true that criticizes religion (one form, at least), but it's pan-hatist. Even parental love ultimately fails. It's the feel-bad movie of the season.
I recently heard a critic say exactly this in a radio review of The Mist... but intending it as a compliment!
I actually liked the fact that the books in the trilogy had related titles, all dealing with the central device in each book (The Golden Compass, The Subtle Knife, The Amber Spyglass, although it may be a bit of a reach to call the last device "central" to the final book). "Northern Lights" sounds rather bland to me. What were the other two books called in the UK?
"We've drifted so far way from the innocence of Christmas movies like Jimmy Stewart's "It's a Wonderful Life." We've shifted from celebrating a savior to crying out for more secularism.""
I'm not sure Chuck watched "It's a Wonderful Life" very carefully. I wouldn't really characterize it as an innocent celebration of Jesus.
Dammit! I should have listened to my gut. On first reading I had no issue with Willey's comment, but then I read Moses' comment #51, and somehow convinced myself it was a troll comment (even though it didn't square with the "This guy is an asshole" part) and got all trigger happy.
Sorry Willey. I'm dumb.
Maybe he saw the Saturday Night Live "Lost Ending" sketch, in George Bailey (Dana Carvey doing his dead-on Jimmy Stewart) and his friends end up beating Potter (Jon Lovitz) to death! Right up Chuck's alley (not to mention freakin' hilarious!).
For the longest time, I actually thought that the "Lost Ending" was really part of "It's a Wonderful Life" and not an SNL sketch. I have no idea why. Needless to say, I was pretty disappointed when it was 'left out' of the yearly broadcast.
I was too young to notice when Clash of the Titans came out, but did it cause the same kind of uproar with people not wanting their kids to see it because they were afraid they'd start worshipping Zeus? Or is it just because The Golden Compass is atheist?
Re: Gobaskof in #63, according to darkmaterials.com:
So, if you're going to blame anyone for it being called The Golden Compass, blame the author.
I didn't hear them whine that hard when Passion of the Christ was in theater. Maybe it wasn't aimed at children but it was what I call indoctrinement (sp?) at its highest level. I also didn't hear them whine about The Witch, the Wizard and the Wardrobe which was pretty much allegories about the bible.
And come ON. It just looks like one heck of an incredible movie. I'm gonna go see it.
Something tells me that C.S.Lewis' Lion, Witch, and the Wardrobe didn't get this kind of spin. Could you imagine the news media saying this:
"Hollywood is collaborating with a militant Christian British children's book author to indoctrinate children."
Yes.
I just imagined me saying it in my next book/movie review on my blog. Though, it will be satire and I'm not the news media.
I was too young to notice when Clash of the Titans came out, but did it cause the same kind of uproar with people not wanting their kids to see it because they were afraid they'd start worshipping Zeus?
Actually, parents were worried that seeing Harry Hamlin in a skimpy toga would make their sons gay. It sure worked for me.
For the people interested in a Buddhist story: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/photo//2007-07/25/content_5443110_2.htm
When I was in Taiwan, the posters claimed in would be released world wide, but a brief Google gave me no information of anything outside of Taiwan and China.
"I've got no gripe with people writing Narnia or making that into a film."
I do, but only because the film (never read the book) was so fantastically boring. No depth of character, no reason to give a damn (ha!) about any part of the weak, thin story.
I love that the actor who played the eldest boy-king is an atheist irl, though!
Get real. This movie isn't going to convert anyone to atheism. It's a fantasy story. It's got witches and talking bears in it. It's going to generate about as many new atheists as Tolkien's Middle Earth trilogy generated converts to worship of Eru and the Ainur.
I have to disagree. I think the movie could push some kids toward atheism. Sure, the books are not necessarily atheistic since people have souls (i.e., daemons) and since a 'first cause' god is not ruled out but the fact that the 'god' followed by Christians is treated as part of the fantasy world can cause questioning.
After all, reading fantasy novels with gods led me to question the reality of any gods.
In related news, it has been discovered that esteemed 18th century British author Jonathon Swift advocated cannibalism.
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops - aka the *actual* Catholic Church - takes the unorthodox tact of reviewing The Golden Compass by actually watching it. They give it an A-II, meaning that it's about as likely to convert children to atheism as Fred Claus or Shrek the Third.*
There are really only two conclusions to be drawn here. Either The Golden Compass is so effective at brainwashing that actual bishops have been seduced by it and are now luring other innocent Catholics to appease their new Atheist masters, or Bill Donahue is completely full of shit.
*This ignores the popular use of Shrek the Third as disproving the existence of a loving god.
Bloody hell, that's supposed to be "Jonathan". Mea culpa.
I have a co-worker who, along with his family, is eagerly awaiting Jesus's second coming so they don't have to be separated by death and HE is looking forward to seeing The Golden Compass. He says a) it's a fantasy movie and b) his faith is not going to be demolished by anything that might be in the movie. He even plans to take his kids.
It actually made my day.
Well, I'm embarrassed. I clearly mis-understood Willey. Sorry Willey. My mistake. I apologize.
I'm a little late to this thread.
Just watched the Catholic League's video. Here's what they say:
This is SO horrible you HAVE to find out how it's going to DESTROY your children's faith in Christianity. We are SO DEVOTED to the FAITH that we will SELL you a 23-page booklet for ONLY FIVE DOLLARS!
What a bunch of filthy mother fucking sons of bitches. They claim to be all holy and shit, but if they were truly concerned about "getting the word out" they'd put that booklet online, instead of using it to make money for their fat fucking leader to stuff more ice cream into his half-fridge underneath the golden bust of a pope. Jesus H Christ that kind of financially lucrative sanctimony pisses me off.
Plus, I have to pay $5 to make fun of their stupid pamphlet.
In a vaguely related waffle, apparently the new Beowulf film has been given one of the lowest ratings ever by CAP (worse than The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, if you can believe it) and described as "quite probably the most heinous culprit for stealing childhood from children ever made".
Animation/CGI = for kids in the wingnut world, it seems.
Apart from the Zoroastrians, Epicurus did. The single huge embarrassingly stupid mistake of his life.
I can't bear to read Easterbrook's crap... did he remember to blame this movie on those Hollywood Joooooooos? It worked so well for him last time.
The supposedly powerful, irresistible gospel of christianity is hanging by a thread ... yet again. Lucky for the J-man that Easterbrook and Donohue are around to save the day. Despite their best efforts though, with one or two more children's movies, it'll be all over for the 2,000 year old cult.
Rolando Aguilera (#60) mentioned "The Mists." This reminded me of Marion Zimmer Bradley's "The Mists of Avalon" (1982), a retelling of the King Arthur legend from the viewpoint of the women involved. The story is cast as a battle between the Druids and Christianity. Merlin is the hero. Guinevere is a conniver who attempts to lure Arthur into Christianity, breaking the pact by which he became king. A long (900pp) book, but engrossing. As I said earlier, alternative history....
In other news: Grand Moff Texan (#59) said "It's like the cloaca maximus of the suburban id." Sheesh, don't they teach Latin anymore? "Cloaca maxima." How do you expect to name the new species that you discover if you can't speak the lingo? BTW, the Cloaca Maxima is famous as the world's first major sewage system. It drained the swamps around Rome and carried the city's waste to the Tiber.
My sister has met Phillip Pullman. She says he's very nice and didn't mention a word about him breathing fire, nor did he try to convert her to atheism.
I always laugh when people talk about something "attempting to win atheist converts." Isn't that an oxymoron, like inviting someone to join an anarchy group? It conjures up a lot of funny images: atheists going to a church every Sunday to worship nothing, or sitting down to thank No God for their dinners, and such.
I think all this furor is silly. I agree with other posters that untested faith isn't worth much. The movie and books do have the potential to turn people away from organized religion, as do about fifty million other things, including the existence of suffering. I think basically that if you believe strongly enough, no amount of evidence can alter that. That's why they call it faith. But if there are chinks in your belief system, anything can get in there and split it wide open.
I'll watch it and I'll no doubt love it. I'm Australian and its genetically encoded in us to like every movie "Our Nicole" is in.
...except Birth. I'd rather stick my hand in a blender than watch that steaming piece of shite again.
Although Mr Shrek reckons she's got a head like a half sucked mango ( but then he's British and also eats black pudding so his taste is generally considered to be up his arse).
Dan @ 8: "Ya know, I'd like to see a study done which shows how effective Hollywood has been in changing people's spiritual beliefs (or lack thereof) over the years."
In Australia's 2001 census, more than 70,000 people declared their religion to be "Jedi".
In New Zealand's 2001 census, more than 53,000 people declared their religion to be "Jedi". That's about 1.5% of NZ's population, more than the 1.2% who replied "Buddhism" or the 1.2% who replied "Hindu".
In Canada's 2001 Census, about 20,000 people declared their religion to be "Jedi".
And quoting Wikipedia:
Impressive stats! However, to be blunt, these had a huge component of practical jokery.
Norman @ #21:
Did you never see the series 'Monkey'? Probably not if you're in the USA - Wikipedia informs me it has never been screened there 'for reasons which involve copyright'. Interesting phrasing: I wonder what else is involved?
Born in a storm on a mountain top
Funkiest monkey that ever was.
Yahoo, someone else who remembers Monkey, Pigsy et al. On Aus TV in the 80's but reruns at 3 am last year (I was up breastfeeding before you assume I'm some nerd that got up at 3 to watch Monkey). Brilliant show, shame you never got it in the US. Could have reshaped your culture as you know it.
Bugger, got the lyrics wrong. I'm stunned after singing the wrong words for 20 years. Sob.
http://www.cfhf.net/lyrics/monkey.htm
His Dark Materials gave my children strength in their Atheism much the same way Narnia gave strength to christian children 50 years ago.
But Pullman draws much from UK history that is hard to understand for Americans - I'm one. References to Milton, English Civil War, etc.
I just wish he had included the Diggers.
If it's a philosophical tract rather than an adventure story, I'm not going to enjoy it much.
I'm incapable of not enjoying any film with Nicole Kidman in it.
truth machine wrote:
Then you probably didn't see "The Stepford Wives."
Then you probably didn't see "The Stepford Wives."
"Then"? Non sequitur. If I'm incapable of not enjoying any film with Nicole Kidman in it, it can't matter what films I've seen.
But my statement isn't actually correct. If "The Hours" had been a bad film, I wouldn't have enjoyed it, despite Nicole's presence ... it's all about the nose.
I assume what he was implying was that your generalized statement might be challenged by more specific familiarity with some of the cases it could be extended to cover.
Pyre: sort of like how I still mark my race as "Half-Orc" whenever I'm given the opportunity?
You could be taking your life in your hands by defying Chuck.
Pfft. Chuck Norris just wishes he was Bruce Schneier.
Sheesh, don't they teach Latin anymore? "Cloaca maxima." How do you expect to name the new species that you discover if you can't speak the lingo?
Whoops, got the gender wrong again. At least this time I wasn't in Tijuana.
.
I read the books when I was in middle school, and at that point I didn't take them seriously at all. It was a fun story that kept me occupied and interested. At the very least, Pullman's take on religion is presented in a unique way. If you're young enough to be influenced by Hollywood, you won't understand what's going on. If you're old enough to understand the books fully, you shouldn't be so easily swayed.
Bottom line - Pullman is a gifted children's writer. That's all. Fundie Bastards.
I assume what he was implying was that your generalized statement might be challenged by more specific familiarity with some of the cases it could be extended to cover.
I know damn well what he meant to say, you humorless git.
I will probably view the movie on DVD sometime.
Are Christians too fast to get upset over a possible negative movie? Probably.
But HISTORY - of the 20th Century shows a scary phenomenon. MASS MeDIA MUTATION of the MESSAGE
Even an educated country can QUICKLY be blitzed with propaganda, lies, half truths and other mass media manipulations - and can GIVE UP civilized behavior.
Yes, it's the "N" word - Nazis. But COMMUNISTS are different only in the details...
I think it was on in the 70s in the UK. The music was quite good but the plot was rather dodgy. Hmm... the same could be said of Christianity. Perhaps it's a common theme to religions. We're not likely to be able to find out much about genuine Druidical music though. How was The Golden Compass music?
Apart from the Zoroastrians, Epicurus did. The single huge embarrassingly stupid mistake of his life.
I will probably view the movie on DVD sometime.
Are Christians too fast to get upset over a possible negative movie? Probably.
But HISTORY - of the 20th Century shows a scary phenomenon. MASS MeDIA MUTATION of the MESSAGE
Even an educated country can QUICKLY be blitzed with propaganda, lies, half truths and other mass media manipulations - and can GIVE UP civilized behavior.
Yes, it's the "N" word - Nazis. But COMMUNISTS are different only in the details...