I somewhat doubt that anyone other than me cares...

[yoshi927]

But, can you believe what they're doing to the His Dark Materials movies?

They're taking out all of the religion references, all of the theology. In other words, they're taking out everything that made it awesome, rather than just good. The Church isn't even the Church anymore. It's just the freaking "Magisterium". They might as well be taking on a communism.

Well, I'm doing a one-man boycott of this movie, hopefully others will join me, but I don't think that many people have read them. This is an example of what's wrong with Hollywood. They get one of the best books they've ever touched, and what do they do? They gut it, and turn it into a generic "fighting the system" movie.

Bah. Well, </rant>.

[Green Bean]

To be honest, it isn't exactly a surprise to me. I mean, did anyone really think that the movie would be portraying the religious bits in detail. I mean, the Church is an evil, tyrannical organization, and God is a senile old man! This is something they're trying to sell on the mass market, and making fun of a major religion (several, to be honest) is not the way anyone would do it.

[warty goblin]

Umm, in The Golden Compass isn't the church officially called the Magisterium?

[Green Bean]

Umm, in The Golden Compass isn't the church officially called the Magisterium?

Hmm. It's been a while since I've read the books.

*wiki wiki wiki*

Yep. So I guess the boycott is over, eh? :smallwink:

[averagejoe]

Huh, and I always thought it was the ginormous armored bears that made the books awsome rather than just good. (Well, the first book anyways.) That and Lee.

[Kaelaroth]

I'm going to go see it. I loved the books, and am sad that they're removing some of the more in-depth messages from the film, but tha' doesn't mean the film itself won't be good. The acting looks fantastic, as does the graphics, and the storyline's OK (even with modifications). Besides, it's part of my friend's birthday bash this year, and I don't like to pass up the chance to get free cola. :smallwink:

[CrazedGoblin]

its what happens to films unfortunatly :smallfrown:

[sun_tzu]

I dunno...I loved the books, but never actually got excited about the upcoming movie.

[Closet_Skeleton]

There have been, like, three threads on this?

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52448&highlight=golden+compass+movie

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=60112&highlight=golden+compass+movie

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=44998&highlight=golden+compass+movie

or four even

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=46896&highlight=golden+compass+movie

Not that the old threads should be revived, but it's kind of old news.

[Occasional Sage]

But, can you believe what they're doing to the His Dark Materials movies?

They're taking out all of the religion references, all of the theology. In other words, they're taking out everything that made it awesome, rather than just good. The Church isn't even the Church anymore. It's just the freaking "Magisterium". They might as well be taking on a communism.

Well, I'm doing a one-man boycott of this movie, hopefully others will join me, but I don't think that many people have read them. This is an example of what's wrong with Hollywood. They get one of the best books they've ever touched, and what do they do? They gut it, and turn it into a generic "fighting the system" movie.

Bah. Well, </rant>.

The latest issue of Atlantic (I believe) just had an article on this very topic. Was a good read, and gave me a fine appreciation for Pullman himself. He seems like the kind of guy I'd invite over for dinner.

Oh, and the books (says the article) were much bigger in the UK than in the USA. Unshockingly.

[DomaDoma]

I loathe anvilicious messages. Unless it's a dystopia or something, chances are excellent I like the book for its fantastic element, and see the author's ham-fisted ideology as a jarring intrusion. Sadly, from all I hear, the anvils are absolutely central to the plot of the third installment, and so taking them out would make the Ella Enchanted movie look faithful.

The first book, though, is low enough in anvil count that neither the purists, nor whatever censors there may be, have to worry too much.

[PlatinumJester]

Even worse they changed the name to the Golden Compass which sounds crap compared to Northern Lights :smallmad:.

[Green Bean]

Even worse they changed the name to the Golden Compass which sounds crap compared to Northern Lights :smallmad:.

Well, it is the title of the book as released in North America.

[factotum]

I don't see a problem with them changing a few aspects of the film. That always happens when turning a book into a film--you simply can't cram a typical book (which would take longer to read than the running time of any film ever) into a 2-3 hour movie without taking some shortcuts and removing stuff. So long as the final product bears some relation to what you started with then you're winning, IMHO. (For an opposite example, see the film "To the Devil a Daughter", then read the Dennis Wheatley book it's supposedly based on. Try to figure out which pages of the book, if any, that the screenwriter actually read. :smallsmile: ).

[Icewalker]

They aren't changing a few aspects from the sound of it though...they are rewriting the main villain group entirely.

In the second two books, the church (and very clearly portrayed as the Christian church) is the main villain. And shown to be evil.
then they KILL GOD.

Basically, if they want to make it so it isn't offensive to people with strong religious beliefs who are offended by this kind of thing, they either have to make an entirely different movie, or not make it altogether.

(Yes, in the Golden Compass it is referred to as the Magisterium, but it is still shown pretty clearly that it is the Christian church.)


I'm guessing it won't screw up the first movie. It isn't so much 'church is evil' as 'church hates heretical science' which isn't something particularly offensive. Also, armored bears.

[averagejoe]

I loathe anvilicious messages. Unless it's a dystopia or something, chances are excellent I like the book for its fantastic element, and see the author's ham-fisted ideology as a jarring intrusion. Sadly, from all I hear, the anvils are absolutely central to the plot of the third installment, and so taking them out would make the Ella Enchanted movie look faithful.

The first book, though, is low enough in anvil count that neither the purists, nor whatever censors there may be, have to worry too much.

Quoted for Truth, and why I didn't enjoy the third book very much. The way I see it, most writers seem to be no better philosophers than I am anyhow, so there's really no reason to read books for such things.

[JadedDM]

Yeah...had they kept all the anti-Christian stuff in the movie, then you wouldn't be the one boycotting this movie. Nearly every other American movie-goer would instead. Remember the picketing for Dogma?

This movie would never had been allowed to be made otherwise. The people would not have stood for it.

[LordVader]

Not in half because Islam and Judaism also believe in a heaven and a God much like the Christian one. So you'd have all three religions after you.:smallwink:

It would never have gotten off the ground if they left all that stuff in.

[VeisuItaTyhjyys]

Clockwork is still his best novel, but I might see this. I don't really care about the changes. Film and literature are different art forms.

[Emrylon]

The dark MAterials did really well over here in the UK I seem to remember...

[Jorkens]

Basically, if they want to make it so it isn't offensive to people with strong religious beliefs who are offended by this kind of thing, they either have to make an entirely different movie, or not make it altogether.
*grumbles about people getting offended because a work of fantasy conflicts with their world view*

[turkishproverb]

*grumbles about people getting offended because a work of fantasy conflicts with their world view*

Let us just take this time to be glad Patricia Pulling didn't accomplish more during her life.

[....]

/shrug

I didn't find the books all that great. The one awesome part was the armored bears, and they seem to be unchanged in the movie.

So I'll go and sit through the whole thing, just to watch the bears fight. After that, they can turn the subtle knife into the pinwheel of happiness for all I care.

[averagejoe]

/shrug

I didn't find the books all that great. The one awesome part was the armored bears, and they seem to be unchanged in the movie.

So I'll go and sit through the whole thing, just to watch the bears fight. After that, they can turn the subtle knife into the pinwheel of happiness for all I care.

While I don't quite agree about the other parts of the book, I will indeed be dissapointed if Iorek doesn't knock Iofur's lower jaw off and allow his tongue to loll out, as described in the book.

[Icewalker]

The Panserbjørne were indeed totally awesome. I was going to homebrew them as a race after reading the books, but never got around to it...hmmm

[Dea_al_Mon]

Heh. I didn't know that they took all the religious stuff out of the movie. hrmm. As a hardcore Christian, I can say with conviction that MOST people subscribing to my religious would be VERY offended by the movie if they left it in. That being said, I thought the books really good. Disturbing, but good. I understand how different the movie will be if they take the whole "God-in-a-bottle" thing out, and it makes me sad. Because regardless of what the message is, the storyline itself was still very interesting and enjoyable. This is essencially raping the story of anything that made it what it was. It is equivalent to taking the magic out of the Harry Potter movies to avoid insulting the extreme right-wings out there.

Unfortunately, you can't please everyone, and I know that I am a minority in my religion. That being said, I really need to dig them out again. Haven't read them in over five years. How sad is that?

GOGO fighting bears!

[Setra]

*grumbles about people getting offended because a work of fantasy conflicts with their world view*
Sure it's fantasy, but that doesn't make his views fantasy.

I could draw a picture of my clone killing my friend's brother's twin from an alternate dimension, and show it to him, then be arrested for terroristic threatening.

But it's FANTASY.

That doesn't mean I don't wanna kill his brother.

[....]

God was a wimp in those books anyway.

[The Extinguisher]

Wait, so all the good guys are people who hate the church and god, and the church itself is evil and mean and stupid. Wow. That's obviously not delibrate at all that those are the author's own views. I mean, what possible reason could he have for making a world where the heroes all agree with him and the people who don't are all villians and evil?

I find any book in which the author so overtly shoves his world views and ideas in your face as not worth it in the long run. If you make a fantasy world just so you are right and everyone else is wrong, that really says something about you.

And it's also the fact I hate the "everyone in the leading group is evil, so the heroes must destory it!" as a fantasy trope. Why couldn't the empire be the nice guys, where the rebellion are just a bunch of terroists?

[....]

Wait, so all the good guys are people who hate the church and god, and the church itself is evil and mean and stupid. Wow. That's obviously not delibrate at all that those are the author's own views. I mean, what possible reason could he have for making a world where the heroes all agree with him and the people who don't are all villians and evil?

I find any book in which the author so overtly shoves his world views and ideas in your face as not worth it in the long run. If you make a fantasy world just so you are right and everyone else is wrong, that really says something about you.

And it's also the fact I hate the "everyone in the leading group is evil, so the heroes must destory it!" as a fantasy trope. Why couldn't the empire be the nice guys, where the rebellion are just a bunch of terroists?


Thats sort of an oversimplification of it. Not everyone in the Church is an evil baby eater. I'm pretty sure a motherly character is in the church.

And the heroes are just kids, they don't know whats going on. Theres this huge war going on between the Church and a rebellion, the kids only really get involved...

Because they see what happens after you die and decide thats not a very nice thing to have happen.

And anyway, its no different than say... the Chronicals of Narnia.

PS: And Empires are ALWAYS evil, but Kingdoms are usually good. :smallsmile:

[Verruckt]

The latest issue of Atlantic (I believe) just had an article on this very topic. Was a good read, and gave me a fine appreciation for Pullman himself. He seems like the kind of guy I'd invite over for dinner.


Pray tell why? As far as I can tell these books are excellent fiction, and I love the steampunk type flavor, but the press storm sounds like the movies are going to be Narnia + Salman Rushdie's "Satanic Verses". I don't know if this should even strictly be considered children's fare. Don't get me wrong, they are a great story, but taking that at surface value is like calling FMA an anime about magic and steam tech, It is , but thats hardly the true reason for it's success. The kids who see this movie are going to enjoy the giant fighting bears and the daemons, but the whole metaphysical/religious debate is going to shoot straight over their heads.

/rant

[Setra]

To quote myself

"I wanna see Golden Compass, if for no other reason than the fighting polar bears"

Call me shallow but I knows what I like, I think I'll do my best to ignore the religious aspect, because quite frankly I don't care.

[DrunkPrivateer]

Pretty lame to take out the religious parts. Watering down art so that any original message is lost and all we have left is a new group of names to go on an "unforgettable adventure."

Also, the characters have to fight "the establishment" or whatever you want to call it. A story about how the status-quo is A-OK wouldn't really have a whole lot to say.

[Dave Rapp]

I'll probably end up seeing the movie, because, well, armored bears. But I have very low expectations for it, expectations that I usually reserve for the Harry Potter films. Which is really saying a lot, because I hate the Harry Potter films, with with a passion that burns with the fury of a thousand dying suns...

And, of course, you know the critics will love the movie. They always love the dumbest stuff.


Wait, so all the good guys are people who hate the church and god, and the church itself is evil and mean and stupid. Wow. That's obviously not delibrate at all that those are the author's own views. I mean, what possible reason could he have for making a world where the heroes all agree with him and the people who don't are all villians and evil?

I find any book in which the author so overtly shoves his world views and ideas in your face as not worth it in the long run. If you make a fantasy world just so you are right and everyone else is wrong, that really says something about you.

And it's also the fact I hate the "everyone in the leading group is evil, so the heroes must destory it!" as a fantasy trope. Why couldn't the empire be the nice guys, where the rebellion are just a bunch of terroists?

In that case, I highly reccomend Douglas Adams' work. I believe you'll find it much more wholesome. And his fans are generally pretty nice people, so when you bash his work without reading it first you won't get flamed or anything. :smallamused:

[The Extinguisher]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/facetious
And I had such high hopes :smallfrown:

Yes, I was exagerating, but it still holds true as an exageration. I've read some of the Golden Compass, but never found the time to read it all. I just find stories in which the author basically says "I am right and you are wrong" to be boring and annoying. Fundementalism of a believe irritates me to know end. I try to keep my personal belief system out of my fiction.

That being said, the movie looks good. But that could be because I don't subscribe to the theory that all movies based on books suck like a bucket of ticks. I'm just full of unpopular opinions :smallamused:

[warty goblin]

I'll see it- it comes out on the last day of classes after all, and nothing says "decompression" like armored bears beating the stuffing out of each other. Also, I'm curious to see how much they do tone down the anti-church sentiments.

[Dave Rapp]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/facetious
And I had such high hopes :smallfrown:

Yes, I was exagerating, but it still holds true as an exageration. I've read some of the Golden Compass, but never found the time to read it all. I just find stories in which the author basically says "I am right and you are wrong" to be boring and annoying. Fundementalism of a believe irritates me to know end. I try to keep my personal belief system out of my fiction.

That being said, the movie looks good. But that could be because I don't subscribe to the theory that all movies based on books suck like a bucket of ticks. I'm just full of unpopular opinions :smallamused:

If you've read some of the golden compass, then you've read some of a third of a whole story. And that's not even the third where the real story emerges. I'm sorry, but I can't see how anybody can make any kind of judgement on a story from just reading that much. Phillip Pullman is stuffing his beliefs down our throats about as much as JK Rowling is teaching witchcraft. That is to say, very very little. And if you admit that "hey, it's fiction, I don't really care what his crazy universe is like" then there's no throat-stuffing whatsoever.

Don't believe me? As the story unfolds (mostly in the second and third books) we see all kinds of utterly-fantastical things, like mind-sucking spirit dealies, witches, realiy-bending tools, and about a half dozen different worlds. No sane person actually believes in that kind of thing. The story's ultimately got nothing to do with his personal beliefs, unless the Author's some kind of crazy person.

But, hey, don't read it if you don't want to. Not like we can force you. :smallbiggrin:

[Jorkens]

If you've read some of the golden compass, then you've read some of a third of a whole story. And that's not even the third where the real story emerges. I'm sorry, but I can't see how anybody can make any kind of judgement on a story from just reading that much. Phillip Pullman is stuffing his beliefs down our throats about as much as JK Rowling is teaching witchcraft. That is to say, very very little. And if you admit that "hey, it's fiction, I don't really care what his crazy universe is like" then there's no throat-stuffing whatsoever.
Yes, I don't see why people should have a problem with the form of the story if I don't have a problem reading things like Paradise Lost or listening to Bach's Passions.

Pullman's personal views do come across, but in a rather more subtle way than just all the stuff about God in the third book - he's down on religious fundamentalism and religious anti-humanism much more than religion itself - I think you could happily read the books from a religious-humanist or a religious-secularist perspective and view all the God stuff as fantasy. You could even just say 'yes but that isn't the church I recognize' and read the whole thing as a pure fantasy story.

edit: I've tried to keep this as a post discussing how a book deals with religion and how people deal with books dealing with religion rather than actually discussing religion. It's quite an interesting topic imo so it'd probably be good to a) keep tiptoeing around the subject and b) be scrupulously polite to minimize the chance of the whole thing getting nuked...

[averagejoe]

Yes, I was exagerating, but it still holds true as an exageration. I've read some of the Golden Compass, but never found the time to read it all. I just find stories in which the author basically says "I am right and you are wrong" to be boring and annoying. Fundementalism of a believe irritates me to know end. I try to keep my personal belief system out of my fiction.

How do you even get that from The Golden Compass? :smallconfused: Starting with the end of the second book the religious ideas really get shoved down your throat, but I'd very much like to know exactly what in The Golden Compass led you to believe it was that kind of story.

I saw a prieview for a movie and, to me, it seems, if anything, more anvilicious than the book in reguards to the religion stuff. Maybe it's just me, but the movie doesn't seem to be against a generic "the establishment" at all. What I saw seemed to be directly attacking religion.

[....]

So right now we have at least three people who want to see this movie for no other reason than to watch two giant talking polar bears in platemail fight each other.

Anymore? Should we make a fan-club? Maybe get a few shirts that say, "Armored Bearz 4 Life"?

[Jack Squat]

make that four, now all they need to do is throw a bottle of Coke somewhere in there, and I'll be satisfied :smalltongue:

[urkthegurk]

I hope it smashes religion, just because of the uproar it would cause.:smallbiggrin: I think that if they can make it intelligent and entertaining at the same time as making everyone go nuts, then they've done their job.
Yeah, right. But at least there'll be polar bears.

[Closet_Skeleton]

Armoured Polar Bears for the victory.

[Setra]

So right now we have at least three people who want to see this movie for no other reason than to watch two giant talking polar bears in platemail fight each other.

Anymore? Should we make a fan-club? Maybe get a few shirts that say, "Armored Bearz 4 Life"?
I'd buy one :smallbiggrin:

[horseboy]

I think you guys are missing a little something here. None of the local theaters played Blood and Chocolate when it was out. A movie based on a series of books that attacks organized religion will not be screened within at LEAST 300 miles of here. Given that this isn't the only place that this movie won't appear, that's a LOT of missed ticket sales.

This is probably going to be one of those movies that it will do much better on video.

[Hell Puppi]

I can understand that they are appealing to a mass market with the movie, but I am very uncertain of how their going to deal with the rest of the series.

Besides, isn't some kid going to read the books after seeing the movie and the parent going to get pissed about eh religious viewpoint anyway? I mean yeah the impact is going to be less than what would have happened had they left the religious themes in the movies, but still. Why ruin a good story when somone's bound to get angry anyway?


Note: That was also how I ployed many other people into reading the books- ....armored...polar bears...
that's really all you need to sell most people:smallbiggrin:

[JadedDM]

We had a sneak preview last night at the theater I work at. It almost sold out, even though that particular auditorium held over 430 people. :smalleek:

[Dea_al_Mon]

I do intend to go see the movie. Probably not right after it comes out, but...I mean...how do you skip something like that? Armoured...bears...fighting a deathmatch... It just blows my mind. Hell, if the bear scene is good, I'll probably buy the movie just so I can watch it and rewind and watch it again.

So, I assume it's 6-8 weeks for the shipping of my "Armoured Bearz 4 Life" shirt?

[Arameus]

To be very frank, the puddle-shallow cheap shots at religion were the worst aspects of the 'verse, which is pretty sad when you take into account how shallow the rest of it is.

Truthfully, why do so many fantasy authors think that having their main character kick God in the balls while being chased by the Pope wearing a Klan robe count as deep religious commentary? Get over it!