Northern Lights/The Golden Compass pre-talkback thread

[Hanshotfirst113]

New Line's big holiday gamble in the hands of...Chris Weitz? What the hell? Looks like they're aiming to complete with their own LOTR (And, God willing, the Peter-Jackson-Will-Be-Returning-To-Direct-It-Please-God-Please-God-Please-God-Please The Hobbit), WB's Harry Potter, and Disney's Narnia.

Final trailer: http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/thegoldencompass.html?showVideo=1.

Sir Ian McKellan. As an armoured Polar Bear. That kicks so much ass. But on the whole, the trailer reminds me quite a bit of Narnia. Then again, I was duly impressed with Narnia when I expected it to be nothing special, so maybe I can be surprised again. Thoughts?

[HG Revolution]

Sir Ian McKellan. As an armoured Polar Bear. That kicks so much ass. But on the whole, the trailer reminds me quite a bit of Narnia. Then again, I was duly impressed with Narnia when I expected it to be nothing special, so maybe I can be surprised again. Thoughts?

The books are essentially the anti-Narnia. Or perhaps Narnia for athiests.

I can't wait to see how Anne Coulter reacts to a villain named after her.

NEWS: The last 3 chapters have been taken out of this movie and supposedly moved to the second: http://www.bridgetothestars.net/news/the-golden-compass-ending-altered

Given how New Line keeps on whining about financial troubles and making odd decisions because of it, along with their failure to make any Lemony Snicket sequels (though that might be more because of Jim Carrey not doing sequels than anything else) and the line "I believe you will find The Golden Compass a fit tribute to His Dark Materials" (perhaps implying this one movie is a tribute to the whole series of books), it makes me scared that instead of actually moving the ending to the start of the next film (which will disrupt the flow of both movies as far as I'm concerned unless they've made so major changes to the workings of the scene), they might be doing this as an excuse to not end the movie on the cliffhanger the book ends on and thus not feel obligated to actually produce any sequels.

[Prdgn]

Is that "The Stranger?"

Awesome.

[Kuroba]

I'm very excited for the Golden Compass movie. His Dark Materials is such a suberb trilogy of books, I'm hoping the movie will do well. I have to say though, I always imagined Mrs. Coulter with brunette-ish hair...but I think Nicole Kidman will do a good job as her.

[Hanshotfirst113]

I can't wait to see how Anne Coulter reacts to a villain named after her.

Well, I think that that gives one a good idea of where Pullman stands on a number of issues :p.

[Lord Dalek]

along with their failure to make any Lemony Snicket sequels (though that might be more because of Jim Carrey not doing sequels than anything else)
I don't see how they could considering they don't own the rights to that franchise.

[HG Revolution]

I don't see how they could considering they don't own the rights to that franchise.

Oops, I thought they made those movies. Guess I got things confused.

[purplehairedwonder]

That trailer for The Golden Compass looks so much better than the book so I may check it out despite not liking the source material. When I first heard saw the trailer for the movie I was interested and had heard good things about the books. The atheistic viewpoint is right up my alley, so I read it over the summer but really couldn't get into it. Hopefully the movie exceeds my expectations and gets me interested in finishing the trilogy.

[HG Revolution]

The controversy has begun:

http://www.catholicleague.org/catalyst.php?year=2007&month=October&read=2306

[Wounded_Dragon]

You know, there's a joke about Catholics not liking anything fun begging to be used here.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Luis Bunuel is smiling very happily in his grave.

[RedKnight]

I will probably give the movie a chance, even though the distinct Anti-Christian slant has turned me off the books. AFAIK, this aspect will be toned down a lot on screen, so it be enjoyable. I wouldn't let my kids watch it if I had any, though. Neither would I recommand it to any parents at church.

Now, don't get me wrong. Although I am Christian, I have no problem -- and I mean, none -- with books that promote an atheist/agnostic/whatever worldview. While I may (quietly) disagree, I do believe that every artist must express what he conceives to be true. Still, I think Pullmann went a bit overboard. Every single Christian in His Dark Materials is cold, evil and fanatic, and the story halts more than once to emphasize this, using words that seem like they come straight from the author's mouth. That I disliked very much.

Even if he Mr. Pullman feels that strongly, I think he should have been a shade more subtle or choosen a setting other than fantasy to air his grievance. To his credit, he admitted as much in recent interviews.

[HG Revolution]

NO! THEY KILLED IT!

http://www.bridgetothestars.net/news/how-hollywood-saved-god

Without Dust and sin and the whole explanation for the story, how can this movie possibly be good?

[Wounded_Dragon]

A few more changes like this and it'll rival Seeker: The Dark is Rising...

[Hanshotfirst113]

This...is interesting. I'm not surprised that a studio would change the elements at all, but Pullman's opinion on the issue is intriguing.

[RedKnight]

Wow... I didn't expect them to go quite that far in toning down the religious criticism. I mean, as much as dislike many of these elements, there's really no drive behind the story without them. Huh...

I don't know what to make of Mr. Pullman's opinion, though...

[Lord Dalek]

Well that's... disappointing.

[Peter Paltridge]

Well that's... disappointing.
No it ain't, we don't need more hateful propaganda designed to make people afraid of the religious.

[HG Revolution]

No it ain't, we don't need more hateful propaganda designed to make people afraid of the religious.

Have you even read the books? They're not against the values religion preaches at all. They're against the terrible things people have done in the name of religion. They're not hateful; they're about love and living life to its fullest, actually.

Changing the villains from the Church to a fantasy entity I have no problem with. It makes things more subtle and actually better while still keeping the message. What annoys me is the fact they're cutting out the explanation for Dust and the whole Garden of Eden parallel. Without those, how will the plot make any sense?

Besides, if you're so against the books, wouldn't you rather they not make a movie at all? No matter how different it is from the books, it'll still promote the books to some extent. At least with a faithful adaptation some people who like the books can be happy. Making a butchered movie both offends the people who hate the books and the people who like them.

[Harlan_Phoenix]

No it ain't, we don't need more hateful propaganda designed to make people afraid of the religious.

Like HG pointed out, it was more about establishment than religion. Sure, Pullman was pretty clear in making His Dark Materials the anti-Narnia, but most of its criticisms were about the Church and corruption, not quite belief itself.

And, regardless of subject matter, I'm always saddened when an adaptation has to be toned down from the source material just to make it seem like an easier sell.

[Rasputin]

I do appreciate how pragmatic Pullman is being over the film adaptation (which is looking incredibly gorgeous, I must say) but I wish he put his foot down a bit. Maybe make a few compromises here and there, keeping the mention of Dust and original sin while toning down the Magisterium? If they keep these elements out now, I'm not sure how they're supposed to be introduced later, since the series' atheist philosophy becomes much more overt in later instalments.

Let's face it, everyone knows that this is the anti-Narnia. There's no use pretending otherwise, if the Catholic League is calling for a boycott no matter what concessions Hollywood makes. If this is going to continue on into The Subtle Knife and The Amber Spyglass, and all parties are thoroughly aware that any attempt to cover up the series' atheism will be rendered moot in very short order, then I think it would be better to draw the punters in gradually with little hints as to the series' intentions, rather than cover them up for the first film only to dump them on the audience with an almighty crunch in the second.

It's only good business sense, really.

[Hanshotfirst113]

I do appreciate how pragmatic Pullman is being over the film adaptation (which is looking incredibly gorgeous, I must say) but I wish he put his foot down a bit. Maybe make a few compromises here and there, keeping the mention of Dust and original sin while toning down the Magisterium? If they keep these elements out now, I'm not sure how they're supposed to be introduced later, since the series' atheist philosophy becomes much more overt in later instalments.

Let's face it, everyone knows that this is the anti-Narnia. There's no use pretending otherwise, if the Catholic League is calling for a boycott no matter what concessions Hollywood makes. If this is going to continue on into The Subtle Knife and The Amber Spyglass, and all parties are thoroughly aware that any attempt to cover up the series' atheism will be rendered moot in very short order, then I think it would be better to draw the punters in gradually with little hints as to the series' intentions, rather than cover them up for the first film only to dump them on the audience with an almighty crunch in the second.

It's only good business sense, really.

I agree; the controversy will probably get more people seeing the film, rather than less. You'd think that Pullman would be a lot more adamant; I'm rather surprised that he's being as lenient as he is about. Of course, since they're not making any alterations to the book itself, perhaps he's simply willing to let things be as long as he gets his cut of the profits. It's not like someone's is changing the text of his novels or something. My local library is putting the audiobook on hold for me, so if it ever comes in, I'll have a chance to read it and its sequels, so my basis for opinion will be better then. But at this juncture, I think that toning down controversial elements of stories may lead to watering down of their meanings, and moreover, as you said, may foul up the sequels.

[The Landstander]

Luis Bunuel is smiling very happily in his grave.I swear, if William Donahue had to watch "Viridiana" his head would explode.

[RedKnight]

Have you even read the books? They're not against the values religion preaches at all. They're against the terrible things people have done in the name of religion.

To quote from the books: "Christianity is nothing but a very big, very convincing mistake."

I'm not looking to spark a huge debate here, but that isn't criticism of the establishment. That's criticism of the religion. And there's more where that comes from.

[HG Revolution]

To quote from the books: "Christianity is nothing but a very big, very convincing mistake."

I'm not looking to spark a huge debate here, but that isn't criticism of the establishment. That's criticism of the religion. And there's more where that comes from.

Pullman himself says he has no issue with the Bible, just with a lot of the actions of religious leaders. Remember, people, this book is an allegory/fantasy. The so-called "Christianity" in these books is a messed-up version from a parallel universe. Ignoring it's issues with establishment, look at the actual moral content of the books. They're about love and sacrifice and repairing the world. There is a positive Godlike force throughout the books. I don't see what's wrong with that.

[RedKnight]

Pullman himself says he has no issue with the Bible, just with a lot of the actions of religious leaders.

I know these interviews, and I'm aware that he regrets painting every Christian in the books as a villain. Nonetheless, that's the way it turned out. Likewise, statements like the one quoted clearly aren't directed at persons or establishments; -- they are attacks on the faith itself. I mean, it's blatant. I don't see any room for interpretation there.


Remember, people, this book is an allegory/fantasy. The so-called "Christianity" in these books is a messed-up version from a parallel universe.

True. In fact, this is one of the points that irked me most, and still does. Mr. Pullman is writing a fantastical story set in a parallel world. So, basically, he got to make up the rules, leaving him with infinite possibilities to get his religious criticism across. He could have come up with a completely new religion, yet he consciously chose to go with Christianity. I consider that a real low blow. I mean, we're still talking about a story aimed at kids. You can't expect them to pick up on the finer points of this "interpretation" of Christianity, -- not when so much has remained unchanged. Most kids will come away with the notion of Christianity being false, oppressive and evil. You'll understand that I don't particularly appreciate that idea.


Ignoring it's issues with establishment, look at the actual moral content of the books. They're about love and sacrifice and repairing the world.

Yes, -- the problem I have is that the books are about repairing the world by removing God and religion.


There is a positive Godlike force throughout the books. I don't see what's wrong with that.

That's the point; -- I'm not sure we know yet that this is true. Maybe once the Book Of Dust is released and we find out just how Mr. Pullman envisions the inner workings of his universe, I'll change my mind. Given his personal convictions, I doubt it, though. What Mr. Pullman has said/revealed about his universe so far is that the being worshipped as God is actually a lying, malevolent force and that the Bible, as a result, is fundamentally wrong. I don't see how he could fix that, nor do I believe he'd want to.

[HG Revolution]

I know these interviews, and I'm aware that he regrets painting every Christian in the books as a villain. Nonetheless, that's the way it turned out. Likewise, statements like the one quoted clearly aren't directed at persons or establishments; -- they are attacks on the faith itself. I mean, it's blatant. I don't see any room for interpretation there.

A fair criticism. Can't argue with this.


True. In fact, this is one of the points that irked me most, and still does. Mr. Pullman is writing a fantastical story set in a parallel world. So, basically, he got to make up the rules, leaving him with infinite possibilities to get his religious criticism across. He could have come up with a completely new religion, yet he consciously chose to go with Christianity. I consider that a real low blow. I mean, we're still talking about a story aimed at kids. You can't expect them to pick up on the finer points of this "interpretation" of Christianity, -- not when so much has remained unchanged. Most kids will come away with the notion of Christianity being false, oppressive and evil. You'll understand that I don't particularly appreciate that idea.

I think the His Dark Materials books, if read by kids at all, should absolutely be read by the whole family, or at least in a school setting. I know some clergy recommend them as a stepping stone for adults to discuss their own faith with children and start debate and serious thought.


Yes, -- the problem I have is that the books are about repairing the world by removing God and religion.

Organized religion? Yes. God? No. The books constantly claim that The Authority isn't God and rather an angel pretending to be God. They never claim there is or isn't a real God. From the way I read it, anyway, Dust is like the true force of God.


That's the point; -- I'm not sure we know yet that this is true. Maybe once the Book Of Dust is released and we find out just how Mr. Pullman envisions the inner workings of his universe, I'll change my mind. Given his personal convictions, I doubt it, though. What Mr. Pullman has said/revealed about his universe so far is that the being worshipped as God is actually a lying, malevolent force and that the Bible, as a result, is fundamentally wrong. I don't see how he could fix that, nor do I believe he'd want to.

Again, the being worshiped as God isn't God. Dust is more like God.

[HG Revolution]

http://www.bridgetothestars.net/news/a-response-from-chris-weitz-to-atlantic-monthly

Thank God! (yes, I see the irony in saying that here, but I'm really happy this movie has not been completely censored as that old article stated)

[HG Revolution]

First review: http://www.bridgetothestars.net/index.php?d=movie&p=tgcreview

So essentially it's a good movie with bad pacing? Sounds like the directors cut of this will be amazing. I got free tickets for an advanced screening of the regular theatrical cut, so I'll give my own opinions on December 3rd.