The Golden Compass - Spoilers

[NeuroTypical]

Beware - there be spoilers here!

I just saw the Golden Compass. I haven't read any of the books, but from where I'm standing, the "protect your poor innocent children from this evil movie" hype over the movie is sorely misguided and unnecessary.

Random thoughts:

* This is a good vs. evil movie, just like any other good vs. evil movie. And the evil people are not Catholic in this movie. Maybe they severely watered down the book, but there is no anti-religious message I could detect.

* The Magesterium bad guys seem a bit one dimensional to me. They're bad because they want to control everyone and have all the power, and that's pretty much it. They try to keep aspects of reality quiet, because it would spread dissent, and people would be harder to control, and they dress up their efforts as attempts to help people be happy. The evil chick that beats up her own daemon, cuz when you're evil, you got issues, and that's about as deep as it goes. Maybe I missed something, but I didn't figure out why they were performing the Nazi-like experiments of cutting children away from their daemons.

* When a person is killed, their daemon dissapears in a gentile shower of sparks. But if this is athiest propaganda, they need to get themselves a better PR person, because there isn't any accompanying message about a lack of an afterlife. The movie allows a rational conclusion to be drawn that souls move on, just like we religious folk believe they do here. Just like Harry Potter, there just isn't much spirituality or anti-spirituality to be found. The closest thing we seem to have to a genuine faith belongs to the witches - and the only thing we really know about their faith, is that their prophecy about the little girl seems to be coming true.

* There is pretty clear message on the topic of out of wedlock births. Any resultant pain or discomfort in the parent's or children's lives as a result of not having married parents, is the fault of the culture that frowns on such an arrangement.

* The movie definitely considers itself the first installment. The cool battle at the end is a clear portent for bigger things to come.

I wont' be taking my 6 yr old to see this movie, for the same reason I won't take her to see Harry Potter or LOTR. A bit too violent, with confusing plot twists that would go over her head.

LM

[MorningStar]

Thanks for the review! It looks like a well done movie. :)

[drjme]

If you haven't read about the controversy, here it is:

The Golden Compass

Claim: The 2007 film The Golden Compass is based on a series of books with anti-religious themes.

Status: True.

Examples:

[Collected via e-mail, October 2007]

There will be a new Children's movie out in December called THE GOLDEN COMPASS. It is written by Phillip Pullman, a proud athiest who belongs to secular humanist societies. He hates C. S. Lewis's Chronical's of Narnia and has written a trilogy to show the other side. The movie has been dumbed down to fool kids and their parents in the hope that they will buy his trilogy where in the end the children kill God and everyone can do as they please. Nicole Kidman stars in the movie so it will probably be advertised a lot. This is just a friendly warning that you sure won't hear on the regular TV.

[Collected via e-mail, October 2007]

I don't just generally dismiss a movie or book just because someone 'says' it's meant to be something else...but this is worth knowing if you plan to see it (or plan to take your kids).

"Hi! I just wanted to inform you what I just learned about a movie that is coming out December 7, during the Christmas season, which is entitled THE GOLDEN COMPASS. It stars Nicole Kidman and it is directed toward children. What is disturbing to me is that this movie is based on the first of a trilogy of books for children called HIS DARK MATERIALS written by Philip Pullman of England.

He's an atheist and his objective is to bash Christianity and promote atheism. I heard that he has made remarks that he wants to kill God in the minds of children, and that's what his books are all about. He despises C.S. Lewis and Narnia, etc. An article written about him said "this is the most dangerous author in Britain" and that Pullman would be the writer "the atheists would be praying for, if atheists prayed." Pullman said he doesn't think it is possible that there is a God and he has great difficulty understanding the words "spiritual" and "spirituality." What I thought was important to communicate is what part of the agenda is for making this picture. This movie is a watered down version of the first book, which is the least offensive of the three books. The second book of the trilogy is THE SUBTLE KNIFE and the third book is THE AMBER SPYGLASS. Each book gets worse and worse regarding Pullman's hatred of God. In the trilogy, a young girl becomes enmeshed in an epic struggle against a nefarious Church known as the Magisterium. Another character, an ex-nun, describes Christianity as "a very powerful and convincing mistake." As I understand it, in the last book, a boy and girl are depicted representing Adam and Eve and they kill God, who at times is called YAHWEH (which is definitely not Allah). Since the movie would seem mild if you viewed it, that's been done on purpose.

They are hoping that unsuspecting parents will take their children to See the movie, that they will enjoy the movie and then the children will want the books for Christmas. That's the hook. Pullman says he wants the children to read the books and decide against God and the kingdom of heaven.

If you decide that you do not want to support something like this, I suggest that you boycott the movie and the books. I googled a synopsis of THE GOLDEN COMPASS. As I skimmed it, I couldn't believe that in a children's book part of the story is about castration and female circumcision.

Origins: The Golden Compass, a fantasy film starring Nicole Kidman that is scheduled to be released into theaters on 7 December 2007, has been drawing fire from concerned Christians. The film is based on Northern Lights (released in the U.S. as The Golden Compass), the first offering in Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials trilogy of children's books, a series that follows the adventures of a streetwise girl who travels

through multiple worlds populated by witches, armor-plated bears, and sinister ecclesiastical assassins to defeat the oppressive forces of a senile God.

Books of the trilogy have sold more than 15 million copies around the world, with Northern Lights winning the Carnegie Medal for Children's Literature in 1995 and in 2007 being awarded the 'Carnegie of Carnegies' for the best children's book of the past 70 years. The Amber Spyglass, the final book of the series, won The Whitbread Prize in 2001, making it the first children's book to do so.

The series' author, Philip Pullman (who has described himself as both an agnostic and an atheist), has averred that "I don't profess any religion; I don't think it's possible that there is a God; I have the greatest difficulty in understanding what is meant by the words 'spiritual' or 'spirituality.'" Critics of Pullman's books (conservative British columnist Peter Hitchens in 2002 labeled Pullman "The Most Dangerous Author in Britain" and described him as the writer "the atheists would have been praying for, if atheists prayed") point to the strong anti-religion and anti-God themes they incorporate, and although literary works are subject to a variety of interpretations, Pullman has left little doubt about his books' intended thrust in discussions of his works, such as noting in a 2003 interview that "My books are about killing God" and in a 2001 interview that he was "trying to undermine the basis of Christian belief."

A Los Angeles Times article on the Golden Compass controversy noted that:

[Pullman]'s never hidden his skepticism about God or his rejection of organized religion. A quick Internet search turns up a 2004 essay he wrote deploring "theocracies" for a newspaper in his native Britain, and his own Web site states that he thinks it "perfectly possible to explain how the universe came about without bringing God into it." "His Dark Materials" features a sympathetic character, an ex-nun, who describes Christianity as "a very powerful and convincing mistake," while "The Amber Spyglass" concludes with the two child heroes participating in the dissolution of "the Authority," a senile, pretender God who has falsely passed himself off as the creator of the universe.

Bill Donohue, president of The Catholic League, has condemned The Golden Compass as a "pernicious" effort to indoctrinate children into anti-Christian beliefs and has produced a 23-page pamphlet titled The Golden Compass: Unmasked in which he maintains that Pullman "sells atheism for kids." Donohoe told interviewer John Gibson on 9 October 2007 why he believes Christians should stay away from the film:

Look, the movie is based on the least offensive of the three books. And they have dumbed down the worst elements in the movie because they don't want to make Christians angry and they want to make money. Our concern is this, unsuspecting Christian parents may want to take their kid to the movie, it opens up December 7th and say, this wasn't troubling, then we'll buy the books. So the movie is the bait for the books which are profoundly anti-Catholic and at the same time selling atheism.

Other reviewers, however, have described Pullman's works as being more generally anti-religion rather than specifically anti-Christian or anti-Catholic:

In "His Dark Materials," Pullman's criticisms of organized religion come across as anti-authoritarian and anti-ascetic rather than anti-doctrinal. (Jesus isn't mentioned in any of the books, although Pullman has hinted that He might figure in a forthcoming sequel, "The Book of Dust.") His fundamental objection is to ideological tyranny and the rejection of this world in favor of an idealized afterlife, regardless of creed. As one of the novel's pagan characters puts it, "Every church is the same: control, destroy, obliterate every good feeling."

[HiJolly]

In "His Dark Materials," Pullman's criticisms of organized religion come across as anti-authoritarian and anti-ascetic rather than anti-doctrinal. (Jesus isn't mentioned in any of the books, although Pullman has hinted that He might figure in a forthcoming sequel, "The Book of Dust.") His fundamental objection is to ideological tyranny and the rejection of this world in favor of an idealized afterlife, regardless of creed. As one of the novel's pagan characters puts it, "Every church is the same: control, destroy, obliterate every good feeling."

I can relate to that, in regard to "organized religion". A lot of non-denominational Christian churches vilify 'religion' and say that they are a part of the body of Christ, sans an organized 'church'. And there's no doubt at all in my mind that the power that comes to people in the heirarchy of 'religion' is a corrupting influence, even in our own beloved Church. It's not common, mind you, but it does happen. And when it does, it damages faith and causes pain in individual lives, many who were there in the first place in order to relieve pain.

So I totally sympathize with the 'anti-controlling, anti-hypocritical, anti-anti-good' views that surface when one is caught in a situation where those in whom we have placed our trust, violate that trust. But I know that eliminating 'religion', or the Church, is not the answer. Rather, the answer is to *know* God lives, and that He would have us associate in the Church, supporting and sustaining its leaders, and its purposes. Faith is, as always, THE key.

Note how faith can follow knowledge.

HiJolly

[CourtneyP]

From what I have seen, this looks like it would be an interesting movie to watch. I plan to see it one of these days.

[josafisch]

I won't... I feel if you support the movie then you're supporting that idiot author. Maybe they watered down this movie but if tons of people see it and like it then they'll make the next 2 and they might not water those down.

I suggest you read this as well; she makes some good points and she has read the book...Golden Compass

[Lolgirl]

I have never had a greater urge to write a full book than now.Just for a slap in the face.

I will never go watch the movie no matter how watered down or interestingly plotted it is.I feel the authour is a total inbicile and is quite senile himself!

[NeuroTypical]

Interesting responses - thanks!

Maybe they watered down this movie but if tons of people see it and like it then they'll make the next 2 and they might not water those down.

Just out of curiosity, what's wrong with that? The author is certainly a dyed-in-the-wool athiest, and his books are pushing his beliefs. So? I'm sure we all want to raise righteous, well-rounded children. It seems they're well-served when we expose them to the alternate beliefs of the world (assuming they're mature enough to grasp the concepts). Do our children not have the light of Christ? Are we not commanded to be "wise as serpents, and harmless as doves"?

Also, why are you folks assigning labels of idiot, imbecile, and senile to this author? From reading his interviews and whatnot, it is overpoweringly obvious that he is none of these things.

May I suggest you take a step back, and read 1 Corinthians 13 before insulting people.

LM

[ztodd]

Good point loudmouth. It's not inherently wrong for people to make books and movies to promote their beliefs, as long as the book or movie doesn't promote, glorify or contain too much immorality, violence, etc., or attack other beliefs. We can choose not to read or watch, and give our reasons for it, but we don't need to start name-calling, or else we're no better than anti-mormons and anti-christians who attack us. I haven't read the book or seen the movie, but so far I haven't seen any evidence that the author was purposely attacking Christianity or belief in God.

[SMG]

I saw the movie last night. First off, I would not let any children under 13 or so watch it. So, I think it's not really a "children's" movie. The only thing that really bothered me is how it ended. Can we say "cliff hanger?" Good, I knew you could!

It did not strike me as anti anything, so far. Just your basic lone good guy who picks up allies along the way against your typical "we want the rule the entire world and / or the universe" bad guy organization.

[ztodd]

After reading what drjme posted, if all that is true, then I can see how we need to be careful about children watching the movies or reading the books. Perhaps Pullman really is out to destroy belief in God. At least snopes.com says he is.

[AmyL]

I have not personally read the books, but I have heard that they removed alot of the Anti-religon topics from the books.

[fish4kitty]

I plan to see the movie alone first to check it out before I'd let my teen kids watch it.

[drjme]

Good point loudmouth. It's not inherently wrong for people to make books and movies to promote their beliefs, as long as the book or movie doesn't promote, glorify or contain too much immorality, violence, etc., or attack other beliefs. We can choose not to read or watch, and give our reasons for it, but we don't need to start name-calling, or else we're no better than anti-mormons and anti-christians who attack us. I haven't read the book or seen the movie, but so far I haven't seen any evidence that the author was purposely attacking Christianity or belief in God.

I suppose the difference is in what way is he trying to promote his beliefs. whether openly or through deceit.

The devil leads subtly and carefully down to hell. personally I won't see the movie. I don't support atheists in their endeavour s the same way I wouldn't go out and buy a anti mormon propaganda movie full of lies that is purposefully misleading. the fact that the author has openly admitted his intent in interviews, and his purposeful targeting of children, for me personally makes it a no go whether it has been watered down or not.

[josafisch]

Edit: After reading through the board again and calming down a bit I didn't feel that this post was needed...

Sorry all!

[HiJolly]

HELLO!! ARE YOU AWAKE?!?

ztodd i suggest you do some research before you say something that might make you look foolish.

Easy, Frater. This is a board for congenial conversation.

HiJolly

[NeuroTypical]

ztodd i suggest you do some research before you say something that might make you look foolish.

This was a bit unwarranted, IMO. 4 hours after ztodd made his post, he posted again:

After reading what drjme posted, if all that is true, then I can see how we need to be careful about children watching the movies or reading the books. Perhaps Pullman really is out to destroy belief in God. At least snopes.com says he is.

That's the problem with admonishing people to be more thorough in their research - it's way too easy for you to make the same mistake.

Anyway, emotions tend to run a bit high when dealing with such diametrically opposed viewpoints on such a crucial topic as the very existence of God. I suggest again, we try to check these emotions at the door, and try to take a rational look at things.

I asked a few questions that nobody has tried to answer yet. I'd love to hear what you folks think.

The author is certainly a dyed-in-the-wool athiest, and his books are pushing his beliefs. So? I'm sure we all want to raise righteous, well-rounded children. It seems they're well-served when we expose them to the alternate beliefs of the world (assuming they're mature enough to grasp the concepts). Do our children not have the light of Christ? Are we not commanded to be "wise as serpents, and harmless as doves"?

LM

[josafisch]

Perhaps I did act in haste and I'm sorry...

I agree with you Loudmouth it was unwarrented...

There's nothing wrong with the author pushing his beliefs but he's not pushing them on adults... he's trying to push them onto kids. I think that's what offends me the most... If the books were geared toward a more mature reader then I wouldn't have any issues.

As far as exposing our children to "alternate beliefs" I'm not so sure this is the right way. I'm glad our children have the light of Christ but maybe staying away from such books and movies is what will make us "wise as serpents" and I surely need to learn to hold my tonge and pratice the "harmless as doves" thing.

[drjme]

This was a bit unwarranted, IMO. 4 hours after ztodd made his post, he posted again:

That's the problem with admonishing people to be more thorough in their research - it's way too easy for you to make the same mistake.

Anyway, emotions tend to run a bit high when dealing with such diametrically opposed viewpoints on such a crucial topic as the very existence of God. I suggest again, we try to check these emotions at the door, and try to take a rational look at things.

I asked a few questions that nobody has tried to answer yet. I'd love to hear what you folks think.

LM

I don't think it is necessarily well served to expose our children to alternate beliefs of the world. especially if they are false. and even more so If they are children or even teenagers, when they are generally in the formulation stage of beliefs that they carry with them for quite a few years and so very vulnerable.

As LMM said we all want to raise strong righteous children, but nonetheless would you willingly expose your children to drunkenness or pornography to let them decide if it is right or wrong? (an exaggeration -yes- but both are a part of 'the religion of satan'? a belief system that is not truth- ie atheism- is also part of that 'religion'.)

I don't want to come across as being judgmental,but sure the movie as those of you who have seen it have said it doesn't appear offensive, but will you now go and buy the series of books and read them? how about buying them for your kids? As christians who have read them clearly state the intent of the author that he himself even clarifies.

He had written fairy tales, detective stories, melodramas, thrillers and fantasies. But when Philip Pullman embarked on his trilogy, "His Dark Materials", he went back to the most fundamental story of all: the one with the snake, the apple and the fig leaf. He recast Adam and Eve as a 12-year-old girl and boy living in parallel universes, who meet, fall in love and spend the night together. This time God, known as the Authority, fades away and dies. "I thought there would be a small audience," Pullman says, "a few clever kids somewhere and a few intelligent adults who thought, ‘That's all right, quite enjoyed it.'" Well, he got that wrong.

Sydney morning herald interview 2003 with pullman:

In Pullman's trilogy, Lyra is the new-age Eve, and Will is the modern-day Adam. God is a wizened spent force of an "Authority". And "The Fall" is to be celebrated as the defining moment of mankind, rather than the source of all worldly evil. Little wonder that His Dark Materials has been denounced by some religious zealots.

Pullman, though, expected more. "I've been surprised by how little criticism I've got. Harry Potter's been taking all the flak. I'm a great fan of J.K. Rowling, but the people - mainly from America's Bible Belt - who complain that Harry Potter promotes Satanism or witchcraft obviously haven't got enough in their lives. Meanwhile, I've been flying under the radar, saying things that are far more subversive than anything poor old Harry has said. My books are about killing God."

I suppose my view is I would not expose my (young) children to things of questionable content until they are able to discern what they are seeing

and are consciously making the decision to find meaning and truth (i'm not talking about this movie in particular just in the general sense of searching for truth)

IMHO

[ztodd]

Perhaps I did act in haste and I'm sorry...

I agree with you Loudmouth it was unwarrented...

There's nothing wrong with the author pushing his beliefs but he's not pushing them on adults... he's trying to push them onto kids. I think that's what offends me the most... If the books were geared toward a more mature reader then I wouldn't have any issues.

As far as exposing our children to "alternate beliefs" I'm not so sure this is the right way. I'm glad our children have the light of Christ but maybe staying away from such books and movies is what will make us "wise as serpents" and I surely need to learn to hold my tonge and pratice the "harmless as doves" thing.

No problem- no harm, no foul. I didn't even see your original post, except as quoted by others.

Sometimes I have a hard time drawing the line between allowing everyone to worship how where or what they may (Article of Faith 11) and still fighting against evil at the same time. We don't want to purposely expose either ourselves or our young children to bad influences just for the sake of being well rounded or well informed, do we? I think we would get plenty of exposure to the evil of the world without looking for it - even if we are doing our best to avoid it.

I also struggle with the morality of marketing to young children - whether it pertains to commercial ads or to religion / atheism, or whatever. Children are very impressionable... We are commanded to teach our children in righteousness because of this... but if we know that our neighbors are teaching their children false things, or having bad influence on them, is it right for us to take the initiative to try to introduce a positive influence in their lives, if their parents are opposed to it? It's kind of hard for me to know that some folks are exerting bad influences on their children at the time of their life when they're most impressionable.

Do we Christians make books or movies directed at pushing our beliefs on young children? Would it be wrong for us to do so?

[drjme]

But if we know that our neighbors are teaching their children false things, or having bad influence on them, is it right for us to take the initiative to try to introduce a positive influence in their lives, if their parents are opposed to it?

IMO no, because they are not your kids. It is the parents duty to rear their children righteously and God will hold them accountable If they teach them evil.

you can be a positive example in their lives without introducing religious beliefs whatsoever.

Do we Christians make books or movies directed at pushing our beliefs on young children? Would it be wrong for us to do so?

Kids bible stories? Bible picture books? Disney's the prince of egypt?

These books/movies you would generally know what you are in for

The difference is they way the stories would appear to be written. If The author phillip pullman is taking Christian beliefs , twisting them into his own atheist beliefs, which discredits Christianity, and so presenting a biased view of something he abhors, as opposed to a christian spreading a belief of something they believe in and love, not trying to dissuade people of something they don't believe in.

[Guest Delmar]

Perhaps I did act in haste and I'm sorry...

I agree with you Loudmouth it was unwarrented...

There's nothing wrong with the author pushing his beliefs but he's not pushing them on adults... he's trying to push them onto kids. I think that's what offends me the most... If the books were geared toward a more mature reader then I wouldn't have any issues.

As far as exposing our children to "alternate beliefs" I'm not so sure this is the right way. I'm glad our children have the light of Christ but maybe staying away from such books and movies is what will make us "wise as serpents" and I surely need to learn to hold my tonge and pratice the "harmless as doves" thing.

My understanding is that the author of these books does have an agenda to discredit Christianity. The danger comes if parents watch the movie and say "that wasn't so bad" then allow their kids to read the books without ever taking the time to find out what is in them! Letting your child be exposed to an anti Christian message is one thing. Allowing your kids to be exposed to an unopposed anti Christian massage, borders on neglect!

[aruth5000]

i heard like a church leader or someone advised us not to watch it ... idk though that may just be a rumor

[Lolgirl]

I'm not quite sure on that either...anybody else know about it?

[~Sarah~]

I wouldn't want to see a movie, let alone give my money to support it, that the author specifically says is "anti God" for the same reason I wouldn't want to see one that is "anti Mormon."

The director has said that he wants to do movies 2 and 3, but won't water them down like he did the first one.