Who killed "The Golden Compass"?

Who killed "The Golden Compass"?

by

Published on December 17th, 2009, 11:48 am
Rift: Arts

When the movie "The Golden Compass" came out a couple of years ago, it was a controversial thing, because it was the first adaptation from a series of books for kids bu atheist author Bill Pullman. The Catholic Church in particular was vocal in opposing it.

Even thought it had rather nice revenues world-wide, no sequel was ever approved. Was this because of the church's opposition? Or because it got "bad reviews"?

We all know that bad reviews have nothing to do with whether series of films continue to be made. My bet would be that the studio simply didn't like the controversy.

One thing that irks me about this whole thing about "His Dark Materials" -- everyone talks about how the story ends with the main child characters "murdering God." This is a lie. Anyone who has actually read the books will know that

1) There is no murder -- the characters inadvertently end the existence of "the Authority."
2) "The Authority" is NOT "God."

I'm getting tired of this sort of pious lying. Really -- is the truth that hard to work with?

SouthernFriedInfidel wrote: "The Authority" is NOT "God."

He claims to be. He is represented as the first Angel who seized the 'Kingdom of Heaven' and claimed to be the Creator of the Universe. The angel Xaphania discovered the truth and led a rebellion of fallen angels. He is called Yahweh, Lord, Almighty as well as 'The Authority' but becomes frail and falls under the control of the archangel Metatron - the Voice of God.

The children do not kill him intentionally, but they do not realize that his crystal box is not just a prison, but his life support and when they open it to free him he dies - albeit in a moment of supreme peace and happiness before merging with the cosmos.

It isn't an atheist book, it is very spiritual and deals with mystical life forces, angels, witches, magic, souls , love, bereavement - and talking bears, but it portrays alternative universes where God is not an omnipotent, eternal God but a being that can age and make mistakes (rather like Yahweh in the Old Testament)

It's also fiction and unlike scripture isn't intended to be taken seriously, but the same folk who get bent out of shape over "The Life of Brian" can't think straight when it comes to any references to their fiction. Although for some reason they don't get upset about 'The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe' where Jesus is portrayed as a large cat constrained by magic.

... and Captain Jack isn't Jesus... yeah right... Honestly they have a point on this, though honestly the Pope should keep his pie hole out of Hollywood IMHO. That said, I don't think the religious have enough influence to ultimately effect the success or failure of a movie or it's sequel. There's much worse stuff out there... It may have partially influenced it... but let's be real...the movie wasn't all that great. Probably the documentary on "Who killed it" will be more worth watching then the actual movie.

Well, I liked it. As book adaptations go, it was a little better than average (IMO) and seemed to me to capture the spirit of the book. Unlike, say "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban," which was a complete and utterly revolting hatchet job.

it was one of those that did very well outside the US but not within. I thought it was so much better than "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" but without blockbuster sales in the US they won't get the finance, so at that level the Christian opposition worked.

I quite enjoyed the C.S Lewis books as a kid and read them to my kids too, but the are not the same calibre as 'His Dark Materials' are and it showed in the film. TLWW is a superficial children's book. HDM can be read at many levels and stands re-reading many times. I don't know how much someone who hasn't read the books would get from from the film though, those levels either get lost in the film medium or have to be explicitly stated.

A Person wrote:...but without blockbuster sales in the US they won't get the finance, so at that level the Christian opposition worked.

Ahem: Police Academy. 'Nuff said. :lol:

A Person wrote:it was one of those that did very well outside the US but not within. I thought it was so much better than "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" but without blockbuster sales in the US they won't get the finance, so at that level the Christian opposition worked.

This is really what it came down to (Although Sam Elliot thinks otherwise). If all it took was the Cat-lick church's dislike of a subject matter to kill a film franchise, "Angels and Demons" would have never been made.

A Person wrote:I thought it was so much better than "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe".

No way... that movie rocked...

Maybe even more than Time Bandits

Liv wrote:
A Person wrote:I thought it was so much better than "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe".

No way... that movie rocked...

Maybe even more than Time Bandits

Nah -- the first Narnia film from Disney blew. "Prince Caspian" was far better. Standard fantasy fare without much in the way of Christian overlay.

I'm the other way around... liked the first one, second one not so much.

Atheists getting upset about God. Isn't that "odd"?

BecauseHeLives wrote:Atheists getting upset about God. Isn't that "odd"?

Okay Glibby... First Narnia or 2nd? We need a tie breaker...

I was so unimpressed by the first one, I didn't bother watching the second.

A Person wrote:I was so unimpressed by the first one, I didn't bother watching the second.

But do tell, you were just put off by the snow... right?

Liv wrote:
A Person wrote:I was so unimpressed by the first one, I didn't bother watching the second.

But do tell, you were just put off by the snow... right?

The snow was OK -- it was the extra-dull plot that bothered me. :whistle:

And you know... a retelling of the Jesus story isn't necessarily a bad thing. "The Shawshank Redemption" is one of my favorites. I think it's just that CS Lewis really sucked at fiction. I tried starting to read his "science fiction" series once years ago and got completely bored with it after 2 chapters.

Then I read "Mere Christianity"... and realized that he really needed to just stick with pure linguistics. :lol:

Well it was one of my top 2 or 3 childhood books, so it was completely surreal to see it come alive on screen as an adult. I thought it was absolutely fantastic, but I am clearly biased because of nostalgia.

I enjoyed the books, but they are children's books, with little depth. I'm not sure why but I found the film boring. It was competent, but uninspired.

And I've just remembered that I have seen Prince Caspian, but I forgot until I looked it up and saw the trailer for it. Which shows how memorable it was.

I think the Catholic League if not the church itself and different other American Fundy Trust are fractionally answerable l, the cut which received all those hybridize reviews was already subject to appreciable studio crushing to soften it postdate various email campaigns vilifying the books and the film before it had even been made.

vanessagarcia1 wrote:I think the Catholic League if not the church itself and different other American Fundy Trust are fractionally answerable l, the cut which received all those hybridize reviews was already subject to appreciable studio crushing to soften it postdate various email campaigns vilifying the books and the film before it had even been made.

Uh.... whut?

He's talking in tongues **May 10th, 2010, 8:53 pm**

He's talking in tongues