L.A. Times: Christians, not filmmakers, ruined "The Golden Compass"

Just in case any nitwits thought they were completely bereft of any cultural heft (thanks, Jackson, for the link), the L.A. Times angrily says otherwise:

It's a pity the religious groups that oppose Pullman's books and the film are so frightened of the prospect of encouraging kids to immerse themselves in compelling, thoughtful literature. Surely their beliefs are strong enough to stand up to a children's story. And surely Hollywood can put more faith in the power of great fiction. Fiddling with art to appease narrow-minded interest groups is its own heresy, one with which Hollywood unfortunately is all too familiar.

Of course, the op-ed assumes what is really at the heart of the debate: that the His Dark Materials trilogy is actually "compelling, thoughtful literature" every child should be reading. But is that actually true? What is so "thoughtful" about it? Does being aware and knowledgeable of other beliefs equate to having to read this particular series anti-Christian children's fantasy novels? (Doesn't that just prove what nitwits have been saying all along: that the books are opposed to Christianity?) In a world filled with millions of books, why shouldn't parents be a bit picky about what their children read? Are the editors at the L.A. Times, for instance, reading Bible stories to their children at night? As for being "frightened," that straw man has been hung out to dry. But expect to read it and hear it again and again.

Oh, and remember how some nitwits said that movie would make the books even more popular? Yep, sure enough, to the tune of a 500% increase in sales over the past three months. Yes, I know I must be "frightened" to even point it out, but I'm still doing so, even shaking hands and quivering lips.

Finally, Pete Vere, co-author of Pied Piper of Atheism, conquered his fears went and saw "The Golden Compass" (after having read the books), and was nearly frightened to sleep. His friend actually did fall asleep. Just like many movie critics.

Comments

[Stephen Sparrow]

'the His Dark Materials trilogy is actually "compelling, thoughtful literature" every child should be reading'.

And some folk would say the same about Playboy or Hustler. There is in the world real physical poison and psychological poison, and both must be kept out of the reach of children until they're mature enough to recognise them for what they are.

[Gail]

Did the L.A. Times excoriate the last "Pride and Prejudice" movie for ruining most of the characters and turning a comedy of manners into a would-be "Wuthering Heights"? If not, then please don't preach about a film's ruining an author's artistic vision. How about any version of "Dracula," much less "Bram Stoker's Dracula?" Freud has had a field day with every single one of those movies, each of which has less to do with the book than the one before. Or "Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves"? Or, as good as they were in many ways, "The Lord of the Rings" -- which made Aragorn angst-ridden and completely mangled the character of Faramir -- or the first "Narnia" movie, which made the kids into whiners who constantly wanted to go back home?

Hollywood directors regularly make movies based on books and then change the endings, if not the entire plots. Then they say that movies are different from books, and they have to make different kinds of choices, blah blah blah. Sometimes the changes are good and sometimes they aren't. I guess those changes are okay as long as they aren't motivated by fear of Christians.

Give me a break! And please, L.A. Times, don't preach against artistic "heresy" unless you're planning to do it with every movie made from a literary "classic." Does anyone remember "The Name of the Rose?" The whole point of the book is that the elaborate detective antics of the priest led to the right conclusion but for all the wrong reasons. It's profoundly philosophical and theological. The movie got rid of all that philosophy and theology and kept the detective antics. Isn't Umberto Eco's artistic and theological vision entitled to the same respect as Pullman's?

[Jackson]

"Isn't Umberto Eco's artistic and theological vision entitled to the same respect as Pullman's?"

Of course not! Pullman's vision is exquisitely "transgressive," thus he's a golden boy.

[Jackson]

I've lately found this helpful, as applied to a wide variety of filth and nonsense:

"They are of the world; therefore of the world they speak and the world listens to them."

-1 John 4:5

[CV]

According to Reuters, opening weekend was a bust, "below expectations."

However, it reference to the controvery, Reuters helpfully points out that the USCCB liked it!

Sigh.

Still, sounds like New Line is not happy with the initial box office. Whether or not films about the rest of the trilogy will get made remains to be seen, I guess.

Still, could it be that enough people who actually care about what kind of entertainment their Christian kids consume actually made a difference with the success of Compass?

http://www.reuters.com/article/entertainmentNews/idUSHO96825920071209

[Sandra Miesel]

And here'shttp://dealwhudson.typepad.com/deal_w_hudson/2007/12/the-golden-comp.html?cid=92907884#comments a Catholic Mother letting herself be guided by that USCCB review:

http://dealwhudson.typepad.com/deal_w_hudson/2007/12/the-golden-comp.html?cid=92907884#comments

Whyever did we work so hard trying to warn people away from Pullman?

[fr richard]

Wow! Who would have thought that a film based on "thoughtful, compelling literature" would put people to sleep?

But it could save people a lot of money spent on Lunesta, so the CD might be a great investment for insomniacs.

[ben from the city]

What suprises my is how nakedly phoney this Pullman character's rebelliousness is. I mean everything about this guy and his supporters is so pro-establishment and pro-actual-earthly-authority that its absurd.
Pullman's English, isn't he? Maybe he doesn't realize the actual Magisterium and Catholic Church was officially and unofficially suppressed in the counrty that he lives in for several hundred years. The actual establishment church in England is so loosey-goosey in its teachings that it you could probably say that only parts of it are actually Christian. Pullman with his maybe/maybe not atheism/sextheism could actually be an Anglican in good standing.
His criticism of the Narnia books? They're sexist and racist. The two unforgivable sins according to the trans-Atlantic baby-boomer establishment. I bet it took him years to come up with that insightful and unique criticism.
His big defenders here in the USA? From some of your recent postings Carl they come from such obscure publications at the Atlantic and the LA Times. And of course the usual "everything anti-Catholic is more Catholic than the Pope" crowd (of people that actually work for the Church).
Sorry, you're not much of a rebel when you have the established church of your country and the international media on your side, and you make all the right noises about all the right targets.

[Ed Peters]

I thought religious-based boycotts "never worked" and actually brought more people into theatres.

[Jackson]

Ed, It'll be hard to establish causation, of course, as you know.

[Bruce]

Here is a line from Roger Ebert's review of The Golden Compass:

"The books have been attacked by American Christians over questions of religion; their popularity in the U.K. may represent more confident believers whose response to other beliefs is to respond, rather than suppress."

More confident belivers in the U. K. ??

It continues to amaze me how normally sensible people can be such buffoons when it comes to religion.

[Brian Schuettler]

Check out today's review of the Golden Compass by a staff member at First Things. I was surprised, to say the least.

[Gail]

Brian:

That was interesting. I do think that very few people are likely to be influenced by the movie, though the books may influence some -- but, hey, Carl just said his favorite book is "The Stranger," and he doesn't seem to be an existentialist.

Our culture is awash in things that are probably much more damaging than "The Golden Compass." The movies typically nominated for Best Picture Oscar probably have a lot more reach and do a lot more damage. That doesn't mean we shouldn't comment on films like this when they come along, or refuse to let our kids see or read them. It just means we shouldn't get hysterical about them (although it's the liberal writers who seem to be the ones having hysterics.)

The USCCB review seemed to say what this says -- watching this movie is no big danger to your soul. Everyone had a fit about that, but I bet it's true. And this is from someone who wouldn't take her kids to see "Happy Feet."

[Gail]

Brian:

That was interesting. I do think that very few people are likely to be influenced by the movie, though the books may influence some -- but, hey, Carl just said his favorite book is "The Stranger," and he doesn't seem to be an existentialist.

Our culture is awash in things that are probably much more damaging than "The Golden Compass." The movies typically nominated for Best Picture Oscar probably have a lot more reach and do a lot more damage. That doesn't mean we shouldn't comment on films like this when they come along, or refuse to let our kids see or read them. It just means we shouldn't get hysterical about them (although it's the liberal writers who seem to be the ones having hysterics.)

The USCCB review seemed to say what this says -- watching this movie is no big danger to your soul. Everyone had a fit about that, but I bet it's true. And this is from someone who wouldn't take her kids to see "Happy Feet."

[Ed Peters]

Has Roger Ebert EVER failed to embrace a fashionable social opinion?

[Carl Olson]

Has Roger Ebert EVER failed to embrace a fashionable social opinion?

Every once in a while he surprises. For example, when the movie Stigmata came out, Ebert ripped it up and down for being full of obvious errors and anti-Catholic nonsense. And I thought his review of "The Passion of the Christ" was very thoughtful and worth reading.

[Katy]

Having read the books when I was a teenager (not that long ago), I'm casting my vote in with Gail's. From what I've read about it, the movie doesn't sound either all that exciting or all that 'transgressive,' both of which the books are.

But even with the books, which could legitimately be damaging, the funny thing about them is that they set up a straw God and a straw Church and attack those rather than the realities. Any reasonably educated adolescent should be able to see what Pullman is doing there, and that it's ahistorical and silly. But ah, you say, there's no such thing as a reasonably educated adolescent anymore? I doubt that, but even if it's true, aren't we supposed to be doing something about it?

And in the meantime, I think Gail's right. There are much, much bigger cultural fish to fry than Pullman. Let's examine and criticize his work by all means, but let's not wring our hands and wail over it. My guess is that he and his ilk would just point to us doing that and say, "See? We're right about these people after all."

[Sandra Miesel]

Roger Ebert was raised Catholic and sometimes it shows. But he's been mostly worthless as a reviewer for years.

[Carl Olson]

Any reasonably educated adolescent should be able to see what Pullman is doing there, and that it's ahistorical and silly.

And yet Donna Freitas, who teaches Catholic theology at the university level, doesn't seem to understand what Pullman is doing. Or, more accurately, she sees what he is doing and finds a way to make it fit with her brand of anti-orthodox "Catholicism." And Pullman's books receive rave reviews and critical acclaim and win awards by the buckets. Obviously many people take his stuff very seriously, including his theology and belief system. As I learned in dealing with The Da Vinci Code, it's not that people are stupid, it's that so many of them are poorly educated and gullible. There lies much of the problem.

Let's examine and criticize his work by all means, but let's not wring our hands and wail over it.

Who, exactly, is wringing their hands and wailing about it? Just wondering.

[Jackson]

"...it's not that people are stupid, it's that so many of them are poorly educated and gullible. There lies much of the problem."

Along with a will that chooses every brand of filth.