Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Christmas-Crushing Movie "The Golden Compass"
human events ^ | 11/09/2007 | L. Brent Bozell III

Posted on 11/30/2007 8:06:34 PM PST by Coleus

As the movie studios gear up for a big Christmas movie season, one trailer that looks like a blockbuster is "The Golden Compass," which must be trying to cash in on the "Narnia" movies. It has flashy special-effect polar bears in armor and a young heroic damsel in distress facing off against evil forces. The casting is top-notch, led by Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig, the current star spy in the James Bond movies. But buyer beware: Narnia it's not. It's the anti-Narnia. Instead of a Christian allegory, it's an anti-Christian allegory. The author of "The Golden Compass," Philip Pullman, is an atheist who despises C. S. Lewis and his much-beloved Narnia series. "I thought they were loathsome," he said of those books, "full of bullying and sneering, propaganda, basically, on behalf of a religion whose main creed seemed to be to despise and hate people unlike yourself."

This book and movie is only the first in his trilogy, titled "His Dark Materials," that gets more and more anti-religious in each book. Pullman hates orthodox religion and "those who pervert and misuse religion, or any other kind of doctrine with a holy book and a priesthood and an apparatus of power that wields unchallengeable authority, in order to dominate and suppress human freedoms." If you hear the ring of anti-Catholicism, you're right. The evil empire in this movie for children is called the "Magisterium," which is exactly the word Catholics use to describe the teaching authority of the Pope and his bishops. The books are more explicit, in which the evil institution is also called "The Church" and the higher-ups are the "Vatican Council."

British columnist Peter Hitchens has explained how our secular thought-shapers would love for Pullman to undercut Narnia's influence on children: "The cultural elite would like to wipe out this pocket of resistance. They have successfully expelled God from the schools, from the broadcast media and, for the most part, from the Church itself." He writes that while Lewis mocked atheists as joyless, Pullman depicts priests as evil and murderous, drunk and probably perverted, and the Church as "a conspiracy against happiness and kindness."

Isn't it a bit perverse to head into the Christmas holiday season hyping an atheist fantasy movie for kids? No doubt sensing this, Pullman and the moviemakers have ventured on a dishonest but energetic public-relations campaign to convince the public that this film isn't really anti-Christian. It's a plea for open-mindedness and spiritual dialogue. The Church is just a metaphor, see. The movie's director, Chris Weitz, spins it this way: "In the books, the Magisterium is a version of the Catholic Church gone wildly astray from its roots. If that's what you want in the film, you'll be disappointed." Weitz says they merely "expanded the range of meanings" for the Magisterium, that it's merely a metaphor for tyranny of any stripe: "Philip Pullman is against any kind of organized dogma whether it is Church hierarchy or, say, a Soviet hierarchy." That would be more believable if Hollywood had a track record of casting a Soviet hierarchy as evil -- and if Hollywood didn't have its own organized dogma of secular fundamentalism.

Nicole Kidman spins it her way: "I was raised Catholic, the Catholic Church is part of my essence. I wouldn't be able to do this film if I thought it were at all anti-Catholic." The media have played happily along in disguising Pullman's religion-bashing. On NBC's "Today," weatherman Al Roker delighted in making "The Golden Compass" the fall book selection of "Al's Book Club for Kids." Pullman appeared on NBC to deny that he was really promoting atheism. He touted letting the reader decide what the author intended, in a "democracy of reading." The closest he came to atheism was saying the book championed "open-minded intellectual curiosity." If that sounds like a transparent dodge, it certainly was. He told the students asking questions to think of the Taliban in Afghanistan. But the menace in Pullman's trilogy isn't called the Caliphate, and its hideous monsters aren't mullahs. They are cardinals and priests, and the heroes are an atheist former nun and two rebellious gay male angels.

The atheists may be angry that the movie waters down Pullman's anti-religious message, but they can take comfort in the fact that many parents (and grandparents and even godparents) will, sadly, buy the hype over this movie and buy this trilogy of vicious anti-religious books for the young readers in their lives. To the Christian book buyer, beware: Instead of celebrating God's son born in the flesh, you'll be celebrating God being killed so that man can advance to true consciousness. For those anticipating the wonder of Narnia, you'll have to wait until next May, when "Prince Caspian," the second installment, returns magic to the screen.


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: antichristian; atheistsupremacist; boxofficebomb; bozell; christianbashing; chronicallyoffended; culturewar; goldencompass; grinchstolechristmas; liberalbigot; moviereview; religiousintolerance; straighttodvd; thegoldencompass; thenogodgod; waronchristmas; waronchristmas2007
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-124 next last
To: irishjuggler
Exactly. Don’t listen to anyone! How do you really know cyanide is bad for you just because some “authority” says so? Try it yourself and make your own decision!

I was talking about works of art - films, books, cartoons, among other things. Do you really think that exposure to any of these will kill you like cyanide? Will taking a look at them for yourself corrupt you somehow? Or weaken your faith? Religious people sometimes get so worked up over the creative works of others - what are they so afraid of?
41 posted on 12/01/2007 1:13:41 AM PST by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: miliantnutcase

Yes, I would! Absolutely! I can’t think for myself at all. I copy everyone and everything. In fact, I’m thinking of renaming myself “militantnutcase” because it’d be such a cool name, especially if “militant” were spelled correctly.


42 posted on 12/01/2007 1:14:42 AM PST by irishjuggler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: steel_resolve
....."Is he talking about the Koran?"......

Yes he is, and he made Mohamed out to be an animal. I think every Muslim should be informed of this, especially in Sudan.

43 posted on 12/01/2007 1:14:51 AM PST by chuckles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: irishjuggler

Nice comeback. Right out of the middle school playbook to immediately snap back with a personal attack on my forum name. FYI, if militant wasn’t taken at the time I might have used that one instead.


44 posted on 12/01/2007 1:22:47 AM PST by miliantnutcase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek
Do you really think that exposure to any of these will kill you like cyanide?

No. My point it's idiotic to adopt the position that one must experience everything personally without considering the advice and recommendations of others. Apologists for the Pullman seem to have a problem with Christians pointing out the author's own anti-Christian words. No one is trying to censor these books or movies. It's about informing parents about the author's agenda, so that they can make their own decisions about what they buy for their children. If you want to embrace anti-Christian propaganda, that's your right. If I or anyone else wishes to reject this garbage and recommend that others do the same, that's our right. Why is only Christianity fair game? If this were a pro-Nazi film or an anti-Semitic film or an overtly racist film, few would dare assert that the world would be "a better place" if everyone were encouraged to see it and allowed to come to their own conclusions.
45 posted on 12/01/2007 1:24:43 AM PST by irishjuggler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: miliantnutcase

Ah, that’s a shame. But I’m sure that, one day, you’ll find your own special place in the world where the name “militantnutcase” is available!


46 posted on 12/01/2007 1:27:28 AM PST by irishjuggler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: irishjuggler

Yeah, I’m looking forward to it. Does my name offend you? =P


47 posted on 12/01/2007 1:38:20 AM PST by miliantnutcase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek
The world will be a better place if people think and make decisions for themselves.

Then why do you post on an internet message board trying to influence others? Shouldn't they be allowed to form opinions without your help?

People have a right to be informed in the face of a deliberately deceptive multimillion dollar ad campaign.

48 posted on 12/01/2007 3:09:46 AM PST by denydenydeny (Expel the priest and you don't inaugurate the age of reason, you get the witch doctor--Paul Johnson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: irishjuggler
My point it's idiotic to adopt the position that one must experience everything personally without considering the advice and recommendations of others.

And my point is it's idiotic to blindly follow the the lead of others in their opinions of artistic content. The poster I originally responded to had never seen "The Last Temptation Of Christ" yet felt qualified to pass judgement on it. This is nonsense, whether it's done by Muslims or Christians or Buddhists or anyone else.

if this were a pro-Nazi film or an anti-Semitic film or an overtly racist film, few would dare assert that the world would be "a better place" if everyone were encouraged to see it and allowed to come to their own conclusions.

Never mind making the world "a better place". If you're going to render an opinion on a book or film, call it vile or racist or whatever else, you'd better have seen it or read it. Otherwise why would you think your opinion on the material in question is worth anything? If you have no first-hand experience, you're simply parroting what someone else said - someone who may not have any exposure to the material in question either. Take this far enough and you have the blind leading the blind - a lot of uninformed opinions from people who don't really know anything about the material they're objecting to. This is exactly what we see in Muslims getting worked up over cartoons and movies, with the additional Muslim ingredient of violence.

I won't be seeing the movie - I read the books and found them kind of dull. But at least I know why I don't like them. A lot of the people objecting to the movie won't.
49 posted on 12/01/2007 3:32:11 AM PST by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
"full of bullying and sneering, propaganda, basically, on behalf of a religion whose main creed seemed to be to despise and hate people unlike yourself."

But it's okay for you to hate and despise people unlike yourself, like C.S. Lewis for one.

50 posted on 12/01/2007 3:37:16 AM PST by FrdmLvr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Wow,I have to warn the family.They just lost 20 tickets from us.We have a lot of grandchildren.


51 posted on 12/01/2007 3:54:08 AM PST by fatima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: denydenydeny
People have a right to be informed

I agree. The best way to be informed about a subject is to learn about it yourself. The worst way is taking the word of someone who has avoided the subject matter and doesn't know anything about it either.

in the face of a deliberately deceptive multimillion dollar ad campaign.

Now I'm curious - how do you know it's deceptive? Have you seen the actual movie yet? If yes, how does it differ from the ads and how do they deceive?
52 posted on 12/01/2007 3:54:22 AM PST by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek

I am not afraid.Let me see it for free.


53 posted on 12/01/2007 4:01:03 AM PST by fatima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

In other words, the good guys won’t be referred to a “son of Adam.”


54 posted on 12/01/2007 4:12:08 AM PST by BuffaloJack (Before the government can give you a dollar it must first take it from another American)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus; Ottofire; marinamuffy; flynmudd; twonie; Peace4EarthNow; Nightshift; WileyPink; doc1019; ...

Baptist ping


55 posted on 12/01/2007 5:32:48 AM PST by WKB (FDT= Alabama's song from1982 He's "Close Enough To Perfect For Me")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek
I don't recall the Pope issuing a fa-qua to have the director killed

No, but there's a common thread of condemning and denouncing works of art - books, films, cartoons, whatever - without any first-hand knowledge about them, based on what some religious authority tells them. The world will be a better place if people think and make decisions for themselves

Intelligent people can learn from the experience of others, not just their own. I've never been drunk and driving a car at the same time. I've never tried marijuana, cocaine, or heroin. I've never cheated on my wife. But I know plenty o people that have done some, or all, of them. Some got away with it. Most of them paid the price.

I can take the author's own remarks and decide if I want to contribute money to him, or not. I don't necessarily have to read his book, or see his movie, first. I won't be seeing this movie, but my 19-year old daughter plans to. I will be interested in her reactions.

56 posted on 12/01/2007 5:52:28 AM PST by chesley (Where's the omelet? -- Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek
"...what are they so afraid of?"

Trolls, perhaps?

57 posted on 12/01/2007 6:01:09 AM PST by Sam's Army
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek

It’s simply a matter of people getting tired of being verbally or “artistically” abused constantly. It gets old after a while to see your faith mocked, to see yourself and your fellow Christians accused of being violent sadists who represent a faith that is a fraud. It especially gets old when other faiths are protected from such attacks by Political Correctness.

It’s a double standard. It’s considered to be “intolerant” to mock Islam. Ron Howard or Dan Brown wouldn’t dare put out a movie or book that called Mohammed a fraud and Islam a fake religion based on violence and conspiracy. Both men are cowards and would fear a Jihad being declared against them. But even beyond that, they know that they’d be branded as “intolerant” if they mocked any faith other than Christianity. So they safely mock Christianity, a religion that isn’t protected by liberal “soft totalitarian” sensibilities, and whose practitioners don’t do anything more violent than carrying picket signs or writing columns disputing the film.

Ironic, isn’t it? An ultraviolent faith like Islam doesn’t get mocked by artists because they fear being slaughtered. Instead, they mock Christianity, and even accuse it of being murderous, because they know Christians can safely be mocked without losing one’s life, one’s freedom, or one’s invitation to a Beverly Hills cocktail party.

It just gets old after a while. It’s sickening to see these authors and directors posture and preen and brag about what “courage” it took for them to take on big, bad Christianity, when many of us know full well they wouldn’t attack Islam in such a manner for obvious reasons. They wouldn’t attack Hinduism, Buddhism, or Native American religions, either, because while it might not be life-endangering, they’d regard such as attacks as being “intolerant” under the rules of Political Correctness.

Urinate of a crucifix and you might get a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts, and anyone who objects will be called “intolerant”. Urinate on a Buddhist symbol, and you won’t get the grant because you’ll be called “intolerant” for treating a Buddhist symbol badly. Urinate on a Koran? Don’t even think about it.


58 posted on 12/01/2007 7:24:35 AM PST by puroresu (Enjoy ASIAN CINEMA? See my Freeper page for recommendations (updated!).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Thanks for posting this. We, of course, will not be seeing it.

We have seen MAYBE 5 movies in the theatre in the past 10 years. We decided to vote with our money and the entire family saw Narnia in theatre paying full price FOUR TIMES.

Upon hearing that Prince Caspian was coming out in May, my son just did a cartwheel down the hall. LOL


59 posted on 12/01/2007 7:39:21 AM PST by kimmie7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kimmie7
I blast Hollywood a lot around here, but occasionally something good comes out of there. Narnia is an example. So is The Lord of the Rings trilogy.

I don't expect every film to pay homage to Christianity, and I enjoy some films that are a little over-the-top, but I just get sick of seeing Christianity mocked and ridiculed so often. And it adds insult to injury to see the mockers donning the clothes of Martyrdom and pretending that it took courage to attack Christianity.

60 posted on 12/01/2007 7:54:11 AM PST by puroresu (Enjoy ASIAN CINEMA? See my Freeper page for recommendations (updated!).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-124 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson