Michael Medved on 'The Golden Compass'

CBN ^

[icwhatudo]

When money tracking firms greet opening numbers with “it’s not an out-and-out debacle” you know the film isn’t doing as well as expected.

[stevem]

I wouldn't have read this but for the Medved reference. He is a movie critic I ALWAYS read.

This movie never would have made my radar screen except for all the chatter about Pullman. This caused me to think a bit and have concluded that prominant atheists strike me as an unhappy lot. Yet, it's not just that they seem unhappy. It's more that they want for all day to share their unhappiness with as wide an audience as they can.

[DoughtyOne]

Other characterizations that are not good are "daemons," which are the human characters' animal companions or spiritual counterparts. They seem cuddly and friendly but they are in fact personal demons which Pullman does not really disguise.

While I don't think Mevid is mischaracterizing the intent of the author here, I do want to address the issue of these 'daemons'.

It is my opinion that these animal counterparts are more accurately described as the human's soul, in an external manifestation.  If the person has opted to adopt a good nature, the manifestation has a like manor.  If the person has adopted an evil nature, the manifestation reflects that.

I do not think it is accurate to describe these manifestations as a 'demon'.  The common perception of a demon is evil.  We don't all have evil natures.  I therefore object to the characterization of the outward manifestation of these people's souls, to be demons.  No, they are simply the outward manifestation of the individual's soul.

From my observation of the description of the author's intent, it is easy to accept that he may have wanted to depict everyone as having an internal demon.  That's not my perception.  I believe we have good and evil spirits (some would say our good or evil nature) telling us what we should do, but it is our choice what we do in life.  We are not controled by an evil demon, although we may virtually become one by the exercise of our own free will.  We can also become angelic by making choices based on what we believe is the rightous thing to do.

[lilylangtree]

Since I’ve already seen one movie this year, I’ve used up my allotment for 2007. If, and only if, I decide to see the movie, I’ll wait until next year.

[Left2Right]

Actually it seems to me that most atheists are an unhappy lot, not just the prominent ones. If find it fascinating that they are so sure of themselves, yet always want to debate, argue or convince you of their point of view. On the other had, there seems to be a great number of people who are Believers, who although they may have doubts and uncertainty, seem to be a much happier lot overall and are much less argumentative.

[Axlrose]

Excellent advice.

I’d never knowingly watch something with an unbeliever message anway.

[nyyankeefan]

lily....ain’t even gonna watch it when it comes on TV!!!!

[dr_lew]

“demon” is derived from the more general Greek term, “daimon.”

The entry in Liddell and Scott includes:

II. daimones, in Hes. [ Hesiod ], are the souls of men of the Golden age, forming the link between gods and men:- later, of any departed souls, Lat. manes, lemures, Luc. [ Lucretius ]

[tophat9000]

The bizarre thing is this guy Pullman claims he an atheist

But a true atheist would believe there is, no god, no, spiritualism, magical thinking, mysterious visions, no divination, no soul, but Pullman has them all and more

He just has traditional evil as good and good as evil

The guy doesn't sound like a true atheist but a believer on the Satanic side

[BerryDingle]

“Actually it seems to me that most atheists are an unhappy lot, not just the prominent ones. If find it fascinating that they are so sure of themselves, yet always want to debate, argue or convince you of their point of view. On the other had, there seems to be a great number of people who are Believers, who although they may have doubts and uncertainty, seem to be a much happier lot overall and are much less argumentative.”

Actually, I think the exact opposite is true. Atheists are happy people who have no problem at all with others practicing whatever religion they want. The self proclaimed atheists who are upset actually do practice a religion of some sort, the forerunners seem to be either communism (ACLU), environment, or both. A true atheist doesn’t acknowledge religion, so therefore doesn’t get angry about it.

[BenLurkin]

So what you are saying is that while as the author’s underlying premise remains anti-Christian — it is not meant in the way some people are taking it?

[Calm_Cool_and_Elected]

ping

[BenLurkin]

The take on it at CBS:

Dec 9, 2007 1:00 pm US/Pacific

'Golden Compass' Tops Box Office With Modest $26M

LOS ANGELES (AP) ― "The Golden Compass" proved a mild fantasy at the box office, pulling about $26 million this weekend. That's a modest opening weekend compared to such recent December heavyweights as "The Lord of the Rings" and "The Chronicles of Narnia" flicks. New Line Cinema's "The Golden Compass," whose cast includes Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig, also took in $55 million overseas since it began opening Wednesday in 25 other countries.

Disney's "Enchanted," the number one movie the previous two weekends, fell to second-place with $10.7 million, raising its total to $83.9 million. New Line, which had enormous success with its three "Lord of the Rings" films, had hoped for more out of "The Golden Compass," expecting it to reach at least $30 million domestically over its first weekend.

The film follows the adventures of an orphan girl hurled into a parallel world of witches, strange flying machines and talking polar bears. It cost $180 million to make.

[sinanju]

Atheists have always seemed such miserable, nasty characters they have never attracted people to jump on their bandwagon.

[sinanju]

Yesterday, I heard one caller-in on a radio show saying he took his young children to see the movie and it bored them silly. Impossible to follow and the CGI was cheesy.

[sinanju]

Though that same reviewer said Sam Elliot did a great job as a fantasy-world cowboy character—it was as if he was acting in a different movie.

[Pikachu_Dad]

While I don't think Mevid is mischaracterizing the intent of the author here, I do want to address the issue of these 'daemons'. It is my opinion that these animal counterparts are more accurately described as the human's soul, in an external manifestation.

Don't be silly. He called them 'daemons' for a reason.

[Pikachu_Dad]

We are not controled by an evil demon, although we may virtually become one by the exercise of our own free will.

Free will? You mean as in young thirteen year olds engaging in sexual relations as in the end of the third book?

[sgtyork]

I think this movie goes for a much more complex and evil depiction than you think.

If you’ve ever read about documented cases of possesion, “familiars” or “demons” are common.

http://paranormal.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ/Ya&sdn=paranormal&cdn=newsissues&tm=16&gps=111_3_1020_629&f=10&su=p284.8.150.ip_&tt=14&bt=1&bts=1&zu=http%3A//www.catholicherald.com/saunders/04ws/ws040916.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04713a.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04711a.htm

I’m not a flake, but there are documented cases in modern times. This movie, attacking Christianity, would naturally form an alliance with Christianity’s oldest enemy. The movie makers are truly playing with fire.