Badmovies.org Forum

I don't see anyone here talking about it, but The Golden Compass seems to be stirring up controversy a lot of other places.

The Christian reviewers aren't the only ones panning it either. Rotten Tomatoes (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/his_dark_materials_the_golden_compass/) gave it a rotten 39% rating, though it's at a rotten 44% now.

What do you think?

Although I'm about spent on the fantasy genre as of late, I'm going to wait until I watch it before passing judgment. 

From what I've read, the controversy is only because the author of the book presents an Atheist perspective (well, sorta)?  One thing though; it's nice to see something from an Atheist point of view (even if it's more of an anti-theist perspective) other than atheists-are-bad-and-always-repent-in-foxholes endings that tend to predominate.  There are so many faith-mirrored stories already (Narnia, Passion, Star Wars, etc,), it would be a nice change to see something different. 

Too bad this "big atheist" movie comes from an author who kinda comes off as an ass lol (with the whole "killing god" comment he made).  As an agnostic atheist myself, all that "killing god" $hit is quite obnoxious and not necessary.  It's just one of a million notions that I just don't buy, which doesn't necessitate an attack on those who have a solid belief (or on that belief) in any one of them, if that makes any sense.  Live and let believe I always say; whatever gets people through life, but I digress.

Basically, I'll just have to wait and see.

i agree with envelope, but i think its kind of an interesting view. id like to see how its executed. i've been seeing quite a bit a b***hing about this movie because of its religious innuendo, id like to see what all the fuss is about.   

Have to wait until I see it to make a call, as far as I'm concerned it's a movie. People are way to sensitive about things anymore. If a person has a strong religious belief a movie is not going to convert someone to atheism, nor is a book or anything else.

If the movie were targeted at an adult audience, I would be with you . . . I mean, the DA VINCI CODE was pure crap, historically and religiously speaking, but I wasn't about to go picket the theaters showing it or anything.  But to have a movie specifically targeted at children, based on a book whose avowed purpose, according to its author, is to get children to "kill the image of God in their hearts", is a particularly nasty and pernicious tactic.  Releasing it at the Christmas season just adds insult to injury.

That being said, it is probably very well done, judging by the ads.  I'm not going to contribute to its success by going to see it.

Looks too similar in style to the 1st Chronicles of Narnia flick which I was underwhelmed by.

It is no more wrong than releasing Chronicles Of Narnia to a child demographic, trying to convert them to the ways of religion.  To have it one way but not the other is pure hypocrisy.

Only if you believe the two paths of life (atheistic and theistic) are morally equivalent to each other . . . which I do not.

But that's your opinion Indiana, which I respect.  But, to show one idea which you agree with but to deny another point of view is just wrong. 

Couldn't have said it better myself.  Karma!

I agree somewhat with the previous post about it being fair game either way.  

Not to get into the existential debate too much (this isn't the forum for it) but sometimes I find it troubling when I see children indoctorinated into any belief structure well before their cognitive abilities and abstract thinking have developed fully.  After all, we all start out lacking belief in gods since religion is a learned behavior and Atheism is, technically speaking, the absence of belief in any gods and not necessarily the denouncement of specific gods.  But that's the nature of the beast I suppose.  I was quite indoctorinated myself and things changed.  Everyone can change back and forth and I think that is a very healthy thing to be exposed to various viewpoints throughout life.  I personally wouldn't mind my children seeing both Narnia or The Golden Compass, for example; they can make up their own minds.  Like a previous poster said, one movie will not change someone's core beliefs unless they were already weary in the first place. Existentialism is a funny thing...and a very touchy thing for some people.

Still, I think the author's venomous attitude could ultimately be self-defeating.  In a sense, I think it might be a more acceptable if the message aimed at kids was that it's ok to have questions, not buy what you've been told just because you've been told, or that it's ok to believe what you believe or that it's ok to not believe.  

This is why I really admire the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.  Think what you will about the movie vs the book series vs the radio show but in my mind, it's the most happy, positive, Atheist stories I've ever encountered ...and I've never come away from the books, radio, or movie thinking anything negative about theism.

And that is how anyone can choose not to show support for something that they disagree with. Don't go see it. Easy as that.

No need to get in an uproar about any form of media IMO.   :teddyr:

Care to elaborate on what you mean by this? Are you suggesting that I am less moral because I don't share your belief structure? 

Because one could argue that an Atheist can be more moral, doing good for the sake of being good in and of itself rather than being good because someone is watching with threats of punishment (Hell) and promises of rewards (Heaven) in the case of one particular religion as an example. I mean, if you look at it that way, who's really being moral?

Basically, morality is a learned behavior, religion or not.  Anyone can be moral or immoral regardless of which religion, if any, they follow.  Some of us don't have the "get out of jail free card" of repentance and must live with our guilt. 

Now, if that's not what you meant (Atheists are less moral than Theists) than forget everything I just said :)

Without trying to turn this into a huge atheist/theist/Christian debate, let me answer Mortal Envelope's question as best I can . . .

The whole Christian perspective is that there IS absolute truth in the universe, that this absolute truth is embodied in an almighty God, and that this God communicated his truth to mankind in the most direct way possible - by becoming one of us ("the WORD became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory" as the Apostle John put it).

Now, if that is true - and as a historian with a Master's Degree, I would argue that there is extensive historical evidence that it is - then knowledge of that truth carries with it the responsibility to inform others of it.  NEVER by violence but by reason and gentle persuasion and convincing arguments, to show any who wish to know that there is proof that God is real, that He cares for mankind, and that He desires fellowship with us.

If God is real and God is good, therefore, a book, film, or other literary work that is created for the avowed purpose of DISPROVING and DESTROYING faith in God is not morally neutral but rather actively evil.  How successful it will be, I have no idea.  But the harshest words Jesus ever spoke were directed at those who deliberately damaged or destroyed the faith of little children - "If any man causes one of these little ones who believes in Me to stumble, it would be better for that man to have a millstone tied around his neck, and be cast into the depths of the sea."

Look, this is a thread about a movie.  I have no problem with discussing or defending my faith, but if M.E. or any of the rest of you would like to hear me elaborate further on this topic, might I suggest that we move this conversation to the OFF TOPIC DISCUSSIONS board?  I'll be happy to meet you there.

Sorry - modified my post before I noticed your response.   I don't think this forum, even in Off Topic is the place for this kind of discussion either really...and I'm going to try really hard to resist responding to almost every statement in your last post, but I do want you to realize that claiming your moral superiority comes off rather arrogant, which may be counter-productive. 

If you really want to have this discussion, the proper place would be the agnostic atheist forums at about.com; I'm sure with your Masters Degree in History and your mission to spread the Truth(TM) you can show us non-believers a thing or two :)

I noticed your modification after I posted my reply and wondered how that extra text got there . . . .


and in response to the latter part of it, I will say that in the purely humanistic definition of "morality", atheists are capable of remarkable acts of decency, humanity, and kindness.  I have enjoyed the company of many atheist friends over time, and we have had frequent, and very spirited, discussions on a wide range of moral and religious issues.

As far as the meat of my comments above, I'll just say this:  all my statements are based on the premise that truth is absolute, and that what I believe is indeed the truth.  No . . . that doesn't convey what I am trying to say either.  OK, lessee . . . if I am right, and Jesus of Nazareth was in fact a living incarnation of the Almighty, then religions, philosophies, and belief systems that deny that fact CANNOT be true.  However, if I am wrong, then any other belief system is equally as valid as mine.  That is why I have put a great deal of research into trying to confirm what I believe through history.

As far as joining another  skeptics/agnostics forum . . . I spent 2 years going at it with several atheists and agnostics, plus a Jewish rabbi and a healthy sprinkling of pagans, on a Religion/Philosophy forum over at Easyboards.com a number of years ago.  It was fun and I learned a lot (and hopefully taught a bit too), but in the end it became rather tedious as I wound up repeating myself over and over.

I did post a lot of my reasons for believing as I do in a thread on this board entitled "My Issues With THE DA VINCI CODE" earlier this year.  At any rate, karma to you for a gentlemanly discussion, and my apologies if you find me offensive . . .

Nah it's ok  :cheers:.  I like theists too :) - heck, got a lot of em in my family and all :)  -it's just too easy to ruffle someone's feathers regarding such a topic.  Sorry if I came off condescending; it's just that it's easy for me to jump the gun with a lot of prior experience of being insulted just for not believing the same.   You don't know how many times I've been called immoral just because I don't share the same belief structure.   Sometimes it feels like when a salesman starts insulting ya when ya don't buy their product.  Anyway, it's coo' - I realize that wasn't your intent.  Good karma for you too - I know your heart's in the right place and that's all that really matters right?

Existentialism is one touchy subject, which is why I usually try to avoid it (along with political discussions or discussions about child-raising - seems no two people have the same opinions on any of these subjects).

Anyway...this movie could go either way...it could be an interesting, enlightening fantasy flick or it could be Atheistic rolling pile of turd lol.

Take it easy.

Well our local theater is not going to show "The Golden Compass" as they are bending to local religious pressure from some of the churches. I believe churches have the right to tell their respective flocks what they think of the movie (even if they haven't seen it and are knee jerk reacting), but the churches need to keep their politics's inside the church, some of the church even threatened to picket and protest the theater if they showed it.

Church want freedom of religion and the right to place nativity scenes on the courthouse lawn, the right to display the 10 commandments in schools and the right to prayer. But they cry foul when someone doesn't want it and claim freedom, then soon as something comes along they don't agree with they want it banned.

I respect religion and I even darken the steps of church from time to time, but I have no time for hypocrisies, wanting your religious rights is fine, but wanting to ban/judge anything you haven't even seen based solely on opinion and altering the rights of others through pressure and threats is just ... un-Christian.


You know what Matt: 7:1 says I'm sure, and if you continue on to Mat 7:2-5 you'll know that this verse 7:1 is not speaking to not judging at all -- it is speaking to not judging unfair or any other cheap and selfish way.

To judge without seeing something is unfair. To many Christian tend to knee jerk and join the negative propaganda campaign without ever checking the facts or investigating  themselves. I was called by a church member of protest the movie, and call all the theaters (local) to get them to not show the movie. So I asked have you seen it? No they replied, so I asked 'Then what gives you the right to condemn what you haven't seen?" They babbled about the book and the connection so I asked "Have you read the book?" No, again was the answer so again I asked "Then what gives you the right to condemn what you haven't read?"
They grew angry because I wouldn't blindly follow the mob of ignorance and hysteria based solely on some press release and hung up on me after saying I'd answer to God.

I'm ok with that.

You have a valid point.  I did read the DA VINCI CODE book, but I did not see the film after that because the book was enough for me.

I don't know that I want to read the HIS DARK MATERIALS trilogy which THE GOLDEN COMPASS is based on.  The author's own words about the book, plus the numerous quotes and excerpts I have read, have enabled me to form a provisional judgement. 

As far as religiously offensive movies go, I will personally advise my friends and church members to avoid them, but as a rule, I'm not real big on picketing theaters and all that . . . all it does is give the film involved free publicity.  I will be curious to see how it does commercially - I gather the DA VINCI CODE movie was a bit of a flop.

I saw the movie and from a purely cinematic point of view it sucked. I guess I know to much about da Vinci and the Templars from reading real history that I couldn't make those leaps of belief.

I'll see the movie and I won't be looking for hidden messages or undertones of atheism I'll be looking to be entertained. In the words of Gladiator "Are you not entertained?"

$758 million worldwide. Studios just love flops like that. :teddyr: :wink:

The Golden Compass looks interesting, though I'll wait for DVD. I tend to purposely tune out any overt religious and/or political messages in films and just enjoy them at face value.

Did it do that well?  I just remember that it opened fairly big, and after that, seemed to fade.  It may have made up for it in DVD rentals, I don't know.  If I was wrong, I stand corrected.

Nope it made about a billion bucks worldwide, I don't know why it really wasn't that good of a movie IMHO.

I want to see it because I'm a big fan of the fantasy genre.  Also, Nicole Kidman, even though she's a fellow Aussie, is notoriously bad in most films, so I want to see if she stinks  in this one.

I believe in God, but not the religious dogma that religions today cling to.  I don't have a problem with a film bagging God.  I don't take it personally.  And I can enjoy it on it's own merits.  When I see a movie, I leave my personal beliefs at the door and just enjoy the film for what it is - entertainment.

The religious types who get all crazy about stuff like this really should give themselves a head butt and get on with their lives.  Sheesh, people, it's all make believe! 

Killer Bees: Kidman hasn't really had a winner in a while.  She's not a bad actress and all, but seems to make more wrong decisions than right ones [Stepford Wives anyone?]

I've long since ignored the fact that she's an Aussie long ago, it saves me from being burnt when I'm in that patriotic mood [from Melbourne here by the by]

As for the religious side of things, well, I'm not a big fan of censorship in general, so for me its more of an issue of censorship rather than faith.  Believe what you want, go ahead, but I should not be banned from watching anything just because someone else disagrees with it.  If it is controversial in nature, I think it actually promotes intelligent discussion, in that you can pick apart a text/film etc and point out why it is wrong and reassert your own point of view.  If your view can't hold up to it, then it couldn't have been strong enough in the first place.  Or like others have mentioned, you can just not watch it in the first place, problem solved.

I find that a much more intelligent approach, but unfortunately it's been my experience that those who do protest these sort of things don't usually seem to be altogether that intelligent to begin with.


As for the movie, I'm a sucker for fantasy, so shall see it in one form or another eventually regardless of the message.  As long as the movie is fun that's enough for me.  I'm not expecting altogether that much though I must say.

That was about the most reasonable discussion of this topic I've read in awhile (that were quite a few).

This is a nice forum...


(or it is the Christmas spirit infecting everyone, BTW nice avatar cheezeflixz)

I'll keep my comments to the movie. Not sure if I'll see it. I'm a bit tired of fantasy trilogies, or trilogies in general, or quadologies,... In fact it gets on my nerves tremendously, that no one seems to be able to fit some plot into just one film.

[quote author=Mortal Envelope link=topic=117056.msg172905#msg172905
Still, I think the author's venomous attitude could ultimately be self-defeating.  In a sense, I think it might be a more acceptable if the message aimed at kids was that it's ok to have questions, not buy what you've been told just because you've been told, or that it's ok to believe what you believe or that it's ok to not believe.  

This is why I really admire the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.  Think what you will about the movie vs the book series vs the radio show but in my mind, it's the most happy, positive, Atheist stories I've ever encountered ...and I've never come away from the books, radio, or movie thinking anything negative about theism.
[/quote]

Fair enough.
The authors arrogance is no different then that of the...whats that "God hates fags" group? You know the one... Its a desire to hurt people, and I  guess get a 'power rush' from it. A less lethal form of the celebrity killer, like the guy who shot John Lennon.
The ultimate 'Look at me! Look at me!' attitude, so to speak.

But yeah. Not watching it. Its just the same old Hollywood mindset. Like, Whatever dude..
And personaly, I often like to quote Marvin the Paranoid Android.

i wanna see that flick about the lochness monster, the waterhorse i think its called. its a kids movie but i dig the lochness monster.

Well, I probably shouldn't jump in here, but what the hey.

I'm generally of the opinion that hardcore Christians and hardcore athiests have a lot more in common than they'd care to admit. Both take the events in the Bible literally, and both seem to think that if it isn't the literal truth, it's a worthless lie. The main difference is in the side of the fence they ended up on.

For me, if something is completely plausible and believable, it doesn't take much faith to believe in it, which is sort of the point. I belong to a Christian church, but I will honestly say I don't believe all the stories actually happened the way they were described. I believe the value of the scriptures is in putting them into their original context and seeing what they have to tell us. The quote I always bring up comes from an old TV special on archaeologists searching for the remains of Noah's Ark. As one theologian pointed out "If you're looking for the boat, you've missed the point."

When it comes down to it, I believe there is a higher power in the universe, an intelligence or at least a purpose behind things. I believe there is much more going on than we can currently comprehend, and to say there isn't suggests we think there is no more to learn. That's something else that connects the two extreme views on this issue. Religious extremists likewise think the answers can be found in a single book.

For me, religion is a philosophical journey, and the truth a work in progress. Keep an open mind, ask questions, learn all you can and keep putting the pieces together. Religion as we know it is evolving just as we are. It's our imperfect human way of understanding the incomprehensible. Unfortunately, on both sides of this moderate view, we have the people who say it's a fact that the entire world was flooded miles deep by 40 days of rain, and the people who say it's impossible. There are some of us who say "fine, but what does it teach us?"

What always frustrates me is that the name "Christian," much like the name "Muslim," is getting monopolized by people with very extreme beliefs who probably do more damage to the cause of religion in the things they say and do than any atheist ever could.

Oh, and I have no interest in seeing The Golden Compass. No reason. It just doesn't excite me.

Must've been that AWESOME hair style that Tom Hanks was sporting in it.   :teddyr: :tongueout:

OK, I've got to give you Karma for that  :bouncegiggle:

Dean,

I LOVE Melbourne (I'm in Brisbane)

I agree with your post.  I saw Stepford Wives which was woeful.  The only thing that saved it was the gay guy.  He was hilarious.  And Bette Midler is awful in anything - I don't like her at all.

I saw the Interpreter on telly a few weeks ago.  It was okay.  Apart from that I've only seen Kidman in bad movies.  The one exception was The Others which scared the crap out of me.  But that's I what I get for watching a scary movie late at night.

Granted, I haven't seen all of her movies but the ones I have seen have scared me away and I don't think I could wilfully waste my precious youth on movies that will probably be awful   :teddyr:

But I want to see the Golden Compass because she's not carrying the whole movie herself.

Fair enough.
The authors arrogance is no different then that of the...whats that "God hates fags" group? You know the one... Its a desire to hurt people, and I  guess get a 'power rush' from it. A less lethal form of the celebrity killer, like the guy who shot John Lennon.
The ultimate 'Look at me! Look at me!' attitude, so to speak.

But yeah. Not watching it. Its just the same old Hollywood mindset. Like, Whatever dude..
And personaly, I often like to quote Marvin the Paranoid Android.
[/quote]

Pullman has mellowed out a little in his attitudes in the past couple years.  I don't think this is a thing about money, either, as he's made plenty of it from the massive book sales and selling the rights to the movies. 

But yeah, I think you have a point about the connection, but Pullman was never that extreme - he just thinks the opposite of what Christians like indianasmith think.  That is, that an atheistic viewpoint is morally superior and  (and by extension) better for humanity than a theistic one.



Anyway, as apparently the only person who has read the books (all three) and now seen the movie, I feel the need to comment on the movie.

The books are solid pieces of fantasy writing.  They are not truly anti-religion in general - I'd say they are more anti-dogmatic, and in particular, anti-Christian.  There is a recurrent theme of the destruction and controlling of sexuality (sometimes veiled, sometimes not), which is clearly an attack on Christian attitudes and practices at times, for example.  However, the strongest criticism is definitely towards the infrastructure and controlling nature of large religious bodies - chiefly the Catholic church. 

Anyway, that aside, it does work as a fantasy novel pretty well.  The characters are well-drawn and interesting, the storyline works, and it is generally quite nicely written.  It isn't my favorite style of writing (I don't know the name of the writing style it employs, but it reminds me of older fantasy novels and I've never particularly liked it), but it works. 

The film is a mixed bag.  The biggest problem is pacing.  I would be quite surprised if there are not many, many deleted scenes from the released version - or, if not deleted, scheduled to be filmed but axed.  There are many scenes where if you haven't read the book you'll have some trouble telling what is going on.  Scenes progress and there is a linear level of storytelling, but it is clipped and confusing at times.  In particular, Lyra's time with Ms. Coulter and her learning to use the Alethiometer.  This is the fatal flaw of the film.  You won't end up caring much about the characters, as they aren't given enough screen time for you to learn to like them - and they get little development, if any.

The books, for comparison, have as much going on as, say, the Lord of the Rings books - sometimes more.  It doesn't work as a two hour movie very well.

It isn't all bad however.  Performances are good mostly across the board.  Some of the special effects work is quite nice.  The look of the world is very good.  It is worth seeing in the theatre for the spectacle, I would say. 

And on a final note, almost all religious references of any kind are completely destroyed (the only remaining one seems to be something being called heresy - but against what?  You can't commit heresy against a secular government) - rendering the villains into dull totalitarian dictators whose motivations don't make much sense.



One final spoilerific note on the books I must make:


SPOILER FOR THE AMBER SPYGLASS




They don't kill God in any of the books.  There is no God in the books.  What people thought was God is actually an 'angel', and he has grown weak.  Lyra and her companion free him from what they think is a prison, actually a shell protecting his weak physical form, and a gust of wind blows him to pieces, destroying him. 




END