M: Snopes says "Golden Compass is Anti-Religious"

[Aurone]

I didn't know where to post this, so I decided to do the movie section since it makes a few references to the film.


http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/compass.asp


My mom got an Email linking this site. She knew I read the book and that I'm looking forward to the movie. Boy I had a fun time explaining that to her, her being a christian.

Persionally....this has PO'd me.

[Synesthesia]

I'm not sure if they totally got it right. None of these articles are.
It's the first time I have not agreed with a Scopes.com article. I swear they need an article about how incorrect their article is.

[Will]

I don't understand why everyone here is getting upset over these articles saying HDM is anti-religious. It is and Pullman has said it is.

[Cookiemonster]

Aurone, can you please check the spelling of your thread titles before you post them?

Snopes sais "Goldan Compass is Anti-Religous"

- is a little beyond the realm of the common typo I'm fixing it now.

[Aurone]

My Apologies. I was kind of steaming when I posted it. I've been trying to do a whole family trip to see this film, more to help the film make some $ and just for fun. Now with my mom reading this, I can't help but wonder if she really will want too. She's understanding of other religous views, but she's still christian none the less.

[Will]

You can assure her they've bowed to corporate interests and had her, an American Christian's, feelings most at heart when making the film.

[daftbrain]

I don't understand why everyone here is getting upset over these articles saying HDM is anti-religious. It is and Pullman has said it is.

Where did he say that?

[BenMech]

I don't understand why everyone here is getting upset over these articles saying HDM is anti-religious. It is and Pullman has said it is.

Because most of the boardmembers here are still under the impression that religion in any form is a good thing.

[Blossom]

I don't understand why everyone here is getting upset over these articles saying HDM is anti-religious. It is and Pullman has said it is.

Because most of the boardmembers here are still under the impression that religion in any form is a good thing.

'Still'? Who do you think you are to say when and when things shouldn't be good or bad. And what gives you any reason to suggest it isn't a good thing for that matter. Furthermore, what you said had nothing to do with what Will said at all.

[AUST]

I don't understand why everyone here is getting upset over these articles saying HDM is anti-religious. It is and Pullman has said it is.

Because most of the boardmembers here are still under the impression that religion in any form is a good thing.

Really? I doubt that. Personally I ahve religious belifs, but a vast majority on erhe don't and most of thema re anti-religion.

[advo]

It's a stupid article, but I'm actually more curious to who have been mailing the world, because it seems as that person really got the message all around. As I vehemently supporter of the books AND the movie, I'm thinking to adopt the strategy to send out the message that the article is utterly flawed.

[Grumman]

From what I read, the article is very descriptive and isn't lying at all. The interesting thing here is that these religious people are falling in the trap Pullman set up for them: What they are doing is precisely what he loathes in the books, just proving him right.

Actually I happen to be a religious person myself, but I must admit that it's this behavior from religion which has brought so much intolerance and pain to the world. The issue is that if we took at face value that what is often done in the name of God really came from him, then he can't be a good God. My own belief is that God isn't like that, and that organised religions often misrepresent Him.

[Peter]

Ranters will rant. This relatively low-level rant hardly seems worth worrying about.

[advo]

From what I read, the article is very descriptive and isn't lying at all. The interesting thing here is that these religious people are falling in the trap Pullman set up for them: What they are doing is precisely what he loathes in the books, just proving him right.

Actually I happen to be a religious person myself, but I must admit that it's this behavior from religion which has brought so much intolerance and pain to the world. The issue is that if we took at face value that what is often done in the name of God really came from him, then he can't be a good God. My own belief is that God isn't like that, and that organised religions often misrepresent Him.

I think they made a presumptuous move by just declaring that it's "true". I don't think they have enough material to demonstrate the many aspects of the issue, and what is perhaps the worst is that the article is being used as arguments for His Dark Materials is about "Killing God". I don't disagree that His Dark Materials CAN be seen from an anti-religious perspective, but I think that's a very simple and narrow-minded way to look upon the books. I think the books are about so much more, and definitely worth a read even for Christians and even for people who disagree with the books. I don't even mind so much that people are against the books if they just had some reasonable arguments but some of the people haven't read the books and are looking only at the Snopes article for reference. I think that's too thin. I'm aware that it's probably not many here, but e.g. the IMDB board are flooding with people like that. And in that way I think it's an irresponsible article.

[Peter]

Anyone who's seen Monty Python's Life Of Brian will have been suffering from intense deja vu for.. for ever, it seems. These arguments are old and stale.

Some people are so slow.

[Grumman]

I think they made a presumptuous move by just declaring that it's "true". I don't think they have enough material to demonstrate the many aspects of the issue, and what is perhaps the worst is that the article is being used as arguments for His Dark Materials is about "Killing God". I don't disagree that His Dark Materials CAN be seen from an anti-religious perspective, but I think that's a very simple and narrow-minded way to look upon the books. I think the books are about so much more, and definitely worth a read even for Christians and even for people who disagree with the books. I don't even mind so much that people are against the books if they just had some reasonable arguments but some of the people haven't read the books and are looking only at the Snopes article for reference. I think that's too thin. I'm aware that it's probably not many here, but e.g. the IMDB board are flooding with people like that. And in that way I think it's an irresponsible article.

It doesn't really take much analysis to understand that HDM is against organised religion, as well as any dogmatic and intolerant form of domination. Furthermore, if there were any doubts, Pullman has confirmed it in several interviews. So my point of view is that HDM IS against organised religion, it clearly explains why, and there is no reason to be ashamed about it. If the movie makers wish to make people believe otherwise because it affects their profits, it's THEIR problem.

[Riali]

There's a lot of space between "against organised religion, as well as any dogmatic and intolerant form of domination", and flat out "anti-religious", Grumann.
I don't think anyone who has read the books could come away with the idea that spirituality (that is a truly pretentious and sappy word, but I can't think of another to substitute) is not present in PP's philosophy. The trilogy is full of souls, and angels, and the search for fulfillment in the afterlife. I don't think any of these fall into the realm of "anti-religion". The problem, of course, lies in that the religious philosophy outlined by HDM is wildly opposite to that taught by most organized religions.

[advo]

I think they made a presumptuous move by just declaring that it's "true". I don't think they have enough material to demonstrate the many aspects of the issue, and what is perhaps the worst is that the article is being used as arguments for His Dark Materials is about "Killing God". I don't disagree that His Dark Materials CAN be seen from an anti-religious perspective, but I think that's a very simple and narrow-minded way to look upon the books. I think the books are about so much more, and definitely worth a read even for Christians and even for people who disagree with the books. I don't even mind so much that people are against the books if they just had some reasonable arguments but some of the people haven't read the books and are looking only at the Snopes article for reference. I think that's too thin. I'm aware that it's probably not many here, but e.g. the IMDB board are flooding with people like that. And in that way I think it's an irresponsible article.

It doesn't really take much analysis to understand that HDM is against organised religion, as well as any dogmatic and intolerant form of domination. Furthermore, if there were any doubts, Pullman has confirmed it in several interviews. So my point of view is that HDM IS against organised religion, it clearly explains why, and there is no reason to be ashamed about it. If the movie makers wish to make people believe otherwise because it affects their profits, it's THEIR problem.

Yes, HDM is against organised religion but I think it would be wrong to say it sums up everything in the books. Like the world, it has far too many facets for it to be summed up into one single sentiment. And I think the snopes article does that. And I am not ashamed of anything, I'm not a particular religious person myself Also, Philip Pullman has also explained many times that his books are also about other things than just against organised religion. And even so, I always read with the text in my perspective more than the author. And I have always understood it as that the religious undertones takes a second place to the story in the books. The story between the people; Lyra and Will, Lyra and Roger, Lyra and her parents etc.

I get that a lot of fans are upset with the studio, I am myself pretty rattled by the last minute changes but I am still happy that they choose HDM. Even if TGC is a horrible movie, it doesn't change how the books are. I get that we want the movie to be as close to the book as possible but sometimes changes happens - even for the better. When Pride and Prejudice 2005 came out, everyone but the fans of the book thought it was a very good movie. Sometimes it's just impossible to satisfy the fans, I guess. For me, I'll rather see a bad movie than no movie. I don't think that compromises the books because like Philip Pullman, I view them as separate entities. With that said, of course I prefer a good movie above all. My point with this is don't be so hard on the studio. Of course, they want to earn money, that's what they do. It's their job to make movies that sell. And yes, sometimes they make stupid mistakes that end up harming the movie such as The Invasion but hopefully that's not the case with TGC. And even if it does hurt the overall story in the book, I cannot blame them for wanting to protect their investment. At the end of the movie, whichever way it's going to go, good or bad, I'll go home and read the books again and I'll be just as satisfied with them but for the movie studio? They have other things to worry about to. Bottom line, it would be naive to believe that NLC is adapting the books because of its great story rather than the cold-calculated monetary possibilities in it.

[Grumman]

Yes, HDM is against organised religion but I think it would be wrong to say it sums up everything in the books. Like the world, it has far too many facets for it to be summed up into one single sentiment. And I think the snopes article does that. And I am not ashamed of anything, I'm not a particular religious person myself Also, Philip Pullman has also explained many times that his books are also about other things than just against organised religion. And even so, I always read with the text in my perspective more than the author. And I have always understood it as that the religious undertones takes a second place to the story in the books. The story between the people; Lyra and Will, Lyra and Roger, Lyra and her parents etc.

I get that a lot of fans are upset with the studio, I am myself pretty rattled by the last minute changes but I am still happy that they choose HDM. Even if TGC is a horrible movie, it doesn't change how the books are. I get that we want the movie to be as close to the book as possible but sometimes changes happens - even for the better. When Pride and Prejudice 2005 came out, everyone but the fans of the book thought it was a very good movie. Sometimes it's just impossible to satisfy the fans, I guess. For me, I'll rather see a bad movie than no movie. I don't think that compromises the books because like Philip Pullman, I view them as separate entities. With that said, of course I prefer a good movie above all. My point with this is don't be so hard on the studio. Of course, they want to earn money, that's what they do. It's their job to make movies that sell. And yes, sometimes they make stupid mistakes that end up harming the movie such as The Invasion but hopefully that's not the case with TGC. And even if it does hurt the overall story in the book, I cannot blame them for wanting to protect their investment. At the end of the movie, whichever way it's going to go, good or bad, I'll go home and read the books again and I'll be just as satisfied with them but for the movie studio? They have other things to worry about to. Bottom line, it would be naive to believe that NLC is adapting the books because of its great story rather than the cold-calculated monetary possibilities in it.

I'll agree with you, except that I'll choose to skip the movie. As a fan of cinema myself, I think there are better things to watch.

[SoulLily]

Ah, I got this email just yesterday as well, from my sister.

This information has been researched and found be accurate. Please follow
the link to read for yourself.

http://snopes.com/politics/religion/compass.asp

You may already know about this, but I just learned about a kids movie
coming out in December starring Nicole Kidman . I believe it's called The
Golden Compass, and while it will be a watered down version, it is based on
a series of children's books about killing God (it is anti-Narnia). Please
follow this link, and then pass it on. From what I understand, the hope is
to get a lot of kids to see the movie - which won't seem too bad - and then
get the parents to buy the books for their kids for Christmas. The quotes
from the author sum it all up. I'm going to tell everyone about this movie.
I hope it totally bombs because we were all paying attention!

Please read the following article. I know to Christians how horrible this
is, but we shouldn't really be surprised, should we? Let's prayerfully deny
the enemy access to precious minds and souls.

What bothers me is how they simply state that the books are about killing God. They're not; that's just one of the many events of the trilogy. They're about love, tragedy, compassion, being kind to one another not only in times of crisis but all the time. They're about growing up. But most of all, they're about Lyra.
The second upsetting comment is that PP wrote the trilogy "to show the other side" of Narnia. It's not like he was sitting in his shed one day thinking about what to write and suddenly decided "I think I'll attack the Narnia books." They are so much deeper than that.
PP's objective with these books was not to "bash Christianity and promote atheism" as the article states. And "he wants to kill God in the minds of children," eh? In interviews he's plaintly stated that his agenda is not to promote or sell atheism in any way, simply to tell the story of Lyra, which he does beautifully.
These people are so narrow-minded. Anyone who's actually read the books can see that the message isn't encouraging people to "kill God", but encouraging them to be curious and thoughtful and kind.
I am a religious person myself, and in a few ways I agree with PP's ideas. Many things that people do "in the name of God" are wrong, like persecution and holy wars, and personally I think that that's what the trilogy really attacks, not faith itself. But hey, that's just my interpretation. And I think it'd be a wonderful thing if the movies drew people in to read the books. Because no matter how awesome the movie is, the book is about 10 times better (this I find is true for just about any film adaptation case).