My Studios

Yeah, I'm a fan of freedom of speech. Problem is, I also happen to appreciate actual good taste, which leaves me without a team to root for most of the time, lately.

I remain, as always...

Nico.

Nicodemus, you make it sound like he's against oppression in any form, not Christianity specifically:

Nicodemus wrote:

he's gone on-record as having characterized the "war on Heaven" depicted in His Dark Materials as being a sort of revolution against dogma, with the "hegemony" of God's celestial empire being upended and replaced with a "heavenly republic."

However, that isn't the case at all, he's anti-Christian:

thestonetable.com wrote:

Every Christian character in the series is rotten to the core, and none of them bothers to pretend otherwise. "The Christian religion," one of Pullman's main characters blandly explains, "is a very powerful and convincing mistake, that's all." thestonetable.com

Personally, I have no problem with Harry Potter, The Matrix, or "Fantasy" in general. I love it. And I have no problem with Pullman using witches, or Daemons (though I have to admit that causes me to raise my eyebrows). I DO have a problem with his war on my faith. And for that reason, and that reason alone, I do not intend to see this movie in theaters, and I plan on encouraging all of my family to stay away as well. I appreciate New Line's attempt to "water down" Pullman's message, and just tell a good story, which is why I'll probably see it on DVD. But at this point, unless something convinces me otherwise, I will be staying away from it. And honestly this is what I see as being a huge difference from Harry Potter, I loved the Harry Potter books and movies. Yet Pullman has managed to alienate me with HIS dogma. I wish storytellers would keep their agenda's to a minimum, let them be subtle, they'll reach more that way.

The base crowd, that "boycotted" Harry Potter, (Mostly out of ignorance and intolerance if you ask me) isn't the only crowd being alienated here. Will it have an impact on tickets sold? I have no idea. I would guess not, but there is that possibility.

Regarding the "daemon" excuse, Nico, I disagree, like I said it isn't a deal breaker for me, not even close. If he was unacquainted with Christianity, I would chalk it up to a difference in culture, religion, or whatever. But, and this is where the "eyebrow raising" comes in, he IS acquainted with it, deeply. And even more so against it. Is it coincidence? I started to read the books to find out, but I only got halfway through the first one before I gave up, probably because I was spending so much time analyzing that I couldn't get into it to enjoy it. And I do love to read, I've read all the Harry Potter books, Frank Herbert's Dune, though I admit I haven't read as many of those as I have watched the various mini-series and movies made on them, and even Stephen King. (BTW, how is Frank Herbert, "antagonistic toward Christianity"? I was younger when I read them so maybe I just missed it.)

On the other hand. I completely understand this:

Nicodemus wrote:

people who WANT to find something scandalous, managing to find something to bay about, surprise, surprise.

My in-laws are some of those people, I find it quite humorous that the words "Harry Potter" and "Stephen King" have taken on "profanity" status in their house.

Anyway, to get back to the point. Will it affect box office? Probably, but probably not noticeably. Second, as a Christian I object, not necessarily to the movies, but rather to the principal behind Pullman's stories and not even the stories themselves.

And that's my 2, well probably more like 200, cents.

As my pastor says: "God wants spiritual fruits, NOT religious nuts" pretty much sums it up.

I as a fellow Christian, respect your opinion, but have you in fact read the book? If you have, props to you for the effort! However the thing that I think bothers both Nico (who is *also* a fellow Christian, if I am correct from his posts?) and myself, is that the religious rumor mill spreads untrue opinions in place of facts that could be gleaned if someone were to actually read the book objectively and make up their own mind. So if you haven't actually read the book, a word of advice, don't believe everything you read on the web.

You are also arguing that a *fictional* opinion is oppressive towards you. In my mind you may as well say that because in the fictional world of Harry Potter there is a doorway in the middle of a london railroad leading to the burning depths of hell!.. er.. the magical world, that the author actually promotes that as reality. Or look at Planet of the Apes, they are opressing the whole human race! We should boycott. Totally.

You consider Chronicles of Narnia to be fine obviously (its a classic, and one of my favorite series of all time), but the whole series has consistently enflamed generations of feminists around the world for having tearfully helpless or purely evil characteristics in every female character, with no real stong female leads. Do, I agree? No. But think of how silly that sounds to YOU that someone would purport that this is an anti-female series.
Edit: HAH I just started reading the link you sent, and thats part of what its talking about >.< hilarious.

I'm not trying to belittle your opinion, so don't take it that way, you just seem to be taking a fictional story, about a non-realistic world where polar bears wear armour, very personally as if it is a direct attack on your faith.

Lovely wrote:

Good point Nico. If anything, films like the Saw series and other torture porn films should be boycotted.

Hear hear!!!! They're a danger to the very brains of man everywhere....Did you know that the average person's IQ drops by 24 points with every Saw film he watches????

Hmm, I get the funny feeling you didn't completely read my post, or quite possibly comprehend it (which would be entirely my fault, it was far too long and convoluted sometimes it's very difficult to express opinions simply).

becs wrote:

You are also arguing that a *fictional* opinion is oppressive towards you.

As I said, I have no problem with fiction or fictional opinions, it's when those opinions are backed by real animosity, that I take issue.

Let me find a better quote:

Christianity Today wrote:

Pullman regularly admits, even boasts, that his series is a blatant, calculated attack on Christianity. He also declares that he wrote it to counteract the influence of C.S. Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia. - Christianity Today Movie Review

This isn't just a fictional opinion becs, when someone names a religion by name in their books and then calls it a "powerful and convincing mistake."

I don't know, I'm not going to convince you of anything so I'm just going to let it lie right where it is. But let me say once more, for the record, that it is NOT the story, or the fantastical elements that I object to.

Understood, it is the fact that the vast majority of media/celebrities are vocally anti-christian. Why aren't we boycotting Lions for Lambs, considering Tom Cruise's anti-christian, scientologist leanings? Or as others said, why aren't we protesting the utterly disgusting state of American box office film in general? Why? Because the aforementioned "religious nuts" in general choose their causes poorly, and pretty much destroy all credibility Christians have as a whole.

by name in their books and then calls it a "powerful and convincing mistake."

Again, fictionally he can say whatever the hell he wants and that doesn't mean its true or that he actually has that level of venom for the faith. Whether it is or is not his true opinion, who are you to say his opinion is *wrong*? Think of all the severely anti-muslim movies out there, I haven't heard of any boycotts of those. What about movies or books about nazi germany, I'm pretty sure that Hitler said something equivalent of "powerful and convincing mistake" about the Jews, so should we not be able to include that in fictional or non-fictional account because it might be offensive?

Good points becs, and I'm starting to understand more where your coming from. I suppose the reason I have no feelings towards Lions for Lambs is because I know next to nothing about it. Why not boycott Tom Cruise himself? My first response is because I haven't seen his beliefs bleed through into his movies. I'm sure they have, but my point is I haven't seen them. Mostly because I've been avoiding him and his movies for a few years now cause I just don't like him, anyway.

becs wrote:

Why? Because the aforementioned "religious nuts" in general choose their causes poorly, and pretty much destroy all credibility Christians have as a whole.

Very strong words. I have felt the same at times, most specifically over the Harry Potter controversy. But I don't believe this is the case here.

becs wrote:

Again, fictionally he can say whatever the hell he wants and that doesn't mean its true or that he actually has that level of venom for the faith.

Probably the best point you've made, I truly have no idea what he believes, nor does anyone else. I do know the agenda that the books appear to portray, and again maybe I'm wrong, but I cannot in good conscience encourage my 12-year-old sister to go see a movie who's author condemns Christianity, even if it isn't a sincere condemnation.

becs wrote:

What about movies or books about nazi germany, I'm pretty sure that Hitler said something equivalent of "powerful and convincing mistake" about the Jews, so should we not be able to include that in fictional or non-fictional account because it might be offensive?

Absolutely, it's not about it being "offensive."

Wow. Let's not get into an accidental jihad, here, folks... There's plenty more appropriate places for that on the Internet.

To respond...

AzureWolf:

Nicodemus, you make it sound like [Philip Pullman]'s against oppression in any form, not Christianity specifically... that isn't the case at all, he's anti-Christian.

...Well, let me be clear: I'm far from an expert on the man. I've heard a couple interviews with him, and read more, and I'd had enough of all the innuendo and posturing on BOTH sides of His Dark Materials -- pro, and con -- so I recently decided to read the books for myself. I read The Golden Compass twice, cover to cover, once for entertainment and once for perspective, and I'm right now in the middle of Lyra's Oxford and a companion volume, not written by Pullman, about the "science" of HDM, that offers some insight about the scientific and, I suppose, epistemological concepts behind his books. (It's fascinating reading, btw.) I have glanced through The Subtle Knife and The Amber Spyglass, and have some notion of where the story goes, but I haven't actually read them, yet. So a pretty compelling case can be made that I'm far too ignorant to speak knowledgeably about Pullman, His Dark Materials or the price of tea in Svalbard.

However, that's never stopped me before...

I'm quite aware that Mr. Pullman is an atheist, and I guess if I could choose one word to describe his apparent disposition toward religiosity in general, and Christianity in particular, it would be, "antagonistic." I don't have a problem with that, personally. I was an agnostic for many years myself, and two of my greatest personal heroes, C.S. Lewis and the Apostle Paul, were once non-believers, themselves. And, yes, it's easy to make the connection that Pullman's "bias" against the tyranny of authority took specific form, in HDM, as a crusade of sorts against Christianity. But I saw no need in saying so, since I don't want to prejudice people not familiar with the material for OR against it, before they have an opportunity to read or watch it for themselves. I was trying to be tactful, a lost art I realize, and to respect readers of the Forum enough to trust them to draw their OWN conclusions, without ramming my own narrow, imperfect perspective down their throats. I wasn't being coy or disingenuous; "polite" might be the best word I can come up with right now.

But, since the cat's not only out of the bag, but racing down the hall and under the grandfather clock, now...

Every Christian character in the series is rotten to the core, and none of them bothers to pretend otherwise. "The Christian religion," one of Pullman's main characters blandly explains, "is a very powerful and convincing mistake, that's all."

Yeah. I get that, I do. But, you see, I'm trying, as a Christian but also, you know, as a (I flatter myself, perhaps) reasonable and halfway considerate being, to balance my own parochial perspectives against the needs of Forum readers to have information about how HDM's content may affect its Box-Office performance. Yes, I'm a Christian, and no, I don't agree with Pullman's orthodoxy, and both of those facts have very little to do with the question originally posed in this thread. And I tried to minimize the impact of both of these facts on my conclusions about whether a genuine "boycott" was warranted, or would be successful in impacting the film. I offered up what information I could to allow some perspective, and tried to leave my own conclusions at the door. If I omitted certain "facts," well, neither did I mention who lives or dies. To do so would have been a disservice to people here not familiar with the books, and so would, frankly, telling them what to think about Pullman's "message" and the books' "moral." Again I say, let people read the books for themselves and draw their own conclusions, without my or your or thestonetable.com's assertions influencing their judgments. But, the world is full of people who see an opportunity to correct, complete or contend with something, and can't help themselves from sticking their hands in the air and going, "Oooh! OOOH!!!" until they've had an opportunity to show off their erudition and insight. I've been known to do that on occasion, myself, far too often I'm sure for everyone around me.

And, perhaps I'm being bitchy about this, and I'm sorry for that, and it's possible as well I'm taking out my frustrations with a certain mayhem-engendering malcontent who has pissed in my Wheaties one too many times, today, and if that's the case, I'm sorry for that, too. I'm usually a pretty relaxed and levelheaded guy, you might be catching me on the wrong friggin' day.

Personally, I have no problem with Harry Potter, The Matrix, or "Fantasy" in general.

Neither do I. One of my very favorite series of all time is Stephen R. Donaldson's The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever and The Second Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, which is not exactly happy-fun-time material for a person of faith to experience. [Shrug] I love Star Trek, too, and I don't remember any Christmas trees on the Enterprise. (Or, for that matter, lavatories... perhaps not the correlation I intended to make, but I'm sure Mr. Pullman would appreciate it.) [Grin]

And I have no problem with Pullman using witches, or Daemons (though I have to admit that causes me to raise my eyebrows).

If you go back and read my original post in this thread, you'll find we share quite a bit of common ground, AzureWolf.

I DO have a problem with his war on my faith.

[Nodding] I understand. I'm not a big fan of Pullman's perspective, his process or his eventual "parable," either, but, then, I happen to believe the whole Western WORLD is at war with faith, so I put Pullman's efforts in a certain kind of perspective. When the whole damn mountain is falling on you, the trajectory of a single boulder is, well, not inconsequential, but certainly not your biggest concern at the time, you know?

And for that reason, and that reason alone, I do not intend to see this movie in theaters, and I plan on encouraging all of my family to stay away as well. I appreciate New Line's attempt to "water down" Pullman's message, and just tell a good story, which is why I'll probably see it on DVD.

Understood, and I wouldn't try to convince you otherwise. I have faith that you are quite capable of making the best decision for your and your family's peace of mind, and nothing I've said has been in any kind of effort to "sell" this film, nor to "hurt" it.

Not that I have any right to judge, but there's something not quite logical about those two statements of yours, there, being so close together. Forget the family; I don't mean that. I get that you don't want to contribute to Compass' Box Office in theaters, but, by buying (or renting) the DVD, wouldn't you still be, in a manner of speaking, both condoning this Material [heh] and contributing to its eventual bottom line? I don't get that. Look, I have a similar story. A certain, very talented, filmmaker named Roman Polanski once got an underage girl sloppy drunk and stoned out of her mind and had his way with her in his mansion. He left the United States and has never returned; he's under indictment to this day for statutory rape, and his exile is as complete as Charlie Chaplin's. But he still makes films, and some great ones as I understand them, including The Pianist, an Oscar-winner some years ago. I love Adrien Brody, I love World War II films. I won't see the film. Period. Not in theaters, not on DVD, not on Pay-Per-View or AMC, the broadcast nets, the Internet or if it happens to be projected into the sky directly above my house. If it's ever beamed into my retinas, I suppose I'll have to endure it, but that's the only way I'm seeing that -- or any other -- Roman Polanski film, ever. I'm sure I'm depriving myself of a fantastic cinematic experience, and I'm okay with that. Friends tell me, Oh, man! How can you NOT have SEEN that MOVIE?!?! Easy, I tell them. I have principles, and they are inviolable, even if they're damned inconvenient at times. The man raped a little girl, and that's the end of the discussion, and the end of his career as far as I'm concerned. I don't give a damn if he directs a biopic of Lord Nelson, the real story of the Kennedy Assassination or a seventh Star Wars film. He doesn't exist for me. And that's all there is.

But at this point, unless something convinces me otherwise, I will be staying away from it.

Okay. I support your decision.

And honestly this is what I see as being a huge difference from Harry Potter, I loved the Harry Potter books and movies. Yet Pullman has managed to alienate me with HIS dogma.

I totally understand. I think you're making the right decision.

I wish storytellers would keep their agenda's to a minimum, let them be subtle, they'll reach more that way.

See, here's where I disagree with you. People write what they know, what they experience, what they feel, what they believe, what they hope for, what they aspire to, what they dream of. An author can be divorced from his or her perspective, can separate their artistic efforts from their own individual context, about as much as Picasso could have divorced his paintings from what his eye saw, or Beethoven could have ignored the sounds ringing in his own ear. Jackson Pollock and Andy Warhol and Claude Monet created entirely new movements because they could not divorce the world they would come to influence from the world they, themselves, SAW. There's more of Michelangelo in David than there is David, more of van Gogh in The Starry Night than there are actual stars, more of da Vinci in The Mona Lisa than, perhaps, there was ever A "Mona Lisa." Dividing an artist's work from an artist's perspective is every bit as impossible as -- in Pullman's terms -- severing a human being from its daemon. The creative spark is, if anything, the human soul.

However, perhaps I digress.

The base crowd, that "boycotted" Harry Potter, (Mostly out of ignorance and intolerance if you ask me) isn't the only crowd being alienated here.

Perhaps not, but it's the only one with the GOAL of SELF-alienation.

Will it have an impact on tickets sold? I have no idea. I would guess not, but there is that possibility.

Yes.

Regarding the "daemon" excuse, Nico, I disagree...

Wasn't aware I was making an excuse for anyone, just expressing a hypothesis.

BTW, how is Frank Herbert, "antagonistic toward Christianity"?

I don't know if HE was, but take a look at the machinations of the Bene Gesserit, and Dune's myriad references to the Orange Catholic dogma, and tell me this guy had an optimistic vision of the future Church of Rome...

My in-laws are some of those people...

Well, for me, it was my parents. My in-laws are more scandalous than scandalized.

I find it quite humorous that the words "Harry Potter" and "Stephen King" have taken on "profanity" status in their house.

My parents were Opus Dei, imagine what low esteeem they held the "Vatican II" Church in...

...[A]s a Christian I object, not necessarily to the movies, but rather to the principal behind Pullman's stories and not even the stories themselves.

You have a far firmer grasp, I would surmise, of Pullman's eschatology than I do, so I would conclude you have good reason to feel the way you do.

And that's my 2, well probably more like 200, cents.

[Grin] I feel your pain.

Whew... Okay, your turn, becs, then I'm calling it quits on this schismatic discussion...

"God wants spiritual fruits, NOT religious nuts"...

ROTFL!!! Oh, that's GOOD.

...[T]he thing that I think bothers both Nico (who is *also* a fellow Christian, if I am correct from his posts?) and myself, is that the religious rumor mill spreads untrue opinions in place of facts that could be gleaned if someone were to actually read the book objectively and make up their own mind. So if you haven't actually read the book, a word of advice, don't believe everything you read on the web.

Well. Yes, I'm a Christian, and, as I said, a more "conservative" one, you'll be unlikely to find on this site, I suspect. However, I'm not particularly threatened by nonreligious or contrareligious or antireligious elements in the world. I'm a mature man (well, that's debatable, I suppose) who's very secure in his beliefs and who works to accomodate people of other belief systems, or no particular belief system, in his world because -- guess what? -- there are people of different beliefs in the world, whether I like it or not, and either I spend my life tilting at windmills, or I engage the world on MY terms, but not so xenophobically as to REJECT the world, or those who inhabit it but don't happen to share my exceedingly particular point of view.

I'm not a moral relativist in any sense. I believe there is Good in the world, and there is Evil, and there is absolute, definite, tangible Right, and equal and opposite Wrong. I am commanded to Love, but feel justified in what could be called righteous Hate, but I try not to indulge the latter when it's blind and dumb and stupid, as well. So, rather than eschew the world for its many contrary notions, I try to engage it, and come to an accomodation that challenges me, informs me and, ultimately, strengthens me. I wrestle with my faith, and I wrestle with the world, and somehow, I emerge tempered, tested and transformed. It doesn't work for everybody, but it does me. And I believe that God has given each man (and woman) the ability to discern what is real and what is false, and I have faith that all who are meant to share my beliefs, will, and that those who don't, are not intended to. I don't push against the ocean, I rise and fall with the tide. (And try to get a good tan, now and then.)

You are also arguing that a *fictional* opinion is oppressive towards you. In my mind you may as well say that because in the fictional world of Harry Potter there is a doorway in the middle of a london railroad leading to the burning depths of hell!.. er.. the magical world, that the author actually promotes that as reality.

What's funny is, many Christians consider C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkein and Orson Scott Card as "dangerous" as Philip Pullman. Put three Christians in a room and two will gang up on the third for his or her habits, or lack of spiritual purity, or the color and brightness of their halo. What a sad commentary on faith. We are in Babel yet.

You consider Chronicles of Narnia to be fine obviously (its a classic, and one of my favorite series of all time), but the whole series has consistently enflamed generations of feminists around the world for having tearfully helpless or purely evil characteristics in every female character, with no real stong female leads. Do, I agree? No. But think of how silly that sounds to YOU that someone would purport that this is an anti-female series.

And Christopher Columbus was a drunk, and Thomas Jefferson owned slaves, and John Kennedy was a philanderer. The only thing more American than our ridiculous hero worship, is our equally ridiculous need to destroy our heroes once we've recognized them, to madly throw up alabaster pedestals and tear them down with even greater fervor. There's a quote from Rudy, given voice by the great character actor Robert Prosky: "I've been in the priesthood thirty years, and I've come to two immutable conclusions. There is a God... and, I'm not Him." Word.

I'm not trying to belittle your opinion, so don't take it that way, you just seem to be taking a fictional story, about a non-realistic world where polar bears wear armour, very personally as if it is a direct attack on your faith.

I think we all need to go to our corners and come back at the next bell. I'm leaving town for a few days, I'll catch up next week.

AzureWolf, again, sorry if I was a jerk. It happens.

This is why I didn't get into all this in my original post, guys. This right here.

I remain, as always...

Friggin' EXHAUSTED. Aren't you? Hell, I only had to write it, you had to actually read it. Quit reading me 'til your headache goes away, is my advice.

...Go!

ashkul88 wrote:

Lovely wrote:

Good point Nico. If anything, films like the Saw series and other torture porn films should be boycotted.

Hear hear!!!! They're a danger to the very brains of man everywhere....Did you know that the average person's IQ drops by 24 points with every Saw film he watches????

Well, I've seen all four of them, and 4 x 24 equals..... hmm... no, don't tell me... 15. Yeah, that's it. Well, that doesn't sound so bad!

Life is bleayaaadlahhhh. (Sorry, had to catch my own drool there.) (Wink.)

Nico: Great Caesar's Ghost, man. Some of us have TV to watch!!!

First, let me say that I apologize to the Fantaverse as it were, for my "accidental jihad". I didn't realize I was cramming my beliefs down anyone's throat, merely sharing them. Going back I see your point Nico, about not wanting to make this leap.

Other than that, all I have to say is "Bravo, Nico". You captured most of what I had intended to say and said it better than I. Your apology for bitchiness is accepted.

I guess a simple, "I won't be seeing this movie" would have sufficed, oh well.

wow, Nico, that was the accidental Jihad right there....i mean, how can any human being pump that much info out at one sitting?? my friend, you should just edit that post and send copies of it to all the major publishers and before you know it, you're writing religious books instead of that history book you were researching for....

*GRIN*

AzureWolf wrote:

Why not boycott Tom Cruise himself? My first response is because I haven't seen his beliefs bleed through into his movies.

He's not in it, but just watch Battlefield Earth to witness Tom Cruise's religion in action. They love dreadlocks.

Nicodemus wrote:

I don't give a damn if he directs a biopic of Lord Nelson, the real story of the Kennedy Assassination or a seventh Star Wars film. He doesn't exist for me. And that's all there is.

So I guess you didn't watch Rush Hour 3 then? Aren't you lucky? The world is cruel sometimes. FUCK YOU BRETT RATNER!!!!!

As for Bill Pullman, he played a great president. Only if all presidents went up and burned some alien ass to pieces. The world will be much better.

Oops, wrong Pullman.

If there's one film we should boycott, it's Meet the Spartans. The next spoof masterpiece from acclaimed writers/directors Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer. Kevin Sorbo, I'm very disappointed in you. Fire you agent now!

As for Golden Compass, it will totally rule. Eva Green's in it = instant rulage!

ashkul88 wrote:

i agree with what 6 said earlier....about any press being good press....i think this backlash will only fuel speculation about the movie and increase BO intake....

I agree. I was on the fence about seeing this one and whaddya know? I want to see it know. I didn't know the author was an atheist! Sounds exciting! I just hope it has enough legs to fend off the worthy competition during the holidays.

JackO wrote:

I just hope it has enough legs to fend off the worthy competition during the holidays.

Don't worry, Eva Green and Nicole Kidman will provide them.

ohnaut wrote:

JackO wrote:

I just hope it has enough legs to fend off the worthy competition during the holidays.

Don't worry, Eva Green and Nicole Kidman will provide them.

My Studios

ADVICE & ANALYSIS: