ROTTEN TOMATOES: The Golden Compass Pointing Toward Controversy?

The Golden Compass Pointing Toward Controversy?

Prepare the hysterical boycotts!

by Jeff Giles | August 21, 2007

Magic-loving moviegoers who have thrilled to the twists and turns of such tween-friendly literary adaptations as The Chronicles of Narnia and the Harry Potter series will have their pick of sorcerous films this fall, including The Seeker: The Dark Is Rising and The Golden Compass. Plenty of controversy, too, if the past is any indication -- and oh look, here's some already!

The Golden Compass, opening December 7, was adapted from the His Dark Materials series of books, a bestselling trilogy by author Philip Pullman that incorporates every ingredient necessary for a shot at box-office fantasy gold, including magic, monsters, and a battle between the forces of good and evil. Unfortunately for the filmmakers, Pullman's books also include a fair amount of what has been perceived to be anti-Catholic rhetoric; in the first book, for instance, the church is in the business of kidnapping children and conducting some rather unpleasant experiments on them.

Naturally, when compiling their Fall Movie Preview (which is nice and all, but really doesn't hold a candle to our own), those muckrakers over at Entertainment Weekly asked Compass star Nicole Kidman how much Vatican-bashing we can expect to see on the big screen. The actress responded:

"It has been watered down a little...I was raised Catholic, the Catholic Church is part of my essence," Kidman said.

"I wouldn't be able to do this film if I thought it were at all anti-Catholic."

Of course, you just know comments like these aren't going to stop a tidal wave of outrage from conservative magpies, and the Sydney Morning Herald quotes what's sure to be an early harbinger of the response from some quarters:

"Clergymen who kidnap children. Witches who aren't wicked. Even a pair of sexually ambiguous angels. If you thought Harry Potter was blasphemous, wait till you get a look at [this] trilogy," wrote one film critic last week.

The Catholic League's William A. Donohue is usually good for a laugh. Can't wait to hear what he thinks of all this.

Source: Sydney Morning Herald

Related Items

Movie:	The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe
	The Seeker
Celeb:	Nicole Kidman

(1-20 of 128 posts) | Reply

IMAmoose24 writes:
on Aug 21 2007 08:14 AM

Oh joy, more anti-catholicism in movies. How original...

Can't Hollywood find something besides the Bush administration or the catholic church to bash. It's really old by now.

(Reply to this)

Baccus83 writes:
on Aug 21 2007 08:16 AM

Cry me a river.

It's the caveat of fantasy that people see it as so ripe for commentary. Philip Pullman's trilogy just so happens to include some jabs at overzealous religious types, but so does - oh I don't know - why don't you name me a major work of fantastical fiction in the last century that doesn't!

And I love how it's always the Catholics that get offended. Why is it automatically assumed that the Catholic church is the intended target, and not fundamentalist religions? Are we not allowed to write stories about kidnapping clergymen without having it be "anti-Catholic?" Must all witches be evil? Are we in the thirteenth century? Where does a film critic get off calling a movie blasphemous without having seen it?

Pisses me off.

(Reply to this)

rustdog writes:
on Aug 21 2007 08:20 AM

"kidnapping children and conducting some rather unpleasant experiments on them."

That sounds about right. Just add the word molestation and you've got everything covered.

(Reply to this)

witherwings writes:
on Aug 21 2007 08:20 AM

Angels ARE sexually ambiguous, according to Christianity. Actually angels have no sex at all. Whatever. His Dark Materials is an atheist's Chronicles of Narnia, I always say. While I am a Christian myself, I don't mind an atheist writing his or her perspective on the world in this way. I think it's sad, but it's interesting as an art form. If I were a parent wanting to teach my children my faith, I would explain to them the difference. Big deal. Good grief, people, have some faith in your faith!

(Reply to this)

Baccus83 writes:
on Aug 21 2007 08:31 AM

In reply to this comment (#1059194)
And, as somebody who's read the books, I can safely say that they are not anti-Catholic. However, if you go into it with a bad attitude, looking to be offended, then you'll find something.

And THIS is the thing that gets me angry; people who want to be offended because they want to feel victimized. As if a fantasy film is really going to shatter their world and make them a laughing stock, as if it is personally attacking them. Have we not heard of allegory? Phillip Pullman's stories use conventions of the church as a framework for fantasy, just like C.S. Lewis did with "Narnia."

What sickens me is that certain Catholics think that they own the concept of angels, or clergy, or witches, and that anything that puts a different spin on these concepts than what they're used to is "blasphemous."

Just because the book includes theological symbolism does not mean it is blasphemous. Just because the book is concerned with issues that concern Catholics does not mean it is heretical. Just because characters in the book that belong to a church do terrible things does not automatically make it anti-church. Must every clergyman portrayed in fiction be good? No!

Can we just get over ourselves?

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on Aug 21 2007 08:40 AM

Boo hoo, so the Catholic Church gets beat up in a movie. Well, they are one of the most powerful groups on the planet. Why should they be worried by a couple of movies?

Large institutions are often portrayed as antagonistic in books and movies. Do people (other than a few wackos) claim that a movie about the Vietnam War is "Anti-American"? Or a movie where the government spies on it's own people (which isn't really fiction these days) like Enemy of the State?

(Reply to this)

jaqu7 writes:
on Aug 21 2007 08:43 AM

Witherwings, you are an anchor of reason.

I do think it is natural for people to become emotionally charged over the issue of religion. I've read all the books, and I enjoyed them. But Pullman's stories are provocative, whether intentionally or unintenionally, and people are going to respond to that. I don't think most people (including Catholics) mind having certain Catholics be villainous. But Pullman's overall message will make some people uncomfortable and they have a right to respond accordingly.

(Reply to this)

MrSnuggles2k2 writes:
on Aug 21 2007 08:50 AM

For those idiots who seem to revel in catholic bashing, where are you when hollywood continuously caters to islamonazi fanatics? when was the last time a muslim was the bad guy in a movie? cant do that, because muslims might go ape**** and kill people. catholics, well they just "cry" about it on Fox News. am i right?

(Reply to this)

Baccus83 writes:
on Aug 21 2007 08:50 AM

They certainly have a right to be uncomfortable, but the problem is that they're so many people think that uncomfortable = blasphemous. Just because something makes you uncomfortable doesn't mean it's morally wrong, it just means it doesn't accord with what you're used to thinking.

(Reply to this)

Jsm158 writes:
on Aug 21 2007 08:59 AM

MrSnuggles, that has to be the single most ignorant statement I've ever read. First of all, Muslims are "bad guys" in movies ALL THE TIME. Second of all, MOST Muslims are not violent at all, and despite your narrow-minded views, they don't want to blow up buildings and kill people. Those are only the very, very small percent of Muslims, known as the Muslim Extremists.

(Reply to this)

kenny356 writes:
on Aug 21 2007 09:11 AM

Actually, I've read all the books, and anit-catholic might be a little harsh. Now if you were to say anti-church in general well that would be more. But it really only gets really anti-god and whatnot in the last book.

(Reply to this)

Baccus83 writes:
on Aug 21 2007 09:18 AM

How about "The Kingdom" coming out in a couple of weeks? Muslim bad guys there.

How about that one season of 24?

I can name more, but I'll stop.

The reason for Catholic / Christian bad guys is probably because the writers are more comfortable writing about Catholics / Christians than they are writing about Muslims, a religion they might not know that much about outside of some prevalent stereotypes.

(Reply to this)

witherwings writes:
on Aug 21 2007 09:21 AM

In reply to this comment (#1059330)
Yes, the last book was very preachy in its anti-God message (But so is C.S. Lewis in its pro-God message! Art should not be censored according to its message in a free society.). It's funny to me that they're getting so worked up over this. The anti-church bias, which is probably the more correct label, didn't phase me; I hardly noticed it. I guess I'm saying that if THIS bothers them, wait until the third movie hits the screens.

(Reply to this)

Xylemicarious writes:
on Aug 21 2007 09:25 AM

My step mom is Catholic and loves the books. They're really a commentary on fanatical religion in general and how they oppose progress and knowledge. And sorry to say, but that's not even really an opinion. Throughout history, fanatical religions have always opposed new ideas and progressivism. Always have, always will.

(Reply to this)

jaqu7 writes:
on Aug 21 2007 09:27 AM

You're right. I agree that it's anti-god rhetoric Kenny, the last book in particular. I found them to be well written and thoroughly entertain, though I am a Christian. I knew from the onset that Pullman is a secular guy, and his stories reflect it. He has a particular outlook and writes from that perspective, the same as Kurt Vonnegut, or C.S. Lewis for that matter. But the moment he released his stories to the public, the public has a right to respond. If people think the stories are blasphemous, fair enough. They should have the right to say so without being called idiots or whatever else.

(Reply to this)

witherwings writes:
on Aug 21 2007 09:31 AM

In reply to this comment (#1059343)
Yeah, the Enlightenment and the Renaissance, sheesh, all that religious art was so backwards. And Plato was such an atheist...

And then Hitler and Mussolini and Stalin were such wonderful Christians.

(Reply to this)

jaqu7 writes:
on Aug 21 2007 09:52 AM

For the record, I'm pretty sure Stalin was an atheist. And based on their lives, I don't think Hitler or Mussolini were Christians, at least not in the sense that they were followers of Christ. Politically. But that doesn't mean much.

(Reply to this)

witherwings writes:
on Aug 21 2007 10:02 AM

Exactly, jaqu7. My last comment was riddled with sarcasm, in response to Xylem's statement that religion equals regression of thought. I am not arguing that religion equals PROgression of thought, now, I am only pointing out the fallacy of Xylem's statement. Via sarcasm. Sorry about the confusion.

(Reply to this)

Burninator1 writes:
on Aug 21 2007 10:12 AM

I actually have read His Dark Materials several times since they are one of my favorite series. I would say that they are anti-church and anti-god but that they do not specifically target the Catholic Church. The Church in The Golden Compass is assumed to be the Catholic Church but it is never mentioned by name therefore could be any church. The books do not reach their ultimate church-bashing until they arrive at the third book entitled The Amber Spyglass. This book deals with a dark angel, Metatron, the death of God and chaos in heaven. Most importantly, God is said not to be the original creator of Heaven and Earth and rather more of a Napolean-like figure from the book Animal Farm. You can see why they are touchy subjects with the Church. However, this is fiction and furthermore fantasy so everyone should just take all of this with a grain of salt.

(Reply to this)

jaqu7 writes:
on Aug 21 2007 10:20 AM

Gotcha. Sorry I didn't pick up on the sarcasm Wither. My bad.

(Reply to this)

Related Links

The Golden Compass

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links