God cut from Dark Materials Film

[central scrutinizer]

Another example of religious-based censorship. I don't know how many of you have read Pullman's fantasy/scifi trilogy, The Golden Compass, The Subtle Knife, The Amber Spyglass, but it has a very different take on religion and God - God is portrayed as sort of a dictator in his dotage who is fighting to retain control. The books are usually classified as "juvenile fiction". But now they are making a movie of it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4077987.stm

excerpt:

The director and screenwriter of the film adaptation of Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials is to remove references to God and the church in the movie.

Chris Weitz, director of About a Boy, said the changes were being made after film studio New Line expressed concern.

The books tell of a battle against the church and a fight to overthrow God.

"They have expressed worry about the possibility of perceived anti-religiosity," Weitz told a His Dark Materials fans' website.

Pullman's trilogy has been attacked by some Christian teachers and by the Catholic press as blasphemy.

<snip>

"You have to recognise that it is a challenge in the climate of Bush's America,"

end excerpt

[Coventina]

1. How weak is their faith?

This is something I just don't "get" about censorship.

Is your faith so weak that the mere existence of a movie (never mind if you go to see it or not) going to threaten you in some way?

To me, censorship is basically admitting that your worldview is so shaky that anything could disrupt it and throw you into confusion.

Geez.

[Anakin Skywalker]

35. Damn Right, Coventina!

Makes a hell lot of sense, what you said.

[CornField]

61. Funny story about my sister and the "curse"

My family is full of fanatical christian fundamentalists. After having an argument with a sister about my pagan leanings, I decided to play a joke. I put some feathers in a box... added some herbs... some esential oils... and then drizzled a dark red ink over the top. I mailed the thing to her.

Long story short, she came completely unglued about it -- assured that I had placed some sort of curse on her and her house. She phoned and demanded I remove it. I tried to explain that it was just a stupid joke... she wouldn't believe me. To my knowledge, anything bad which happens in her life is still the end result of my "curse" on her.

That's how strong their faith is -- they place more significance in a box of herbs, feathers and ink than in their own diety.

[itzamirakul]

2. Why bother..

to even make the film if the main concept is being removed?

[phantom power]

18. He should make it in New Zealand

He could use the all the infrastructure that Jackson left behind after LOTR.

Although, I don't know if that would allow him to bypass the major studios or not.

[Khephra]

42. It's being used to make the first Narnia film

I don't know if they're making more than one, but Narnia scooped up a lot of Jackson staff.

[phantom power]

46. Well, Narnia ought to be cool. But these Dark Materials books seem

more interesting and unusual.

[NYC]

49. I would agree with you, but

often the main concept of a book is not contained in the movie. Also, there is still money to be made by the book's author, even if the movie doesn't follow the book.

[LynzM]

51. I second that.

It's a main theme throughout the book- the nature of God, and the role of the church. Without that, you lose a HUGE part of the story. Then again, you probably lose most of that story condensing it to movie-length, anyway.

[EarlG]

3. Hrm

I actually just finished reading the series. I thought it would make a cool movie while I was reading it, but I'm a bit confused as to how they can remove references to God (known as the Authority in the series) since that's kinda the entire point of the story.

Personally I liked the way Pullman handled the "religious" aspects of the story; I never really felt that he was slamming on the church or religion in general - just using certain religious aspects (eg. heaven, the Authority, the church) as characters and settings in a fantasy novel.

I agree that the series has "a very different take on religion."

[Odonata]

19. I loved those books

There's no point in making a film if they're going remove religious references.

[nodehopper]

31. I thought he was slamming a specific trend in abuses of religion in histor

how religion was used to repress knowledge and to fuel greed and ambition without being the ethical and spritiual system it was supposed to be.

But those books are about goodness, morality and ethics, I would want to raise my children to be like Lyra and Will. In the whole series they always think of the consequences of their decisions and their ethical obligations first....And the "Authority" isn't even God, it's a corrupt angel.

If they are not going to make the movies the way the book is written they shouldn't bother making them at all.

[davidinalameda]

59. exactly

there's no story without the whole God thing and how those around him took over Heaven

it will be interesting to see how they do the bears and the witches though

[WildClarySage]

4. I wondered, when I heard they were making this film

how they were gonna get around that. There's no way a movie with that premise would be made and watched in Jesusland. Of course it would give the fundie's something to focus on besides our liberal bodies...

[patdem]

5. Wasn't Rushdie's (sp) book called blasphemy???

'The Satanic Verses'...this is just the same!!!

I had to correct my spelling!!

[samwisefoxburr]

6. It's happening in other movies, too...

...The DOOM movie based on the computer game, has all references to demons and Hell taken out. It's now about a virus that mutates humans, which DOES NOT MAKE IT DOOM!

[gatorboy]

11. Nope! It makes it Resident Evil.

And they already did a piss poor job on those movies. Why make another and call it DOOM?

Skip it and make a Quake movie :D

Hellboy would never have gotten made in the new Bush country...

[shrike]

7. This is silly

It's fiction. Fiction means make-believe.

[gtar100]

8. Which makes it just too close to their religion

[BiggJawn]

13. I was going to say that...

But I didn't want to strike the match to the impending flame-storm...:evilgrin:

[shrike]

26. Well, guys, I am a churchgoer

Catholic, in fact. I must be secure enough not to be threatened by this sort of thing. I must not even mind all the Christian-bashing on DU because I've been hanging out here for years.

[Sabriel]

9. Next, they have to remove cannibalism from the Donner Party movie

Give me a break! The Pullman trilogy is all about theology and "God"! F'ing idiots.

[crimnos]

10. "Bush's America"

:puke:

I haven't read the series in question, but I may have to check it out now. Sounds interesting.

[BiggJawn]

12. Weitz should quit in disgust.

Instead of letting the "Ministry of Ministry" force him, through a perceived threat that may not even be there, through his studio into changing the story.

Isn't that called "whoring"?
"I'm really proud to be involved in this project, and I'm sure it will be an Epic...Even if the Daughters of Carrie Nation tell me to cut the Heart out of the story...OK, so it'll be a excreable FLOP, but I still get paid...."

That'd be like trying to film "TLOTR" without Sauron...

[Voltaire99]

23. Weitz disgusted? It's partly Weitz' fault!

He seems to be behind having Tom Stoppard fired from the project.

Now, who would you rather have adapt Pullman's books? The legendary playwright and screenwriter of Shakespeare in Love--or the hack who gave us American Pie?

[Khephra]

14. You might as well leave Christ out of The Passion

There's absolutely no point in making or seeing this movie now. The studio has effectively castrated the storyline.

[Shakespeare]

15. NOOOOOOO! How incredibly stupid and cowardly.

Congratulations, they've just excised the entire plot. :eyes:

[central scrutinizer]

16. The daemons will

be changed into warm, fuzzy little bunnies and bear cubs who will cavort in a meadow and have hilarious misadventures but in the end they will learn valuable lessons about abstinence, unquestioning piety, and conformity.

[Shakespeare]

17. The very idea of that....

....would no doubt change Pantalaimon into an arching, hissing wildcat. Bite your tongue.

;-)

[jackelope72]

20. "The climate of Bush's America"

In other words, "Baby, it's cold outside."

I have an idea. Let's remake the original "Star Wars" trilogy without Darth Vader and the Emperor!

Let's do "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" without the White Witch!

Absolutely disgusting.

[Anakin Skywalker]

36. What? You Can't Do That!

I am too damn important to be left out! *hiss*

[WindRavenX]

21. I love these books

Sadly, it looks like the movie is going to suck. The religious themes are CRUCIAL to the themes and plot!
I fucking hate this country sometimes.

[Anakin Skywalker]

37. Censorship Sucks!

I guess I just have to read the books instead of watching this movie then!

[villager]

22. disgusting and sad.

Pullman should withdraw the rights -- or at least, his approval of this bowdlerization, er, "adaptation..."

[truth2power]

39. I was gonna ask that.

Doesn't Pullman have anything to say about this?

I can't imagine that any contract he signed would allow the screen writers to bowderlize his work.

[villager]

44. alas, most contracts give the book authors little say...

...in how the adaptation is done...

But he could still let it be known how gutless this is, how it replicates the very thing Lyra is fighting in the books...

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[shrike]

25. A message to Angelique from one of 'us people'

1. Americans -- and I'd have to include you among them -- have a very skewed idea of morals, and I don't think it's the Democrats' fault. How they can consider a man who set 1,200-plus people to their deaths, needlessly, is beyond me.

2. What the hell does morality have to do with who is president? What difference does it make if the president of the United States believes in God or goes to church? I'd really like an intelligent answer to this one -- and I have a feeling I won't get it.

2. "Us people" include folks like myself. I am Roman Catholic, attend church every week and my faith is not questionable -- so, unlike you, I think myself well qualified to respond. If my faith -- or anyone else's faith -- is so weak that it can be challenged by a movie -- and it is a MOVIE -- then it isn't much of a faith.

[nodehopper]

28. what exactly are you doing on this board then?

Preaching?

There are plenty of liberal/progressive Christians and otherwise religious figures here. No one is talking about how God is bad and Christians are idiotic. Scary fundamentalist Christians who believe the Rapture is coming and care more about banning gay marriage than about crimes against humanity in Abu Ghraib are a very particular group that we critique.

I am sure you haven't read the books in question, but they are deeply spiritual and firmly grounded in ethics. Their critique is against the way the Church has been used historically to abuse the disenfrenchised and to repress learning.

[muriel_volestrangler]

32. 'We people' are quite happy with the discussion of theological matters

as are thinking clerics, such as the Archbishop of Canterbury (Williams Backs Pullman: "Philip Pullman's fantasy novels, which have been branded anti-Christian propaganda by some critics, should form part of religious education in schools, the Archbishop of Canterbury has told Tony Blair.")

Conversation between the Archbishop and Philip Pullman

RW: I suppose one of the questions I would like to hear more about from Philip is what has happened to Jesus in the church in this world (of His Dark Materials), because one of the interesting things for me in the model of the church in the plays and the books, is it's a church, as it were, without redemption.

It's entirely about control. And although I know that's how a lot of people do see the church, you won't be surprised to know that that's not exactly how I see it. Chance would be a fine thing! There is also the other question which I raised last week about the fascinating figure of The Authority in the books and the plays, who is God for all practical purposes in lots of people's eyes, but yet, of course, is not the Creator. So those are of course the kinds of differences that I am intrigued by here.

PP:Well, to answer the question about Jesus first, no, he doesn't figure in the teaching of the church, as I described the church in the story. I think he's mentioned once, in the context of this notion of wisdom that works secretly and quietly, not in the great courts and palaces of the earth, but among ordinary people and so on. And there are some teachers who have embodied this quality, but whose teaching has perhaps been perverted or twisted or turned, and been used in a fashion that they themselves didn't either desire or expect or could see happening.
...
The figure of The Authority is rather easier. In the sort of creation myth that underlies His Dark Materials, which is never fully explicit but which I was discovering as I was writing it, the notion is that there never was a Creator, instead there was matter, and this matter gradually became conscious of itself and developed Dust. Dust sort of precedes from matter as a way of understanding itself. The Authority was the first figure that condensed, as it were, in this way and from then on he was the oldest, the most powerful, the most authoritative. And all the other angels at first believed he was the Creator and then some angels decided that he wasn't, and so we had the temptation and the Fall etc - all that sort of stuff came from that.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2004/03/17/bodark17.xml

Many people think these are some of the best children's books ever written. It is a sad reflection on the climate of wilful ignorance in the USA that the filmmakers have retreated from showing the story as written. Maybe they should film one version for the Free World, and another for the Religiously Blinkered?

[Nihil]

52. Good point

> Maybe they should film one version for the Free World, and another
> for the Religiously Blinkered?

How about having the first release as the US version and the extended
("Director's Cut") DVD showing all of the missing scenes, the complete
plot, all of the bits that actually tie the books together ...

(The books are brilliant - especially the first one - and I'd recommend
them to anyone who hasn't read them yet.)

[nodehopper]

27. so weird...esp. since the dictatorial guy isn't even god, it's an angel

(spoilers)

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


And the whole authority is a sham...when "God" (the oldest angel) really is finally encountered he is an old, senile man trapped in a glass box who is grateful to expire when the main characters free him from the box...they don't even realize that God has just died in front of them.

[DrWeird]

29. I detect a PR stunt.

perhaps.

[Briar]

30. Grovelling coward

He should be ashamed of himself, backing down to a mob of rabid religious loonies.

[daleo]

33. Next step: A new film of 1984

But, after removing all those negative references to Big Brother.

[Withywindle]

34. ??!????

That moment is the moral lynchpin/crucial climax-turning-point of the themes in the whole book (and you're right about the characters not even fully realizing what has just happened). It makes everything else make much less sense and mean much less. What the hell!

I suppose the scheming Metatron and the two male angels in love are right out too...


Disgusting. It's such an awesome story.

[politicat]

38. You can't remove the church from His Dark Materials....

They're the central force opposing Lyra. You remove the church and the story falls apart. The Oblation Board is part of the church.

Fucking New Line. I hope Pullman retained rights and can pull the script from them. Such bullshit.

Pcat

[muriel_volestrangler]

41. So far it seems Pullman is OK with this

Although he is not directly involved with the film, the author has had many meetings with the team and has seen a treatment, or outline, of the first of the three films.

Pullman was unavailable for comment yesterday, but his agent, Caradoc King, said that he was happy with the work so far. “Of course New Line want to make money, but Mr Weitz is a wonderful director and Philip is very supportive. You have to recognise that it is a challenge in the climate of Bush’s America,” he said.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1393306,00.html

[politicat]

47. Pullman has had lots of money thrown at him. Writers can be bought...

We're not that well paid.

Gak. Hopefully, enough outcry would make them change their minds... I've sent it on to my atheist organizations hoping to get some awareness running.

Pcat

[Briar]

40. "a challenge in the climate of Bush's America"

You bet. "His Dark Materials" is great precisely because it challenges irrationality, superstition and bigotry. A sanitised version of the film would be a travesty and not worth making, let alone seeing.

[neweurope]

43. Don't cry because of the movie.

Cry for lost freedom of speech. SHOUT about lost freedom of speech.

[eridani]

45. Don't ever eat this guy's chili

His recipe I'm sure leaves out the chili powder.

[NashVegas]

48. Weitz and New Line Should Drop the Film and Let Someone With Balls Make It

fucking Hollywood. Everyone involved should be ashamed of themselves for messing with an author's work like this.

[NYC]

50. The Brothers Karamazov would be censored

under the same rules. The entire "The Grand Inquisitor" would either become senseless or be totally eliminated.

[muriel_volestrangler]

54. There was an excellent TV version of that section on its own in the UK

2 years ago, called "Inquisition", starring Derek Jacobi. According to this site, it's been sold to some other countries, but not the USA (of course). Definitely worth it, if you get a chance to see it somehow.

[TyeDye75]

53. Conservatives dont object to religious refernces in films

as long as its a Roman Soldier using a rope to wrench Jesus' bloody, dislocated arm into place for it to be nailed onto the cross.

I mean, thats required viewing right.

[LWolf]

55. Well, that pushes one of my buttons, big time.

I have fought, somewhat successfully over the years, my own bias; I've always hated it when they made a great book into a movie. Because that meant that people didn't have to read it. Literacy is no longer a requirement.

I've learned to appreciate, somewhat grudgingly, some films which adapted my favorite books.

I understand that sometimes modifications to a story are made to make it "work" better on film. I'll accept that, if I really have to. Begrudgingly.

But when stories are remodeled to suit marketing preferences, I draw the line. Leave the story intact, or don't make the film at all.

Don't geld literature for the intellectual eunuchs you want to sell tickets to.

I don't know that the "Dark Materials" series is great literature; I enjoyed it, though, and would like to see it left whole.

[PATRICK]

56. I can't believe they are making this

from an economic point of view. Every element that seems to have value works against every other element and that translates into nearly zero audience demographics if one is faithful to the book. If NOT faithful to the book why do it at all with some pretense of making it particularly ominous children's fare.

Art. Controversy. Religion. How easy to squabble righteously from one side or the other, but the point is the trilogy gradually turned into commercial poison and the bitter theosophical rant oddly allied to mystical magic is not very clear or noble thinking. Their will be an odder assortment of a picketing coalition than an anti-globalist protest, probably outnumbering the actual moviegoers everywhere.

Read Jose Farmer's last Riverworld book or any late Stephen King book or any other writer who suddenly goes cosmic with his pompous pronouncements of the meaning of life etc. and you'll go flying back to the safe harbor of "art for art's sake" will the amateurs please leave their preaching hangups at home? In every case the allure and the art is thoroughly spoiled and the weary adolescent flavor of the didactic pose is not something one wants to deal with when led on by a fantasy.

This guy is in for a world of hurt. He should settle for a low budget "artsy" "different" film or some other kid's fantasy instead of going where Harry Potter dares not.

If the Churches etc, get all riled that is rather dumb on their part too. Better they worry about people in power they support who can do real damage to people and not storytellers with an unusual warp. Anyone who kills off a phony "God" is not morally a bad person. It's a healthy challenge, only in a very self-defeating genre. It is amusing that in this other dimensional vagueness to find such joyless magic and emptiness supplanting the happy ending and anything else conceivably desirable. Weird, but not artsy weird either. Just plain weird.

[skjpm]

57. I'm a Christian, and I love these books

Pullman set out to be the anti-C. S. Lewis, and for that he can only be applauded. This trilogy is a brilliant indictment of an older way of looking at God. But far from being anti-God, it opens up the possibility of new ways of seeing God. Pullman, whether intentionally or not, reminds me of Tillich or Rahner, or (more currently) Bishop Spong's A New Christianity for a New Millenium. We have to get rid of the old, idolatrous ways of seeing God so we can get to the truth. Those who oppose these books are afraid that their particular way of seeing God is threatened, which it is. God, however, is much bigger than what they want Him to be.

[silverpatronus]

58. i read this yesterday on lj...

and fired off this email to new line:

I never thought I would see the day that New Line Cinema would be afraid to put out a great film. The recent controversy over the removal of all references to god and religion from the upcoming 'His Dark Materials' films has led me to believe that New Line has lost its balls. Surely, the studio that took the biggest chance in the history of cinema on the 'Lord of the Rings' trilogy isn't afraid of the religious right? New Line took 'the unfilmable story', an obscure, pretty much unknown director, a bunch of 'no big deal' actors, an obscene budget and an unbreakable three picture deal that would have HAEMORRAGED money if 'Fellowship' hadn't been a rousing success, and watched it turn into the hugest film event since 'Gone With the Wind'. So since when are YOU afraid to take risks New Line Cinema?

The concept of religion vs reason, and certain religious imagery and characters (like the angels) are the heart and soul of 'His Dark Materials'. There is no way to remove all references to god and religion and stay true to the work. You'd do better to name it something else and call it 'loosely based' on the source text if you went ahead with this desecration of Pullman's work.

[VegasWolf]

60. Next, they will take the government out of Orwell's novels. n/t