Northern Lights/Golden Compass

OK, so they've adapted this book into a film and changed the title in the process. When I first heard that they were going to make a film of this I was quite interested, given all the furore in the US about Harry Potter I thought that this would stir up a real hornets' nest. As far as I could work out the religious right got their knickers in a twist about Harry Potter because it featured magic (ie witchcraft), what were they going to do about a film which actually identifies the creator (God) as evil and in which the heroes actively try to kill him?
However

"Several key themes of the novels, the rejection of organized religion and the abuse of power in a fictionalized Catholic Church, are to be diluted in the adaptation. Director Weitz said "in the books the Magisterium is a version of the Catholic Church gone wildly astray from its roots" but that the organization portrayed in his film would not directly match that of Pullman's books. Instead, the Magisterium will represent all dogmatic organizations. Weitz said that New Line Cinema had feared the story's anti-religious themes would make the film financially unviable in the US, and so religion and God will not be referenced directly. Attempting to reassure fans of the novels, Weitz said that religion would instead appear in euphemistic terms, yet the decision has been attacked by some fans, anti-censorship groups, and the National Secular Society (of which Pullman is an honorary associate), which said "they are taking the heart out of it, losing the point of it, castrating it", "this is part of a long-term problem over freedom of speech."

Click to expand...

To my mind, they will indeed be castrating it if they totally change what it's about ( it's also interesting that even in that piece (from Wikipedia) they merely describe a rejection of organized religion, which to my mind is still a dilution - as far as I can remember from reading the books, they go much further than that), really what's the point of adapting a book if the film can't even touch the subject matter of the book? They want the name (and the sales of course) but they don't want the actual book. I think it's a new low in terms of the film-makers having their cake and eating it. It's also a triumph for the censorship of the religious right who have effectively managed to rip the heart out of the story without even having done anything. I think it's total cowardice and a really sorry episode all round.

"Much as I would love to disagree, Donahue is right (when he says the books will market atheism by stealth), though more as a result of simple marketing rather than some atheist conspiracy. The film has been toned down in order to reach a wider audience and so make more money. It will almost certainly encourage some parents to buy the books for their children. With any luck, their kids will read them - and start asking some awkward questions."

Click to expand...

I see this point but it's pretty meagre consolation in my mind. I mean, there are two points there, one being about the "message" and one being the story itself. If I were a massive fan of a story and the film adaptation missed out the entire story that I loved I don't think I'd give a toss that people who read the book after seeing the film would get to enjoy it properly (and get the atheistic message).
Also, that doesn't let those who made the decision to excise all the religious stuff off the hook does it? It's still shameful cowardice on their part.

"I wonder what Philip Pullman thinks? I can't imagine he's very pleased..."

Click to expand...

You'd think so wouldn't you? His comments on it that I've seen have been disappointingly diplomatic though to my taste...

"Funny how they allow stuff that just aimlessly blasphemes for cheap laughs (South Park) but get all hot under the collar about something that makes an intelligent criticism of religion"

Click to expand...

But it's not really a case of "allowing" is it? As far as I can tell the film has just assumed that there would be protests and anticipated that by removing all the content.

"Did anyone here see the stage production of the trilogy that was on four or five years ago?"

Click to expand...

Never saw it but I did read a review of it from Rowan Williams about how he was perfectly happy with it and it was more about getting people to think for themselves than an attack on organised religion. I always feel very sorry for that guy - he seems nice enough but he's in an impossible position and he's pretty much always on the wrong side of every argument.

I notice that they are now selling the book as The Golden Compass (as opposed to Northern Lights). I don't know why but I find that a bit annoying.