207 replies to this topic

[Qwerty]

Daniel Craig and Eva Green promoting The Golden Compass...

http://commanderbond...n...&item=41246

[marktmurphy]

I see Caterina Murino's in Cannes too promoting St Trinians. So what with her, Eva Green and Daniel Craigin town it's a bit of a reunion!

[Vauxhall]

Not really a fan of this genre of movies, but, like others have said, I may well see THE GOLDEN COMPASS out of interest in seeing Daniel Craig and Eva Green in action once more... and Nicole Kidman isn't too bad either I suppose...

[00Twelve]

The music queue that plays as we see the blimp flying in and over, does anyone know what score that music is from?

[deth]

The music queue that plays as we see the blimp flying in and over, does anyone know what score that music is from?

http://www.soundtrac...cid=G&mid=11281


seems it's from Lady in the Water...

[Stephenson]

I've watched the trailer a couple of times now, and I'm really not sure why, but it's just not really grabbing me. All the pieces are there for the kind of film I really enjoy, and obviously the cast is amazing, but the trailer just seems a little flat. Maybe its the editing. It does seem to jump around alot without there being any real sense of urgency about any of it.

[Qwerty]

He's going to pop up in a report on GMTV tomorrow morning as well.

Did you end up catching this report, marktmurphy?

[lafemmefantome]

I've watched the trailer a couple of times now, and I'm really not sure why, but it's just not really grabbing me. All the pieces are there for the kind of film I really enjoy, and obviously the cast is amazing, but the trailer just seems a little flat. Maybe its the editing. It does seem to jump around alot without there being any real sense of urgency about any of it.

I just saw the trailer with the film "Pirates of the Caribbean" and people in the audience didn't see to get it. I just hope that NewLine does some decent marketing to get people excited to see it. It is frustrating if the film quality turns out to be good and no one goes and sees the film.

lafemme

[Emma]

Looks interesting, I like the stuff about the parallel universe and the other worlds. It certainly looks better than the Lion, The With and the Wardrobe (which I was tempted to walk out on).

I have a bit of a problem with this book. Pullman is an atheist who has not hid contempt for Christians and of the Christian faith. I read reviews of the books on Amazon and there's some very heavy Christian bashing in the third novel.

Though I understand they will tone it down or gloss it over in the in the films.

[supernova]

The Golden Compass is going to be so BIG. Feel pleased for Daniel Craig, who suddenly is simultaneously starring in two big franchises (Bond and Golden Compass). Good for him. He has worked so hard and earnestly - he deserves his success.

Noticed that in the photographs of Eva Green on The Golden Compass site, she is wearing very light makeup. It still irks me that her love of Goth, was able to convince the makeup people etc., to go ahead with duplicating her own style of makeup in the Casino Royale movie (don't have the link but read that the makeup department on Casino Royale tried to satisfy all the actresses personal make up preferences). I didn't know such anarchy existed in multi-million dollar movies. Good job if you can get it!

[Gobi-1]

Looks interesting, I like the stuff about the parallel universe and the other worlds. It certainly looks better than the Lion, The With and the Wardrobe (which I was tempted to walk out on).

I have a bit of a problem with this book. Pullman is an atheist who has not hid contempt for Christians and of the Christian faith. I read reviews of the books on Amazon and there's some very heavy Christian bashing in the third novel.

Though I understand they will tone it down or gloss it over in the in the films.

I'll be skipping it for this reason. Reading some summaries and quotes online it's obvious the book series is anti-God and anti-Christian. There's billions of non-Christians out there so there will be an audience for it but I feel there's going to be some sort of backlash from people who think this is Narnia or Lord of the Rings.

[HildebrandRarity]

I have a bit of a problem with this book. Pullman is an atheist who has not hid contempt for Christians and of the Christian faith...

I'll be skipping it for this reason. Reading some summaries and quotes online it's obvious the book series is anti-God and anti-Christian...

"His Dark Materials"...Hello? Sounds not only anti-God and anti-Christian but Satanic too.

HIS DARK MATERIALS...hmmm...looks like it's going to be controversial and, as a result, commercially successful.

I too saw it up there on the big screen in the trailes pre Pirates 3 over the weekend and it kinda looked epic.

Eye candy type film that New Line's piggy-backing off of LORT to market it. Eye candy includes Nicole and Eva.

Too bad about the author of the books being a bit of a satanist.

[Stephenson]

I think it's a bit of a stretch to call Pullman a "satanist". Yes, he is anti-Christian, in the sense that he is highly critical of organized religion (so much so that in the third book this "message" overwhelms any semblance of a plot). But he is not anti-god or pro-satan. The symbolic character of God in the third book (a senile old man carted about on a throne) is meant to represent some organized religions' current relationship with God: treating him as a powerless figurehead, and using his name to endorse actions that he would never condone if he was at full power or treated with the awe and reverence he deserves. I don't think Pullman's intention was to illustrate that "God is dead"; rather that our relationship with God has died because this is how many church leaders treat God.

Just my opinion, of course, but I see parallels between the criticism of Pullman now and Scorsese during "The Last Temptation of Christ". It is easier to focus on the superficial symbolism (God dying, Jesus sleeping with Mary Magdalene), than to try and understand the deeper message (although neither Pullman or Scorsese were particularly subtle). For me, "Temptation" was a far more interesting film from a theological perspective than "The Passion", if only because it showed Jesus dealing with the psychological turmoil of his decision: he was surrendering a way of life that had the potential to make him happy. The fact that he moved foward and rejected that life, to me anyway, makes his sacrifice all the more meaningful.

[HildebrandRarity]

I think it's a bit of a stretch to call Pullman a "satanist". Yes, he is anti-Christian...But he is not anti-god or pro-satan. The symbolic character of God in the third book (a senile old man carted about on a throne) is meant to represent some organized religions' current relationship with God: treating him as a powerless figurehead, and using his name to endorse actions that he would never condone if he was at full power or treated with the awe and reverence he deserves.

Ok.

If he is what you say he is, why poke fun at God?

And, why not trash the other organized religions too?

Some of the other religions are doing a lot of killing of members of other faiths these days, much more so than Christians are i'm afraid...in case we haven't noted.

Why not approach it in another fashion that does not target God or one particular organized religion?

I suppose it wouldnt be lucrative enough for the Luciferian.

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 28 May 2007 - 05:52 PM.

[Stephenson]

I think it's a bit of a stretch to call Pullman a "satanist". Yes, he is anti-Christian...But he is not anti-god or pro-satan. The symbolic character of God in the third book (a senile old man carted about on a throne) is meant to represent some organized religions' current relationship with God: treating him as a powerless figurehead, and using his name to endorse actions that he would never condone if he was at full power or treated with the awe and reverence he deserves.

Ok.

If he is what you say he is, why poke fun at God?

And, why not trash the other organized religions too?

Some of the other religions are doing a lot of killing of members of other faiths these days, much more so than Christians are i'm afraid...in case we haven't noted.

Why not approach it in another fashion that does not target God or one particular organized religion?

I suppose it wouldnt be lucrative enough for the Luciferian.

Well, I read your reply earlier and thought to myself, "Oh, that was a quick response. I think I just got of easy!" Should have known better ...

Truth is, I have no idea why he specifically targets Christianity and ignores other religions. Why did C.S. Lewis choose to write a book called "Mere Christianity" and not "Mere Organized Religion"? Why is "Satanic Verses" about Islam? Maybe Christianity is the religion Pullman is most familiar with and felt most comfortable addressing it. Maybe "His Dark Materials" is a response to the overt Christian symbolism in the Narnia books. Can't say. Lots of people smarter than I have speculated.

But, as I said before, I, personally, don't believe it was Pullman's intention "to poke fun at God", but rather to demonstrate that the manner in which some religious leaders use the concept of "God" as a means to justify their ends was destroying our potential for a true relationship with God. The weak old man in the book was not the real "God", but a pale shadow meant to illustrate the weaknesses of our own beliefs and actions, i.e. God as a fool who can be manipulated and controlled by mere humans into condoning any action we want. Obviously, no one wants to have a relationship with a God like that, so perhaps Pullman was suggesting it is time to re-evaluate our approach to God via paths other than organized churches. Yes, I definitely see this as anti-organized religion (and it is interesting to note that Pullman (at least to my recollection) never calls the character "God", although he is most easily recognized as the Christian concept, so he may well be criticizing other religions). But I certainly don't think it is anti-God; nor do I feel he is attacking people who believe in God. It is the institution and its leaders that I beleive he is criticizing. And at no point does he recognize Satan as a viable alternative. If anything, I imagine Pullman would be equally critical of any type of organized Satanic worship, since it is also "organized".

As for "some of the other religions are doing a lot of killing of members of other faiths these days, much more so than Christians are i'm afraid...in case we haven't noted" this is a ridiculous statement. Members of extremist groups linked to other religions are definitely killing, but they are loudly denounced by the majority of that religion's moderate membership. There is nothing like a generally declared Islamic "jihad" against people of a faith other than Islam, if that's what you're getting at. The attitude that you're suggesting would have us judge all Christians based on the actions of extremist Christians who firebomb an abortion clinic. And in the end, what amount of killing in the name of any god is acceptable? I just don't see how "We Christians are killing fewer people than "Them", so we shouldn't be criticized," is a viable argument. First, there are plenty of criticisms leveled by Christians at other, peaceful religions (Buddhism for one). Second, and this is just my position, I don't feel comfortable criticizing another person's religious beliefs unless I am willing to turn an equally critical eye on my own beliefs and listen with an open mind to the opinions of others. Please note that I do not belief that violent acts are an acceptable way of expressing opinion.

Lastly, I would think that, given the recent success of the first Narnia movie and "The Passion", most people would think that a movie that was actually anti-Christian would be anything but lucrative. Last time I looked there were a lot more Christians attending movies than satanists, and they don't exactly want to take the little ones to a movie that says "religion is bad".

[HildebrandRarity]

Lastly, I would think that, given the recent success of the first Narnia movie and "The Passion", most people would think that a movie that was actually anti-Christian would be anything but lucrative.

2006: Da Vinci Code v The Nativity Story. One a big blockbuster...the other a mere asterix.

LOL

Catch my drift.

;-)

Controversy sells.

[Stephenson]

Point taken; controversy definitely sells to a certain market.

However, DaVinci Code was targeted at adults; by the looks of things, "Golden Compass" is going after the same market as LOTR and Narnia, and so far, none of the advertising has highlighted the controversial aspect of the story ("Based on the controversial novels of Phillip Pullman"). When the protests start (and I do believe they will), I see this as doing more harm than good to the box office.

Besides, the decision to use controversy as a selling tool existed long before this movie. Has the use of controversy always been the work of Satanists, or only in this particular instance?

Edited by Stephenson, 28 May 2007 - 10:07 PM.

[HildebrandRarity]

Has the use of controversy always been the work of Satanists, or only in this particular instance?

:-)

The use of deception to debunk the existance of God or belittle 'Him' has always been the work of Satanists...in this particular case the shareholders of New Line are merely trying to make a buck/feed their families/etc.

;-)

[Stephenson]

Does this conditional statement also include Pullman's efforts? Or is he still an evil satanist manipulating the merely materialistic mortals at New Line?

[stamper]

This is going to tank. Big time. Fast forward style editing ? Cities CGI ? Forgetable second hand actors in the small roles ? Symphonic music that tries to play it like Apocalypse Now is happening every time someone says something ? LOTR like trailer ? CGI animal that talks ? CGI animal that talks ? and did I mention, CGI animal that talks ?

It takes more than two stars to make a great movie.

DC looks like he owns the role thought.

[marktmurphy]

Looks interesting, I like the stuff about the parallel universe and the other worlds. It certainly looks better than the Lion, The With and the Wardrobe (which I was tempted to walk out on).

I have a bit of a problem with this book. Pullman is an atheist who has not hid contempt for Christians and of the Christian faith. I read reviews of the books on Amazon and there's some very heavy Christian bashing in the third novel.

Though I understand they will tone it down or gloss it over in the in the films.

I'll be skipping it for this reason. Reading some summaries and quotes online it's obvious the book series is anti-God and anti-Christian. There's billions of non-Christians out there so there will be an audience for it but I feel there's going to be some sort of backlash from people who think this is Narnia or Lord of the Rings.

Try reading it first.

[HildebrandRarity]

Does this conditional statement also include Pullman's efforts? Or is he still an evil satanist manipulating the merely materialistic mortals at New Line?

To be fair, i've never read Pullman. I suggested he was a Luciferian based on a couple of posts in this thread that suggested he was anti-God.

I won't pass judgement on him because i'm neither fit enough to judge nor have I read him.

Quite often Satanists use deception or mockery to debunk the existance of God. Whether Pullman is or not I have no idea.

[Skudor]

I think it's a bit of a stretch to call Pullman a "satanist". Yes, he is anti-Christian...But he is not anti-god or pro-satan. The symbolic character of God in the third book (a senile old man carted about on a throne) is meant to represent some organized religions' current relationship with God: treating him as a powerless figurehead, and using his name to endorse actions that he would never condone if he was at full power or treated with the awe and reverence he deserves.

Ok.

If he is what you say he is, why poke fun at God?

And, why not trash the other organized religions too?

Some of the other religions are doing a lot of killing of members of other faiths these days, much more so than Christians are i'm afraid...in case we haven't noted.

Why not approach it in another fashion that does not target God or one particular organized religion?

I suppose it wouldnt be lucrative enough for the Luciferian.

Which particular non-monodeistic religions are busy killing each other/others? As far as I can tell the Hindus aren't really up to anything naughty, and the Buddhists haven't fired a gun in anger ever as far as I can tell.

[Stephenson]

Does this conditional statement also include Pullman's efforts? Or is he still an evil satanist manipulating the merely materialistic mortals at New Line?

To be fair, i've never read Pullman. I suggested he was a Luciferian based on a couple of posts in this thread that suggested he was anti-God.

I won't pass judgement on him because i'm neither fit enough to judge nor have I read him.

Quite often Satanists use deception or mockery to debunk the existance of God. Whether Pullman is or not I have no idea.

Not trying to be antagonistic, but are you suggesting that:

1. A person who is anti-organized religion is automatically anti-God?

or

2. A person who is anti-God is automatically a Satanist?

or

3. A person who criticizes Christianity is automatically evil?

[HildebrandRarity]

Does this conditional statement also include Pullman's efforts? Or is he still an evil satanist manipulating the merely materialistic mortals at New Line?

To be fair, i've never read Pullman. I suggested he was a Luciferian based on a couple of posts in this thread that suggested he was anti-God.

I won't pass judgement on him because i'm neither fit enough to judge nor have I read him.

Quite often Satanists use deception or mockery to debunk the existance of God. Whether Pullman is or not I have no idea.

Not trying to be antagonistic, but are you suggesting that:

1. A person who is anti-organized religion is automatically anti-God?

or

2. A person who is anti-God is automatically a Satanist?

or

3. A person who criticizes Christianity is automatically evil?

Antagonistic? Hmm

;-)

1. I'm not a big fan of organized religion in the least but I do believe in God...so that should answer your first question.

2. Perhaps you should re-state number 2. I believe if you are anti-God than you are a Satanist...HOWEVER I believe if you believe in nothing then I believe you are not a Satanist. How do those sound for number 2?

3. A person who critizises Christianity is merely a person who critizises Christianity and nothing more or less. It makes him neither Evil or "Good". Hope that answers 3.


Anymore?

:-)

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 29 May 2007 - 04:59 PM.

[Stephenson]

Nope.

So back to the original topic: My only point was that IMHO Pullman uses the image of a diminished God not to defend an anti-God position but to criticize organized religion, which, by your answers, would mean he is not a Satanist, but simply "a person who criticizes Christianity and nothing more or less."

Edited by Stephenson, 29 May 2007 - 05:28 PM.

[HildebrandRarity]

Nope.

So back to the original topic:

IMHO Pullman uses the image of a diminished God not to defend an anti-God position but to ...

That's it! In YOUR humble opinion. Perhaps you're being too kind to him. Be careful of veiled attempts to engender sympathy to one's agenda, my friend.

:-)

Me? I have not read him so I don't know.

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 29 May 2007 - 05:51 PM.

[Stephenson]

Oh, I don't think I'm being too kind to him. His last book of the trilogy was damn near unreadable ... again IMHO, which is all I'm qualified to offer on the topic.

[LadySylvia]

This is going to tank. Big time.

Isn't this a bit presumptuous to say, considering that the movie won't be released in another 6.5 months?

[HildebrandRarity]

Oh, I don't think I'm being too kind to him. His last book of the trilogy was damn near unreadable ... again IMHO, which is all I'm qualified to offer on the topic.

To conclude our civilized little rebuttle, Stephenson, the trailer on the big screen looked good enough for a visit to the cinema in December nothwithstanding my belief in God.

Aiding the decision is the Kidman/Craig/Green connection.

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 29 May 2007 - 06:40 PM.