precia (precia) wrote in cittagazze,
precia
precia
cittagazze

  • Mood:
  • Music:

HDM goes Godless

Looks like they just broke our movie.

I wonder if they'll rename daemons.
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic
  • 23 comments
OMFG I cannot believe that! ><
I hate those stupid uptight religious people. if they don't like it, then they don't have to watch it. >< ugh, it just makes me so angry. that has just ruined my whole year -- I have no hope of ever seeing a good movie version of that trilogy. arghhh.
I'm sure the whole movie isn't shot. As I mentioned below (and as the article says), one of the changes is referring to the church of Lyra's world as the "Magisterium". This, alone, doesn't ruin the story, but will keep a few heads cooler about it.

What bugs me is that the ending will have to have some serious tweakage to work without the Authority. The third book has so much religion shoved into it, I don't see how it'll possibly work with that removed.
yea, I know. ;/
what annoys me most is the fact that there are still people out there who are bothered by the semi-negative religious aspects. I mean, everyone has the right to freely express their own opinions about something and others just don't have to watch. I'm not surpressing people from making positive religious movies just because I don't support religions. it's a horrible form of censorship. ;/
I do not see the problem.

It is meant to be a movie, not a work of art. If the message has to become a bit subtler, what's the harm? The books are still there, with all their power and conviction: they are the main thing; the films shall exist merely as adjunct. We've known this from the beginning.
While I'm ok with changes like "Church" to "Magisterium", it's the overall effect that I'm worried over. While I understand that the Church of Lyra's world isn't the Church of our world, a lot of people don't. It makes sense, because it'd be pretty hard to promote a movie addressing the subject of church-funded child abuse (i.e. cutting the children from their daemons).

My issue is with what's going to happen to the entire third part of the story. You can cover for some things by changing terms, but how on earth will the end pan out without the religious overtones to work from?
My issue is with what's going to happen to the entire third part of the story. You can cover for some things by changing terms, but how on earth will the end pan out without the religious overtones to work from?

...True. Any movie adaptation of a book has to cut and modify things, thereby shifting focus a bit, simply because if they didn't the movie would end up being tens of hours long. You're right about the third book, though...I guess we'll just have to wait and see how it comes out.
I'm hardly surprised. If you ever expect a movie to be even half as good as a book you love, you will be disspointed. I was mad when I found out there would be a movie, because I knew they would do thngs like this to the plot (ei make it less contriversial and probably more sappy). The movies will be highly commercialized and watered down, because that's what Hollywood does. I'm still not sure if I'm going to see any of the three movies at all, it might just make me mad.
Very disapointing...hopes dashed and all that.
Sorry this is long, but I can't really give a simple answer to it. ^_^;;;
I've read two of the three books in the trilogy so far (and enjoyed them) and am a fairly religious person, though I don't follow a Christian church (or even a church at all). Because of that, I tend to like the interpretation that the Authority is representative of repressive forces. I think Pullman's reasoning is faulty in that he thinks if the real Christian church is advocating the loss of free will/the damnation of people who don't follow it blindly/insert evil thing here, God must approve and be behind it. I don't believe that's so, but I can still get something out of a story in which a similar but fictionalized God *would* approve, if that makes any sense. To me it displays what religion shouldn't be and how it's been corrupted in so many ways to become life-killing instead of life-affirming more than half the time.
That being said, a good majority of this country is not only Christian but thinks with their Bibles and not their brains. (see: the last election. I don't mean everyone who voted for Bush, but a lot of people heard him spout off about God and the evils of gay marriage and instantly punched their ballots for him.) They aren't going to make compromises or think subtly, and if they protested movies like Dogma and Saved! which are satires and ultimately affirm faith and God, they're certainly going to make sure this one never sees the light of day unless a few changes are made so they can see past 'church' and 'God is evil' to what Pullman's ultimately saying about what good and evil are.
I'm going to trust Pullman and the director know what they're doing, for now. Pullman's comments about money trouble me, but I think he'd preserve his vision - there ARE ways to do it. Frankly, if they can do it right they'll make the trilogy more accessible to everyone and maybe get through to some people who would trash it otherwise. I'd say that's worth the sacrifice. If they don't do it right, then I'll join the kicking and screaming with everyone else. :) Only for me, it'll be about incompetence.
"thinks with their Bibles and not their brains." First of all, christians believe that the Bible is the word of God, and believe that God is beyond comprehension, so I don't see how you think that is a negative thing.

secondly, bush never talked about the evils of gay marriage - that would be a really bad move. He did say that he wanted to preserve the sanctity of the term marriage, between a man and a womanm, and I think that's valid and different from what you are saying.
"First of all, christians believe that the Bible is the word of God, and believe that God is beyond comprehension,"

I might go along with that if every christian read the bible, but alot haven't, alot won't so they believe what other christians tell them and their minister.

It may seem like I'm anti-christianity. But I'm really not. I'm just anti-stupidity.

Know your own religion and I'll respect you. Goes for any other religon, too.
yeah i totally understand what you are saying, like when people just blindly believe something without really knowing why. you're right in a lot of cases. thanks for the comment.
I'm referring to people who literally just cite out of their Bible without thinking about the context of the situation they're commenting on or ways they can keep the word of God without attacking others (be that verbally or physically). There are ways to do this and I know many a Christian who not only strive to do so but believe that God says things for a reason, as well as for reasons that, if we think about it, are *not* outside our comprehension.

As far as gay marriage goes, I don't see how marriage between two men or two women renders straight marriage or families with a husband and wife any less valid or, if we must use the term, sacred. I've also yet to see anyone explain the opposing view in a way that makes sense to me. What I ultimately was talking about is that 'sanctity' itself implies some kind of religious holiness (it DOES have a religious conotation, look it up) and this country was founded with a seperation of church and state. This was later affirmed again in one of the four freedoms, Freedom of Worship. Not all faiths or moral beliefs believe that gay marriage will destroy the sanctity of straight marriage, and to write a single definition of marriage into the Constitution would impose one religious belief onto others. And I say again: when people voted for Bush based on issues like that alone, *religious issues alone*, while ignoring all the other factors of the election such as economy and the war on terror and immigration and so on, they were voting using their Bibles and not their brains for something that should not be decided based on religion. Because religion is seperate from government.

And I never intended this to turn into a political debate, so I'm going to try and not comment any more on this.
same with me...thanks for your opinion though. i think this debate is going to have more serious implications on society than anyone really thinks, and there's no easy answer
ok

first of all, i am what you are generalizing as one of those "stupid uptight religious people" and i could take offense, but i won't. i'm a christian, and i have to say that i don't think people realize that this book takes place in a whole different WORLD where their God isn't called God and probably isn't the same God that I worship. Additionally, the "authority" sideline wasn't what I took away from this book at all. It was adventure and excitement and a girl that any girl could relate to. i'm less angry at the labelled "Christian Right" and more angry at Philip Pullman for being such a pushover and caring more about the money that his work. Everything is political in america, everything is politically correct, and everything is about money...personally, I think it is a shame, but I am not surprised. I will still go see the movie, even if only because I feel like i am the lone person in the united states who loved this book. i don't think it will ruin the movie and i still think people will love it
lindsey
If they would keep an anti-religious message it would probably make the movie do the same if not better. Stupid christians would ban its message and ask people not to see it. Of course then, people who never heard of it would know about it. And people who are against the grain would watch it even if they didn't like it.

If one thing christians are good for its for making people famous. Look at Marilyn Manson.

Besides isn't any publicity good publicity. Even better if you could get chrisitans to do it for free and laugh in there face about it later.
Two things... one, the third book clearly states that the Authority and the Creator are separate entities. Why isn't Pullman playing that card?

Second, my outrage is expressed on my personal journal. Feel free to leave your grievances there, as well.
You fucking WHAT now?

AND they've pulled Tom Stoppard out of the project?

That's it, the movie's gone down the toilet.

=^..^=

Suspended comment

that is so infuriating! stupid right-wing zealots...
The only movie I can think of where the playwright sorta butchered the movie but it was very, very close to the book was Cold Mountain, the Miramax film with Kidman, Law, and Zellweger.

The book is about as long as any of the later Harry Potter books and as long as The Amber Spy Glass and most of the script was coherent to the plot.

The way I see book/comic/real life-to-movie translations is that they are only there for eye candy- nothing more. People who enjoyed the movie and want the real story are forced to read the books to get the deeper meaning.

As for this series- if people who want the truth and don't bitch about the religious aspect of the plot they will read the books.

All the religious groups' rantings and ravings will just bring in a more mature audience that can handle what they read or watch. So as many have mentioned, they are doing the fans a favor :D.
I know I haven't joined this community, but I couldn't resist the urge to comment on this delicate, yet infuriating subject. I have read the trilogy, and I absolutely DESPISE the idea that God is cut out of the movies. It is one of the most crucial parts of the plot, and without it, the films will be nothing but cheap, shallow child-pleasing movies with talking animals and such. These books were not meant to be part of the "Harry Potter-type (No offence. I love Harry Potter.) Kiddie Club". Can't these douches see that?! If there is no Authority, there's no point in making these movies. And if the American Government has a problem with Anti-religious movies, they can just choose not to play them in their cinemas (Or just go screw themselves... either/or), but you know, either way, there will be theatres that get a hold of them. My point is, screw Bush and his crazy ways, because the last time I checked, religion should have NOTHING to do with politics.


Yeah.... I'm really pissed... Also I'm sorry if I offended anyone reading my comment.
I'm sort of disappointed to see that they're going to change some bits of the book, but I could see why they're doing it. If the book got some complaints about the Authority/Anti Church thing, I wouldn't be surprised if the movie would get some as well. I can't exactly make generalizations about this right now since the movie hasn't been rated. I mean, I'd understand it all if they'd rated it G/PG or something, but the book isn't entirely based on kiddish stuff. It's more of a growing-up type of plot.

Meh. I'm confusing myself as well. ^^;;