« Keith Allen on Diana inquest film | Filmstalker | Hammer Horror's Beyond the Rave plot »


National Secular Society slams Golden Compass

TheGoldenCompass.jpgWe already knew that The Golden Compass film was to remove all mention of religion from the story, unlike that of the original Philip Pullman novels. We also heard that he was more than happy with this.

Now though the National Secular Society, of which Pullman is an honorary associate, has criticised the film rather heavily, and indeed Hollywood itself.

Terry Sanderson is the President of the society, and speaking to The Guardian he says:

"It was clear right from the start that the makers of this film intended to take out the anti-religious elements of Pullman's book…In doing that they are taking the heart out of it, losing the point of it, castrating it. It seems that religion has now completely conquered America's cultural life and it is much the poorer for it. What a shame that we have to endure such censorship here too."

Wow, that is a harsh statement, fair but harsh. The Director of The Golden Compass, Chris Weitz, countered some of the criticism of this softening at Cannes this year after a preview screening of some footage:

"In the books the Magisterium is a version of the Catholic church gone wildly astray from its roots. If that's what you want in the film, you'll be disappointed…We have expanded the range of meanings of what the Magisterium represents. Philip Pullman is against any kind of organised dogma whether it is church hierarchy or, say, a Soviet hierarchy."

I like how he chose the example of a Soviet hierarchy, that's a much more palatable enemy to the majority of the American people and Hollywood.

You have to admit that they have done well in expanding on the ideas behind the Magisterium, and it is indeed more relevant in today's society. However the impact and Pullman's intended point of the Magisterium is lost, and that is what has enraged the Secular Society.

The focus of Hollywood is profit, and that the upsetting of religious groups might cause a backlash against the film and therefore hurt box office takings, and Philip Pullman has agreed that they can alter his work in this way, so should there really be any complaints?



Aside from the twist of the tale, am I the only one who's watched the trailers for this one and found the CGI rather crap - as in Jumanji level reality factor?

Actually I'm finding that they aren't that bad. I think the early clips were but the latest trailer is a lot stronger.

I feel the reality comes with interaction with the real world, and if they get that right then the CGI becomes more real. In Jumanji everything looked and felt faked, they might get that right here.


Add a comment


Site Navigation

Latest Stories



Vidahost image

Latest Reviews


Filmstalker Poll


Subscribe with...

AddThis Feed Button

Windows Live Alerts

Site Feeds

Subscribe to Filmstalker:

Filmstalker's FeedAll articles

Filmstalker's Reviews FeedReviews only

Filmstalker's Reviews FeedAudiocasts only

Subscribe to the Filmstalker Audiocast on iTunesAudiocasts on iTunes

Feed by email:


My Skype status


Help Out


Site Information

Creative Commons License
© www.filmstalker.co.uk

Give credit to your sources. Quote and credit, don't steal

Movable Type 3.34