MOVIES - The Golden Compass

[Aries]

Have any of you seen the movie The Golden Compass and know any details about the guns which Sam Elliott was seen using in the film?

[dsmith512]

I would pass on this movie. It is very anti-religious.

http://www.catholicleague.org/catalyst. ... &read=2322

A film called "The Golden Compass" opens December 7. It is based on the first book of a trilogy titled His Dark Materials. The author of this children's fantasy is Philip Pullman, a noted English atheist. It is his objective to bash Christianity and promote atheism. To kids. "The Golden Compass" is a film version of the book by that name, and it is being toned down so that Catholics, as well as Protestants, are not enraged.

The second book of the trilogy, The Subtle Knife, is more overt in its hatred of Christianity than the first book, and the third entry, The Amber Spyglass, is even more blatant. Because "The Golden Compass" is based on the least offensive of the three books, and because it is being further watered down for the big screen, some might wonder why parents should be wary of the film.

The Catholic League wants Christians to stay away from this movie precisely because it knows that the film is bait for the books: unsuspecting parents who take their children to see the movie may be impelled to buy the three books as a Christmas present. And no parent who wants to bring their children up in the faith will want any part of these books.

"The Golden Compass: Agenda Unmasked" is the Catholic League's response. It provides information about the film, "The Golden Compass," and details what book reviewers have said about Pullman's books; a synopsis of his trilogy is also included.

It is important that all Christians, especially those with children or grandchildren, read this booklet. Anyone who does will be armed with all the ammo they need to convince friends and family members that there is nothing innocent about Pullman's agenda. Though the movie promises to be fairly non-controversial, it may very well act as an inducement to buy Pullman's trilogy, His Dark Materials. And remember, his twin goals are to promote atheism and denigrate Christianity. To kids.

Please get the word out.

[Old Ironsights]

Ummm... it seems he already saw it since he wants to identify some props in it.

It's a movie. 99% of them are antireligious.

[Ysabel Kid]

Ummm... it seems he already saw it since he wants to identify some props in it.

It's a movie. 99% of them are antireligious.

True enough - but I won't be spending my hard-earned money on ANYTHING that attacks my beliefs. They are free to produce any stuff they so desire - but I am free to say "no thanks"!

BTW - this was the leftists trying to do their "saga". "The Lord of the Rings" and the "Chronicles of Narnia" both did very well at the box office. Both were written by devout Christians, and both heavy on religious themes. Honor, duty, devotion, purity, reverence, etc. - you know, the kind of stuff that makes Hollywierd go mad!

[Longfin]

We also passed on this movie after hearing that it was anti-Christian. I will not support the dark side.

[TCB in TN]

Wrote a term paper in HS about the parallels of Tolken's series and Biblical Christianity. My English teacher (who was not a Christian) was impressed enough to give me an A in spite of her disregard for my beliefs. Many of the classic writers were Christian and wanted to pass on their love for the ideals espoused in the Bible. It is sad that we have gone from Tolken's writing to the grand art form of the day "Grand Theft Auto"! I actually enjoy much of the modern culture, just wish our hero's were still hero's!

[Doc Hudson]

Ummm... it seems he already saw it since he wants to identify some props in it.

It's a movie. 99% of them are antireligious.

If you'd said, "non-religious" or even "irreligious" I'd not argue with you.

But there is a big difference between the indifference to religion of most movies and a movie that actively promotes the destruction of ALL religions.

I have not seen "The Golden Compass," and I will not see it, even when it eventually hits the TV. So I'm afraid I can't help with the gun question.

[Hobie]

Doc, as usual, hits the nail on the head.

There is a difference between indifference to religion and active denigration of religion. This is more than non-believers' poking fun at something they don't understand or think is silly. This is calculated anti-religious propaganda. There is a reason that socialists of any stripe hate religion and persecute religionists (of any belief) and that is because nearly every religion espouses standards, ethics and morality. Connect the dots and you won't be surprised that Hollywood socialists produce this movie or support certain political candidates or adhere to irreligious "religions" such as Scientology or pseudo-Christian churches.

[Old Ironsights]

Well, if I had actually seen it (and I'm not likely to), I would have answered the question.

I just didn't think the Question deserved a sermon.

Kind of like - "If you ain't bidding on it, don't gripe about the price." over in Classifieds...

[Hobie]

Well, if I had actually seen it (and I'm not likely to), I would have answered the question.

I just didn't think the Question deserved a sermon.

Kind of like - "If you ain't bidding on it, don't gripe about the price." over in Classifieds...

An example of topic drift...

[O.S.O.K.]

I've seen the film. I didn't pick up any anti Christian content, but I do accept what is reported here as being true that the books and consequent films will be.

In the Golden Compass, the character's souls are represented by corporeal animal spirits. The vilians separate these spirits from children forcibly and this is definately shown as being evil. I'm not sure what the anit-Christian message there is in that. What does the "dust" represent?

If the first book is bait then it hides it's intentions very well. Again, I'm not saying it's not bait - just that it's darn good bait.

Anyway - the guns that Sam Elliot's charater use are all late 1800's types - single action army colts, leverguns, etc - I don't remember the exact models.

Is Harry Potter anti-Christian? I've read all of the books and seen all of the movies - and enjoyed them quite a bit. I come away from them with my beliefs intact.

[AmBraCol]

I've seen the film. I didn't pick up any anti Christian content, but I do accept what is reported here as being true that the books and consequent films will be.

Is Harry Potter anti-Christian? I've read all of the books and seen all of the movies - and enjoyed them quite a bit. I come away from them with my beliefs intact.

O.S.O.K - my view of both series rest in that I am aware that there is a very real spiritual battle that rages around the globe. To materialists who believe nothing they can't put under a microscope the very idea of spiritual forces is absurd, superstitious, etc. That's fine - I've seen what I've seen and I've lived what I've lived and the reality of the forces of evil is evident to those who seek to know the truth. Now, to answer your question, to my way of thinking the danger of the Harry Potter and Golden Compass series is in that it presents the reality of dark forces as "childs' play". I do not care for any of the hollyweird depictions of satanic forces because they try to make them either funny or to present them as having greater power than they do. I've lived in lands where they are present all my life and have seen first hand that they do have power - but nothing like what hollyweird portrays. As comparison - we know that when someone gets shot with a 38 snubnose revolver that it's impossible for the shot to throw them backwards 20 feet and through a plateglass window - but hollyweird routinely portrays the 38 snubnose as containing exactly that much power. They do the same with the forces of evil. The truth of the matter is that satan and his hosts have no power over those who belong to the Christ. But many who claim to be of the Christ voluntarily allow themselves to become enthralled in/by the enemies' lies and succumb to the temptations he parades before them.

Many will write of this and other things as "mere superstition" and claim (as did one of my college profs) that there is no such thing as demonic power today. The enemy of the Christ is one who uses many tactics. If he's got you by the billfold then he doesn't need to trot out other weapons because he's got you just as sure as if he'd used cruder methods.

If you'd like to look more into the subject, here's a couple of links:

http://www.pluggedinonline.com/movies/m ... 003536.cfm

http://www.pluggedinonline.com/read/read/A0003874.cfm

My main objection to these types of movies is that they attempt to portray "magic" as "good". No, I don't care for Disney's efforts either. If others wish to view them, that's their problem, not mine. But they do portray things in a way contrary to the reality of the world around us. To each his own.

[MistWolf]

We never compare the Gospel to anything else. We compare everything else to the Gospel as it is the very foundation of truth

[Doc Hudson]

With all due respect, I'm going to disagree with Paul somewhat.

I've read the Harry Potter books, more than once, and I've seen the movies, the books are much better. I've not picked up the first anti-religious or anti-Christian comment in any of them. In each book, there are three holidays mentioned, Halloween, Christmas, and Easter. There are no religious discussions of any sort.

IMO, the Harry Potter books and movies are no more anti-religious than the average B-Western. It is nothing more and nothing less than the age old conflict of Good versus Evil. In every book, Good triumphs over Evil. As in real life, Evil seems to hold the upper hand at times, but Good people continue to struggle and eventually triumph. Just like the classic Westerns:
Hero looses family to villain, but villain temporarily vanquished (jailed): Hero grows up and is faced by a returning villain: Hero opposes villain, looses some friends and acquires more battle scars: Hero eventually offers himself as a sacrifice to save others: Self-sacrificing Hero finally vanquishes Villain and everyone lives happily ever after. The only difference it that in Harry Potter both the Good Guys and Bad Guys use wands and potions rather than six-guns and Winchesters.

As I said a number of years ago when the first Harry Potter books hit the market, "These books are encouraging kids to read. There is no way I can oppose anything that gets a kid to sit down and read a book." My opinion has not changed, even if Paul's has.

[Hobie]

I think that inasmuch as Harry Potter rehashes traditional European Christianized beliefs it is a confirmation of those beliefs, not an attempt to subvert them.

As to having your soul embodied in an animal, that's not Christian, is it? The thing is that most atheists seem to fail badly in their arguments because their arguments cause them to use metaphysical references. You can't have it both ways. More and more scientists are coming to that conclusion by virtue of their studies. That is, there must be something greater than the mere physical existence even if they don't understand it.

[AmBraCol]

With all due respect, I'm going to disagree with Paul somewhat.
<snip>
My opinion has not changed, even if Paul's has.

That's fine, Doc. I don't expect everyone to agree with me. And for what it's worth - my opinion hasn't changed either.

As far as books go I don't care much for the idea of "at least it's getting kids to read" - the same argument could be made for Penthouse Letters or other such material, and they are NOT appropriate for kids to read...

Anyway, I do not care for CS Lewis' or Tolkein's treatment of wizards and witches and such. I've seen to many of the real deal to want to try and classify any of them as "good" - no matter what color they're portrayed as. But each must make their own choices. I make mine as an informed person on the subject matter. Others make theirs as persons who do not see any "moral" or "spiritual" battle going on and just see "entertainment".

The whole issue of entertainment is one that allows for folks to adopt new ideas and attitudes. If they can make us laugh they can make us accept. That's how folks are coming to accept the entire homosexual/lesbian/etc agenda. It is presented as "normal" and "funny" and even "desirable". And jokes are made and folks grin and bit by bit they accept. The same is the approach that has been taken over the decades in regards to witches and wizards and whatnot. They are painted often as "the good witch" which is separate from "the bad witch" and often in conflict with each other. So we are lead to believe "There are good witches" and that they can help us against the "bad witches". Interesting to see the experiences of co-workers in other countries when folks seek out a living breathing "good witch" to "help" them out. The results are less than good - to say the least.

An interesting read is a book called "The Beautiful Side of Evil". It shows how folks can be lead into error all the while thinking that they've found something "beautiful" that is in reality evil to the core. But our society thinks that there is no such thing as good or evil, much less any sort of spiritual war going on. And so we blithely trip along to view material that is calculated to weaken our resistance to accept ideas that are foreign to our creator.

We are in the middle of a battle. Bit by bit folks' minds are being softened to new ideas. The same happened in the area of firearms. They used to be mere tools but now we've been geared to think of them as evil incarnate - slobbering trolls of doom and destruction. And it didn't happen overnight. It happened one halftruth at a time - the same way Eve was conned into eating the forbidden fruit.

We need to have a more critical eye when viewing the tripe spewed forth for our "entertainment". I fear I'm something of a killjoy when it comes to what passes for "humor" anymore. The question "Why did you laugh? What's so funny about THAT?" tends to be a real wet blanket type of question. We'd rather laugh at anything than analyze what we're being asked to accept as "OK" in order to laugh.

Now, folks are free to go and view whatever they so desire. I just wish folks would ask themselves "What are the truth claims that under gird what I'm being asked to accept?" Nothing is presented to us that is without a world view/truth claim. We alone are responsible for what we choose to allow into our minds - and eventually our hearts.

[O.S.O.K.]

I read many a science fiction book as a kid and young adult. I did'nt guage them as being Christian or not. Guess I forgot to or didn't realize that I was supposed to. They had a lot of ideas and things that were much more bizzar and thought provoking than the golden compass stuff. I also read all kinds of monster and other books - kinda like Harry Potter, they were fantastical.

Bottom line - I read a lot of books and now have a pretty good vocabulary and comand of the language. Other than spelling

It's certainly fine in a free country to read or not read a book for any reason at all.

I tend to keep my mind open to information and judge for myself. And I do keep a mind of what my kids read and don't want them to read anything that would subvert or bend their minds. But I also think they should read all kinds of different books...

[Old Ironsights]

Fiction totally aside...

One of my passions is Comparative Theology. I have likely read more "holy" books from more religions than many here have ever seen. I know I have read more than many Preachers in my area.

Just because the theme/philosophy/structure/theosophy/eschatology is non (or even anti) Christian doesn't mean that the literature itself is "bad". Heck, get rid of "religious" writings and we lose a LOT of classical Literature... think Upanishads, the Vedas, Teutonic Mythology, Greek/Roman Mythology (the Greek Classics) etc.

Really, fairy tales are fairy tales... but the "positive" of fairy tales like "modern" mythology like Lewis/Tolkien/Rowling is that they are NOT intended to specifically define religiosity in any respect. In fact, Rowling & Tolkien BOTH took great pains to create a genuine "wall of seperation" between Magic Folk (who could "use magic") and Humans (Hobbits, Humans, "Muggles") who really could/can not... i.e. "Magic" as a genetic trait, not a religious/metaphysical experience.

Big difference there.

Now, if we want to talk about "dangerous" religio-fiction, let's talk "Battlefield Earth"... Anybody need a quick audit?