Occam - 09 December 2007 09:08 PM

I haven’t read any of the books, and I don’t plan to.  From the write-ups here and on the movie review websites (even those that liked the movie), I’ve decided to respect and accept George’s evaluation and not waste my time seing it. 

I have a feeling that its sole saving grace would be the same as the last movie I saw - Enchanted.  Thank goodness for Nicole Kidman.  She, in her filmy, clinging gowns made that movie almost bearable. 

Occam

One thing for sure, I would defiantly NOT go by the mainstream reviews of this film. I haven’t read a single one (god or bad) that I agreed with. This movie is on an entirely different level than Enchanted, good lord….

The fact that the movie did very well overseas but only got bad reviews in America should tell you something….

I think the movie was great, its the expectations that were off. Its a story that challenges the core of the American mentality, of course it isn’t going to be something that is widely embraced. The story isn’t a populist story, its a story that is against the mainstream worldview.

Hello Cthulhu - 10 December 2007 12:56 AM

  Some folks have to get worked up over something to feed their persecution complex.

Good point.
And scapegoats make good diversions and recruitment vehicles.

Occam - 09 December 2007 09:08 PM

I haven’t read any of the books, and I don’t plan to.  From the write-ups here and on the movie review websites (even those that liked the movie), I’ve decided to respect and accept George’s evaluation and not waste my time seing it. 

Occam

Thats too bad. The whole movie supports the pursuit of truth and free inquiry. Who here cannot respect that?

morgantj - 10 December 2007 06:41 AM

Thats too bad. The whole movie supports the pursuit of truth and free inquiry. Who here cannot respect that?

I can respect the idea, but I can’t respect bad art. I thought Happy Feet did a great job at pursuing truth and free inquiry and I really liked the story. And it also had Nicole Kidman in it! Naked! Too bad she was a penguin…

I do respect your autonomy of taste with regards to style George.  May I ask you though, George, do you like Harry Potter?  Do you like The Narnia stories?  Did you like them as a child?  Do you dislike fantasy in general, or just the Golden Compass in particular?

erasmusinfinity - 10 December 2007 06:54 AM

I do respect your autonomy of taste with regards to style George.  May I ask you though, George, do you like Harry Potter?  Do you like The Narnia stories?  Did you like them as a child?  Do you dislike fantasy in general, or just the Golden Compass in particular?

I think HP is well written. It has everything a story should have: an introduction of the character, a plot that culminates in one(!) high point, and an end. You know what HP is feeling, and for the time you watch the movie or read the books you become him. I didn’t find that with the Golden Compass. By the time I got to get to know one character, a new one was introduced. I didn’t think much of Narnia, but I still enjoyed it more than LOTR or GC. And no, I don’t dislike fantasy in general. As a kid I loved reading Jules Verne, for example.

I agree with George.  I liked the Lord of the Rings, and the Harry Potter books, because they have characters you can relate to.  I didn’t see anything about the Golden Compass that interested me at all.  Lyra just seems to do whatever the author needs her to do —(one quick example, there was a point in the second book where the obvious thing to have done was to ask the compass where Will’s father was, but it would have spoiled the story to do that, so she didn’t).

Anyway, I started this topic because I thought some of the people who liked the books could point out some of those great allegorical things that I must have missed when I read it.

The main reason I went to see the film was to support reason & free inquiry in the public eye.  The movie may not have lived up to the expectations of Harry Potter, but it was definitely worth the price of a movie ticket.  I hope this film does well enough, that I get to see the end of the trilogy on film (mostly because my reading list is dauntingly long as it is).  Remember this is a kid’s film. 

Harry P and the Pullman trilogy have things in common and differences.

Both series encourage young readers / viewers to question authority and to think for themselves in general.
While real-life religious authorities, of course, claim different reasons for urging parents to avert their children’s eyes from these tales, isn’t it likely that their true fear is the encouragement of independent thought?

To me, the significant differences between Rowling and Pullman, or shall we say, Harry and Lyra, are these:

The Pullman trilogy, at least in the print version, is a bit more sophisticated, and more importantly, more specifically skeptical of religious authority.

The Potter books and movies became a cultural steam roller, and the “Catholic Leagues” of the world were unable to squelch them.  The Pullman series, which does have the potential to plant the seed of critical thinking in the minds of young people, may end in movie form with the first installment if it is unsuccessful.  This would be a damn shame for that reason alone. 

For my part, I thought the movie was an enjoyable diversion.  Had I not already read the books, I’m not sure I would have liked it as much, although I sure like looking at Eva Green, and it’s always a pleasure to see Sam Elliott on the screen.
Ms. Kidman, though, has always sort of given me the creeps.  Maybe that she was married to Tom Cruise sticks in my mind.
Ewwwwwww!

George - 10 December 2007 06:51 AM

morgantj - 10 December 2007 06:41 AM

Thats too bad. The whole movie supports the pursuit of truth and free inquiry. Who here cannot respect that?

I can respect the idea, but I can’t respect bad art. I thought Happy Feet did a great job at pursuing truth and free inquiry and I really liked the story. And it also had Nicole Kidman in it! Naked! Too bad she was a penguin…

I went to movie without any expectations, nor did I care to compare it to any other movie. I wonder if this perhaps, allowed me to view the movie in a different perspective then yourself.

morgantj - 10 December 2007 08:19 AM

I went to movie without any expectations, nor did I care to compare it to any other movie.

You don’t believe that yourself, do you? Our brain is always judging the present based on statistics: comparing, and coming up with possible outcomes: expectations.

Ah, but George, that’s what meditation is supposed to help you stop doing!

mckenzievmd - 10 December 2007 11:45 AM

Ah, but George, that’s what meditation is supposed to help you stop doing!

Or you can try sleeping!

zarcus - 07 December 2007 08:27 PM

I’ve been thinking quite a bit about Dennett’s theory of belief in belief and this looks familiar. I wonder if that wouldn’t be a good approach to take, we might just start saying very plainly; come on, you don’t believe in God and you know it!  I’m willing to try out for awhile. Then when they insist they do we can just keep repeating the claim, much like they do about atheist.

Actually I have tried that, and they do not appreciate the irony.  They insist that God himself says (Romans 1: 18-20, if you want to know) that nobody has any excuse not to believe in him.  I have tried pointing out the epistle to the Romans was written by the apostle Paul, and though he may have been sincere, he was only human and could therefore be mistaken, but it goes in one ear and out the other.  As far as they are concerned, if it’s in the Bible, it is God’s word.

rationalrevolution - 10 December 2007 04:15 AM

One thing for sure, I would defiantly NOT go by the mainstream reviews of this film.

You should always take reviews with a grain of salt.  USA Today’s reviewer only gave “Tin Man” two out of four stars.  If I had payed attention to that, I would have missed out on something good.