The Catholic League is calling for a boycott of “The Golden Compass” this December. This is making news and spreading around various emails. I have friends, whom upon receiving this email, that have decided not to attend the movie. Many cite that they do not want to give Pullman any money for a book they wouldn’t like. A few have said that they do not want to promote an atheistic agenda. I understand how folks can feel this way, I really can. I think the question, Why show a movie like this when there are so many good movies that can be made? is a very valid one.
Having said that, here’s why I will not boycott it.
- For one, Pullman, the author of “His Dark Materials” has already received his money from New Line Cinema. Even if no one sees it, he has his undisclosed sum of cash already in pocket.
- Chris Weitz, the director, changed the Magisterium so that religious elements were removed. The Book != The Movie
- This movie will not convince someone to renounce Christianity.
- Drawing attention to it by for a ban only increase its popularity. It’s like free advertising for the movie.
- I believe that the strongest calls for a boycott are rooted in fear.
- It’s silly to think that the God of the universe can be undone by any movie or book.
I’m not saying that everyone should go see this movie. I have no interest in reading the books. Some may have interest insomuch as the books serve as a discussion point with athesits/agnostics. Not me. My atheist/agnostic acquaintances already have their own preferred framework to discuss their ideas. (Carl Sagan seems to be the favorite.)
Frankly, I don’t know how they will be able to write around the last book in which the character of god dies. The Amber Spyglass is more strongly about religion than all the others, you might get a 15 minute short if all the religiously themed content is removed.
Instead, I think a more reasoned response would look like this. The Church of Scotland has chosen to instead embrace the movie as a golden opportunity to stimulate discussion on a wide range of moral and spiritual issues. The Kirk also sees this movie as a chance to talk about human destiny, corrupt institutions, and making choices in life.
I’m not saying that danger + opportunity = crisis. (Turns out that isn’t true, anyway.) What I am saying is that in choosing how to respond to something like this makes a big difference. Choosing to respond as the Church of Scotland does show confidence and a willingness to talk. They are meeting the moment with information and openness.
I like fantastic stories, so maybe I’ll catch it on DVD. Maybe not. The Naria movie was a disappointment to me, so at least I won’t be entirely disappointed by this one.
Fire away!
Comments
3 Responses to “Film Boycotting”
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
- pinakidion: what rock said
- Rock: “Is Pinakidion ever going to post again?”
- salguod: Is that an answer to a question that I missed?
- xray342: How’s this for cryptic? $ echo ‘pinakidion’ | md5 16da6556b9ba8a411a6f4251591eae2b
- Velocio: “Despite my best efforts, you have learned about evil from me, in part, because you have seen it in me.” Wow, tears....
I like your point, that the God of the universe cannot be undone by a movie or a book. It stands in contrast to the Muslims who want to put a teacher to death for naming a stuffed bear Muhammad. I don’t think God needs us to defend Him. On the contrary, we need His protection.
OTOH, I think there are a variety of ways for us to make an appropriate point about this. One way is probably to boycott. It probably won’t affect this particular message much. But it might cut into the support for the next similar atheist propaganda piece.
Here’s what strikes me about this kind of thing. What motivates those behind this? What fuels the evangelistic fervor of an atheist? It is pretty obvious what should motivate a Christian. But in comparison there’s really little in it for the atheist.
The movie is not an atheist propaganda piece. The director has made it a point to remove the religious content. In some ways, it’s like the rewriting of a Grimm’s Fairy Tale. Did you grow up with this version of Cinderella? Cutting the heel to fit in the shoe? Man, that’s gross.
As far as Pullman’s motivations go, he has basically said that it is not a Christian attack. It could be extended to all religions. As a secular humanist and an atheist, he has basically written about the things that interest him most: the Victorian Era, fantastic settings, Milton’s Paradist Lost, and the pursuit of wisdom. While his ideas are quite different from mine in regards to God, I don’t construe his ideas as a malicious attack. It’s his ideas. The power of his ideas to affect change can only come by the power given by others to his ideas. As such, I believe a boycott gives more power to his ideas that simply shrugging them off. A different movie about the missing years of Jesus should get more attention. It is an attack on Christianity in some very Gnostic ways. Still, a boycott give power to those ideas, so I believe that the Church of Scotland model prevails again in terms of a reasoned response.
The Archbishop of Cantebury has even said that the books could be useful in Christian education. When someone says that God is under attack and tons of emails are forwarded all over the US calling for a boycott, I wonder if anyone has thought about it before spamming their contact list. I spent about 15 minutes looking up information about the books and realized that the author of the email forwarded to me had not looked into the matter at all.
As an aside, the Archbishop and Pullman had a ‘debate’ of sorts talking about the cosmology of the book. Very interesting. Even Pullman sees the pivotal event of Christianity is the resurrection, not the crucifixion.
I read the first book and it was a rollocking good tale. I shall no doubt catch the movie on DVD. Like you Pink I don’t much see the point of a boycott.