His Dark Materials v2

[The Marquis de Leech]

His Dark Materials is not anti-religious as such (though it is incredibly dull, given the premise).

It is possible to read the series in several different ways:

- Theist. The Dust is the actual creator, and has had His creation usurped by the Angels and the Church. At that point you're getting into a fantastical Gnosticism, rather than anything resembling standard Christianity, but it is still a Theist position.

- Atheist. Divine creation is a concept constructed by beings like the Authority, and encouraged by the Church. Theism is merely a puppet play.

- Misotheist. The beings claiming Divine status are evil and must be fought, regardless of whether or not they are actually Divine.

Incidentally, labelling the books as anti-Catholic rather overlooks the fact that in this world, John Calvin became Pope. Insofar as the Church is anything, it is simply organised power usurping the Divine or else perpetuating a self-serving lie. That's hardly limited to Catholicism, and instead is really a go at organised religion in general.

[Happy Ent]

I’m sure the author himself mentioned that his beef is more with authoritarianism than with organised religion. That’s from when the movie was made.

[Seaworth'sShipmate]

I just saw the movie again about a week and a half ago. I liked it.

People say that the directors wimped out on "tackling the controversial issues" in the book, or that they "dumbed it down" unnecessarily. I don't think that is the case at all.

The director did a terrific job taking a complicated and dark (for standards of children's lit) story and making it compact and understandable for a film medium.

However, I think what doomed the movie, what made it do so poorly at the box office wasn't cowardly producers, or pushy religious people. I think it was just the plot of the movie/book itself.

Its definitely more deep/complicated than your average kids fantasy (Harry Potter, Hunger Games, Percy Jackson etc.) There is quite a bit to think about/take in, and it does kind of drag on a bit. At times it seems to really blur the line between child and adult fiction.

As much as I would like for the full trilogy to be made I don't see it happening. The first movie was such a colossal failure really.

Not only did it fail at U.S box office, it managed to bring down New Line Cinema ( of Lord of the Rings) down with it. The ironic thing is it did fantastically well internationally, but New Line thought it would be a good idea to sell the international rights. They basically flushed 180 million down the toilet.

Outside of some miyazaki/ cartoon movie, I see no one else tackling His Dark materials in film form.

[felice]

The director did a terrific job taking a complicated and dark (for standards of children's lit) story and making it compact and understandable for a film medium.

However, I think what doomed the movie, what made it do so poorly at the box office wasn't cowardly producers, or pushy religious people. I think it was just the plot of the movie/book itself

They left out the ending. I think that qualifies it as a bad adaptation, and leaves the movie plot with problems that can't be blamed on the book.

[Seaworth'sShipmate]

^ You know they filmed the original ending right? The footage likely still exists, deep in some vault at Warner Bros studios. To his/her great credit, this committed fan managed to find some of the public footage, coupled with scoreboard illustrations and reconstruct the ending (its really not bad considering!)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWM3XrnlNTU&spfreload=10

[Darth Richard II]

I liked that they cut the ending, since I despise book 2 so much, it means I can make up my own.

I like the movie mostly, but talking Viking like bears is kind of a sure sell for me. Plus her deamon was adorable. And a great soundtrack. Then again I love ago learned to accept movie book transitions as they are.

[HexMachina]

^ You know they filmed the original ending right? The footage likely still exists, deep in some vault at Warner Bros studios. To his/her great credit, this committed fan managed to find some of the public footage, coupled with scoreboard illustrations and reconstruct the ending (its really not bad considering!)

So what if they filmed it? It wasn't in the finished product, so it's irrelevant

[john]

Does everybody really dislike the second book so much? I thought it was the best by far.

[HexMachina]

I thought the second book was good, but as I understand it the problem most seem to have with it is Lyra's characteisation. In hindsight I too can see where they are coming from with that, though i never noticed when I first read the books

eta: still liked the book though. The Lee Scorseby momement was a real gut punch first time I read it

[john]

For me, it was more like a step back to see Lyra more clearly, as she really was. Yeah, she's impressive in many ways but she's also a savage, uncontrollable little brat.

The Scoresby scene was brilliant. Certainly the best death scene I'd ever read when I first read it and I haven't often seen better as an adult.

[felice]

this committed fan managed to find some of the public footage, coupled with scoreboard illustrations and reconstruct the ending (its really not bad considering!)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWM3XrnlNTU&spfreload=10

Interesting - thanks!

[gulogirl]

The series does take on and denounce the central theological premise of Christianity, which is the notion of original sin. To have Christianity, you have to have Eve bring 'sin' into the world through her disobedience to god in the garden of eden, because if you don't have that, you don't have anything for Jesus to absolve. The whole "Jesus died for your sins" deal isn't about the bad things that you, individually, may have done. It's about this original stain upon humanity, wrought by Eve. In Judaism, Eve's actions don't bring sin into the world. This is a later interpretation that, post facto, justifies the imperative to worship Jesus and accept him as savior.

Pullman suggests that this is the essential lie that the Authority and its various multi-verse representations have perpetuated. The notion that experience is the equivalent of sin damages people and closes them off to living full lives as they seek to infantilize or lull themselves into quiescent, unquestioning automatons.

Every one of the books elaborates on the awful repercussions of this idea. Lyra knows that severing people from their daemons is evil, and we learn that Dust, perceived by adults as bad, is actually something positive. By the time we get to the grey underworld, we discover that the afterlife promised by religious faith (and also, of course, the reward offered by salvation through Jesus) is a lie. Then there is the final show-down in which the basic premises of omniscience and omnipotence are demolished.

In this sense, the series is pretty clearly taking issue with Christianity, albeit in a very sophisticated theological way. If original sin is not sin, then there is no need for Jesus. And that's what the series is arguing. I think this is why people get so worked up about it. It strikes not just at the straw men (the priests and power structures of religion) but the premise of a need for Christianity.

I say this as someone who loves these books and wholeheartedly agrees with the argument, by the way. But they are undeniably opposed to Christian theological tenets.

I see the books as atheist but not anti-spiritual.

[Darth Richard II]

For me, it was more like a step back to see Lyra more clearly, as she really was. Yeah, she's impressive in many ways but she's also a savage, uncontrollable little brat.

The Scoresby scene was brilliant. Certainly the best death scene I'd ever read when I first read it and I haven't often seen better as an adult.

Yeah those silly females and their emotions. Good thing she had a strong man to show her what's what.

[john]

Preach. It's a good thing we have you to show us what's what.

[Stannis Eats No Peaches]

Does everybody really dislike the second book so much? I thought it was the best by far.

I like it for the reasons you've given, but I think it drags more than the other two.

[john]

The third one dragged the most for me because there was so much stuff from outside our main povs (also I guess it changed from mainly just one person pov in the first two books?) Angels and priests and wheely aliens and whatnot. There's also a forging sequence which I seem to remember finding very boring.

[Stannis Eats No Peaches]

The third one dragged the most for me because there was so much stuff from outside our main povs (also I guess it changed from mainly just one person pov in the first two books?) Angels and priests and wheely aliens and whatnot. There's also a forging sequence which I seem to remember finding very boring.

Fair enough, but I'm surprised the reforging chapter bored you. It's been years since I read it, but I think I found it quite atmospheric.