IronMan: The "Catholic Batman"?

Barbara Nicolosi calls the movie "a fun diversion and harmlessly nonsubstantial for those who like that sort of thing" but Sancta Sedis is playing around with some latent allegorical interpretations and Steve Skojev takes things along a more literaly track.

Anywhichway, it's fun reading.

Call for Submissions: World's First Pro-Life Film Festival, Cinema Vita

This news should be of special interest to some readers. Marjorie gives us the goods:

"The Cinema Vita Film Festival has been established to encourage young, emerging filmmakers and to showcase movies about contemporary issues concerning the meaning and value of life. Coordinated by the San Francisco Archdiocesan Office of Public Policy, the Oakland Diocesan Respect Life Ministry, Marriage for Life, and Ignatius Press, the festival is based on the recognition that art, especially the medium of film, shapes the popular imagination and has a tremendous influence on culture."

They are looking for submissions spanning 3-5 minutes in 3 categories: high school, college and open. For each there is a cash prize of $250 and a Canon HG10 High Definition Camcorder (value $1100).

Read the submission criteria here. Entries must be postmarked by February 14, early entries encouraged.

Here, again, is the official website.

More details:

The winning films will be shown at the festival on March 7, 2008 at the Delancy Street Theater in downtown San Francisco, along with the award-winning feature film After the Truth, a provocative look at a fictional trial of Dr. Josef Mengele, the notorious Angel of Death at Auschwitz.

Ignatius Insight has an extensive article explaining the motivation and goal of the festival.

Any questions? Marjorie, blogging at Deal W Hudson is point-lady for blog outreach and news.

This is exactly the sort of innitiative I love prompoting at AmP. Get to it, you young media-savvy papists!

A single observation about the movie Cloverfield

This afternoon I took a break from by preparations for this weekend's pro-life activities to unwind a bit by sitting in a darkened movie environment immersed in dolby digital surround.

I chose the movie Cloverfield, which currently sits comfortably at the top of the weekend box office. I don't have much to say about the movie, per se, because frankly there isn't much to say about it.

Without giving anything away, one little scene did strike me.

The movie is filmed from the perspective of a young man's home movie camera, with him providing a live voice-over narration. During an intense near-death experience, the young man begins blurting out a series of profanities, but tucked away within the stream of cursing is a single, very sincere remark:

"Oh God, I'm so sorry."

And that's it. But it got me thinking: what is it about human nature that causes us, in our moments of greatest fear and with the prospects of eternity proximately looming, to fixate on two things: one, God, and second, contrition.

The young man, in the drama, is not notable religious, he's your quintessential average joe. Neither are the producer, director or script writer, to my knowledge, particularly "religious." But that's the point: you don't need to be. They are simply acting as good artists, trying to capture an emotional moment vividly and realistically:

"Oh God, I'm so sorry."

Forbes (of Positive Golden Compass fame) responds

Out of Christmas benevolence (and a new-found preoccupation with Christmas cookies), I won't immediately respond to Forbes' recent attempt to defend the positive review he authored of the Golden Compass.

But Carl did.

Breaking: Peter Jackson to film Tolkien's "The Hobbit" in two films

You heard that right. Plans that had previously fallen through have now been patched up.

The gist from AFP:

Oscar-winning "Lord of the Rings" director Peter Jackson has settled a feud with Hollywood studio New Line and will make two films based on J.R.R Tolkien's "The Hobbit," a statement said Tuesday....

.... As with the "Lord of the Rings," the movies will be shot simultaneously before being released separately. Principal photography was likely to begin in 2009 before the release of the films in 2010 and 2011.

An interesting comment from Lew Harris, editor of Movies.com:

New Line have discovered with 'The Golden Compass' that not anybody can make a movie like this," he added referring to the studio's recent fantasy film starring Nicole Kidman which has struggled at the US box-office.

Correction: "Not anything (that includes anti-Christian fantasy) can make a movie like this."

(But I'll keep my peace.)

I'm not quite sure about splitting the story into two films, but then again it does makes sense if you want to squeeze everything in. And you should. By the by, the combined worldwide box office gross of the original Lord of the Rings trilogy stands just under $3 billion. Great Gimli's beard!

Other sources:

• AP: "Hard 'Hobbit' to Break: Jackson's In"
• MGM CEO talks to Entertainment Weekly
• Coverage from TheOneRing.net

... and there's already an official "The Hobbit Movie Blog."

There ya have it!

Flash: USCCB *withdraws* its Golden Compass review

Someone pinch me:

Today the U.S. bishops withdrew the review of the film “The Golden Compass,” which opened in theaters in the United States Dec. 7. The review was written by Harry Forbes and John Mulderig, the director and staff reviewer respectively of the Office for Film and Broadcasting of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. The review was released and posted on the CNS Web site Nov. 29. The USCCB gave no reason for withdrawing the review.

Since CNS is a distributor of media reviews of the OFB, it must respect the office’s withdrawal of its review. Effective Dec. 10, the review of “The Golden Compass” will not be available on the CNS Web site. It will not be included in subsequent listings of USCCB film reviews and classifications. - CNS News Hub

ph/t: Insight Scoop.

From that comment thread: "One shoe has dropped. The other would be either to replace Forbes or to issue a statement from the USCCB about the problems with THE GOLDEN COMPASS and why the USCCB doesn't appreciate the deceitful use of its review, as lame as the review was."

It's hard to appreciate how significant a change this represents. Back when the USCCB Office for Film and Broadcasting released a positive review of Brokeback Mountain, there was scattered protest but the story didn't get all that much traction (at least, as I remember it). This time, however, New Line Cinema took the positive review of The Golden Compass that they issued and ran with it. New Line's ill-advised decision to use the endorsement of the "U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops" along with widespread criticism of the review from Catholics conspired to create a perfect storm of embarrassment for the USCCB Office for Film and Broadcasting.

[As an aside: I do have to note that I remain continually surprised how many positive adjustments have come about as a result of the protests mounted in the Catholic blogosphere and elsewhere throughout this story. First New Line pulled their most-offensive online advertisements (though they still made it to the newspapers). Then they gave up on their efforts to have similar ads run in Catholic Publications. Now the USCCB is removing the offensive review (instead of tinkering with it a la the Brokeback Mountin example). Let's hope we haven't see the end of this little chain of victories.]

Frankly, without sugar-coating the mistakes that led up to the USCCB's Office for F&B releasing the faulty review, it's a rather gutsy move on the part of the USCCB to pull the review, because it essentially pulls the rug out from under an already-struggling movie. By the same token, however, perhaps the near-universal panning the movie has received by the mainstream establishment provided the USCCB with the "in" they needed to yank the review: i.e., Forbes and Mulderig not only ignored the film's anti-Catholic background, but also represented a pathetic lack of artistic sensibility - the prime quality professional movie reviewers are supposed to possess.

I've intentionally refrained from calling for the firing/resignation of Forbes and Mulderig over this controversy. I recognize that this review (especially when combined with Brokeback Mountain) seems to show a grave lack of responsibility on their part, but on the whole I've tended to see the USCCB reviews as mostly harmless. However, when those same reviews are taken almost at face value to mislead the faithful, that is far more serious. And sometimes, stupidity and ineptitude should cause you to lose your job as quickly as malevolence.

I would certainly join the many, many folks who have been saying that Stephen Gredanus of DecentFilms.com would do a far superior job. For one thing, he's already demonstrated good taste and firm orthodoxy.

And wouldn't that be a wonderful example of good things coming from bad circumstances? Consider: long after New Line's unfortunate foray into anti-Catholic fantasy has been relegated to the DVD sales rack, the USCCB might actually be running a functional, relevant, informed, respected and Catholic movie-reviewing service!

More on this developing story as I see it .... let's see if/when the other shoe drops.

In the meantime, I've been covering this topic (seemingly ad nauseum) here if you need to catch up.

update: This development puts me in mind of something I pointed out last Sunday:

"Awkwardly and ironically, Harry Forbes and John Mulderig of the USCCB Office for Film and Broadcasting appear to have been left holding the bag by the mainstream reviewers."

And what do you do with a bag when you're left holding it? Well, if you're smart, you drop it.

update 2: the Washington Times notices:

The poor box-office performance and indifferent critical buzz — just a 44 percent share of favorable reviews at the popular site Rotten Tomatoes — put the church in the unexpected position of being one of the film's highest-profile champions. The original USCCB review, written by Mr. Forbes, has been cited in the film's ads.

"Secular critics were panning the movie as a poor piece of art, while Catholic critics were concerned with Pullman's underlying agenda," Mr. [Pete] Vere said. "Thus the USCCB review was out of touch with both the secular culture and the Catholic subculture. The bishops need to revisit how that office is run."

update 3: CNA chimes in, and LifeSiteNews demands an explanation for the USCCB.

Meanwhile, Chris Kaltenbach of a Baltimore Sun blog provides a classic example of why this review needed to be withdrawn. Besides calling Bill Donahue "apoplectic", and confusing CNS for the USCCB's Office for F&B, he spends the rest of his time admiring Forbes and Mulderig's take on things. Oops.

update 4: Since several folks have asked: "Comments on the review of 'The Golden Compass' or its withdrawal by the USCCB can be sent to CommDept@usccb.org." - CNS News Hub

update 5: LifeSiteNews, which has a long track record for success in these types of initiatives, recommends contacting Cardinal George, the USCCB president, or his secretary:

USCCB President

Francis Cardinal George, O.M.I.

Archdiocese of Chicago

155 E. Superior Street

Chicago, IL 60611

312-751- 8200

mfox@archchicago.org

From what I've heard, the best way to be noticed is a physical letter, followed by a phone call.

Video: Prince Caspian Trailer (High Quality) + Poster

More information: [IMDB] [Wiki] [Narnia Fans]

And a beautiful poster - Coming May 16, 2008!

New Line ad claim: Golden Compass "entirely in harmony with Catholic teaching." (includes picture)

Sometimes, words fail me. Sometimes, I hate being really right:

Behold how New Line Cinema is promoting it's new movie The Golden Compass, which it is well-known at this point is based on a series of Anti-Catholic books. [This image was sent to me by a trustworthy source. However, I have not been able to confirm a specific URL where it is currently being used (dynamic ads are difficult to pin-down). If someone finds one, please send me the URL or screenshot. update: Some possible confirmation found - scroll down.]

Okay, presuming that the advertisement is genuine....

First, the ad conflates the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the official leadership body of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States, with the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' Office for Film and Broadcasting. They aren't the same.

But this first point is a minor complaint compared to this advertisement's claim, in quotation marks, that this movie is "An exciting adventure story entirely in harmony with church teaching".

This line never appears in the USCCB's Office for Film and Broadcasting review.

The actual quotation reads as follows (underlining mine):

To the extent, moreover, that Lyra and her allies are taking a stand on behalf of free will in opposition to the coercive force of the Magisterium, they are of course acting entirely in harmony with Catholic teaching.

(the previous part of the artificial quotation about the "exciting adventure story" appears elsewhere.)

A spokesperson for the Catholic League observed in response to this problematic line:

In what the League calls "mind-boggling", the USCCB review actually congratulates the screenwriter for portraying the characters as demonstrating "free will" for their opposition to the Magisterium and then suggests that this is a reflection "entirely in harmony with Catholic teaching"."

... The League countered: "Nazis are portrayed as having free will in movies, too. Should the screenwriters of this film be commended for reflecting Catholic values? Free will is indeed a Catholic value, but it is the object of free will that carries moral weight."

Never when I began covering this story back in August did I think I would see New Line Cinema actually claiming its movie The Golden Compass to be "entirely in harmony with Catholic teaching."

And even when I reported that New Line Cinema is approaching Catholic publications to advertise their new film did I suspect they would jump way beyond claiming the movie to be neutral and instead promote the idea that it is in fact "entirely in harmony with Church teaching."

I mean, I didn't think they they would be that stupid. To make the obvious semantic point:

The advertisement makes the universal claim that the entire movie is "in harmony with Church teaching." Even the problematic review warns that the film contains "anti-clerical subtext, standard genre occult elements, a character born out of wedlock...."

So are all those things now "entirely in harmony with Church teaching"?!

As the advertisement stands, it is a bald falsehood, and the U.S. Bishops should speak out against New Line Cinema for attempting to mislead Catholics about the character its movie.

In a way, this is a "good" development, because it takes what (up to this point) has been somewhat arguable problems and makes this a very clear case of grave misrepresentation.

For all my previous posts on this story, click here.

update: I found a nibble:

On BeliefNet's CrunchyCon blog (of all things?) I found this advertisement. I've taken a screenshot of it for verification. Judging by the font and accompanying art, I believe this lends credence to my original post's claim that New Line actually produced the original false advertisement as well.

And of course, they could still be running that previous ad elsewhere on the internet. It's also entirely possible that the New Line advertising staff read blogs like this one or CurtJester, and that they've quickly withdrawn the first (more offensive) advertisement.

This new advertisement still falsely claims the blanket endorsement of the USCCB, which I've already noted does not express opinions on movies except through its Office for Film and Broadcasting, which contracts various people to write the actual reviews.

I think this second advertismenet is a good sampling of what we can expect "quite a few" Catholic publications to publish in the next week, as I previously reported here.

So, are Catholic newspapers and publications going to cast their lot in with New Line on this one? Are the U.S. Bishops going to sit back and let New Line claim their wholehearted endorsement of a movie which contains "elements of the occult" and "anti-clerical subtext"?

I don't need to dabble in the occult or have any sentiments of anti-clericalism to have a strong feeling that some scrambling is going on behind the scenes at 3211 4th Street.

Looking Ahead: Review + Interview for the Human Experience

This is a very busy week for me, but I will be sitting down at some point to sketch out a brief review of the Human Experience by Grassroots Films, which I had the privilege of seeing at an advance screening this weekend.

I'll also be posting excerpts from an interview I was able to conduct afterwards with Joseph Campo (Producer/Cinematography) and Michael Campo (Associate Producer/Writer/Actor).

I was very impressed by these gentleman and by the rough cut of the movie that I saw. Grassroots Films is best known for producing the award-winning vocations video Fishers of Men for the USCCB.

I've posted previously on this film and production company here:

• Human Experience advance screening this weekend
• The Next Big Thing: "The Human Experience" (Megapost)

In the meantime, the Dominican Friars who generously hosted the screenings have a post covering the events.

New Line Cinema uses favorable USCCB review to advertise in Catholic publications?!

I hate to use a hackneyed phrase, but the plot just thickened.

Amy reports:

Using the positive review of the[the Golden Compass] that has come to us from the USCCB film office, a review penned by Harry Forbes and John Mulderig, New Line’s advertising agency is reaching out to diocesan publications.

Amy then reproduces an email sent from New Line Cinema to diocesan publications. Most notably in it:

"We’ve spoken extensively about this film with Harry Forbes, Director of the USCCB’s Office of Film and Broadcasting."

I echo Amy in asking, what is that supposed to mean?

Again, I really try to avoid being cynical in my postings, but in this case we shouldn't forget that Pullman, New Line Cinema, et al. stand to make (or lose) a great deal of money on this movie adaptation.

Now, these same folks are approaching Catholic and Diocesan publications to have them promote the film, and they are using Harry Forbes' favorable review as their trump card. You've got to be kidding me.

I explain why this is not the kind of material the USCCB should be rubber-stamping right here.

Catholic League slams USCCB for positive review of Golden Compass

LifeSiteNews interviewed the Catholic League for their response to the USCCB's recent positive review of the Golden Compass, which I took issue with yesterday in my extensive post on the topic.

In most instances, this article repeats the main points that I made. One interesting connection the interview makes:

Forbes has for many years been the Director of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) Office for Film and Broadcasting. In 2005, LifeSiteNews.com pointed out that Forbes issued a glowingly positive review of the homosexual propaganda film "Brokeback Mountain". Yesterday, Forbes issued another positive review, this time for the film adaptation of the specifically anti-Catholic novel "The Golden Compass."

... The League did not take issue with the USCCB review praising the film for its artistic merit, but for its winking at the devastating anti-Catholicism.

... Forbes' 2005 USCCB glowing review of the homosexual film Brokeback Mountain was substantially altered after a LifeSiteNews.com readers issued numerous concerns to the Bishops Conference. (See coverage here.) LifeSiteNews.com has retained a copy of the original glowing review for those interested.

A litte zing that I passed over:

In what the League calls "mind-boggling", the USCCB review actually congratulates the screenwriter for portraying the characters as demonstrating "free will" for their opposition to the Magisterium and then suggests that this is a reflection "entirely in harmony with Catholic teaching".

"To the extent, moreover, that Lyra (the central character) and her allies are taking a stand on behalf of free will in opposition to the coercive force of the Magisterium, they are of course acting entirely in harmony with Catholic teaching," writes Forbes. "The heroism and self-sacrifice that they demonstrate provide appropriate moral lessons for viewers."

The League countered: "Nazis are portrayed as having free will in movies, too. Should the screenwriters of this film be commended for reflecting Catholic values? Free will is indeed a Catholic value, but it is the object of free will that carries moral weight."

CPT Tom and Freder1ck in the comments thread to my original post also brought up the USCCB's prior "glowing" review of Brokeback Mountain. I think it is important to make clear once again that there is nothing outrageous, properly speaking, in criticizing a USCCB-sponsored movie review. These are journalists hired by the USCCB, not U.S. Bishops invoking their teaching authority.

Related: "Plan to Turn Anti-Christian Books into Super-Series after "Golden Compass" Released" (LSN):

British author Philip Pullman's anti-religious children's fantasy stories will become a multi-million dollar Hollywood "super series", according to a Reuter's report, along the lines of Lord of the Rings and the still unfinished Chronicles of Narnia. At the same time, opposition to the anti-religious, and specifically anti-Catholic themes of the book are coming under greater scrutiny with the US Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights calling for a boycott.

Carl Olson, who has long been following this story, notes how the book is explicitly anti-Catholic:

I recently sat down and read a few chapters of The Golden Compass. Chapter 21 is especially notable, what with its remarks about "the Church," "the doctrines of the Church," "exorcisms," "original sin," "God," "Adam and Eve," quotes from Genesis 1-2, the Bible, castratos, Church music, etc. (all of which, needless to say, are presented in a most negative way).

Yeah, sure sounds to me like Pullman is thinking of one organized religion in particular: Catholicism.

Reminder: Human Experience advance screening this weekend

I will be attending one or more of the screenings of The Human Experience hosted by the Dominican Friars in DC at the John Paul II Cultural center this weekend.

Plans are still in the works for me to have a sitdown with the producer and writer to follow-up with them after I've seen the production.

If I receive permission, I intend to write a short review of the film and, regardless, will be posting more updates on it. As I said, I'm very excited to see it and explain why here.

A synopsis of the plot:

"The Human Experience is the story of a band of brothers who travel the world in search of the answers to the burning questions: Who am I? Who is Man? What is the meaning of it all? Their journey brings them into the middle of the lives of the homeless on the streets of New York City, the orphans and disabled children of Peru, and the abandoned lepers in the forests of Ghana, Africa."

The very promising trailer for this movie:

U.S. Bishops give Golden Compass a pass, and why we shouldn't.

This post is rather long and is divided into two parts. If you want to skip down to my short essay on why I find this movie problematic, scroll down until you see the text bolded in red.

If you want my commentary on an advance review of the movie, read on:

CNS news hub introduces the USCCB's "much-awaited movie review of 'The Golden Compass', which they rate suitable for A-II: adults and adolescents. The story is being marketed primarily to children.

My comments and interspersed with parts of the review, which begins by praising the movie as a "lavish, well-acted and fast-paced adaptation" from "Philip Pullman's much-awarded trilogy, "His Dark Materials":

The film has already caused some concern in Catholic circles because of the author's professed atheism, and the more overt issue of the novels' negative portrayal of his (very much fictionalized) church, a stand-in for all organized religion.

The fact that the church described in the novels is "fictionalized" does not matter so much in this case. Pullman wrongly proposes his caricature of the Church not as caricature but as the actual reality.

Most moviegoers with no foreknowledge of the books or Pullman's personal belief system will scarcely be aware of religious connotations, and can approach the movie as a pure fantasy-adventure. This is not the blatant real-world anti-Catholicism of, say, the recent "Elizabeth: The Golden Age" or "The Da Vinci Code." Religious elements, as such, are practically nil.

Just because this movie is not the blatant real-world anti-Catholicism of the movies noted does not rule out the possibility that the Golden Compass may also be offensive for different, but significant reasons.

(As an aside, it's no surprise to find the "excellent voice work" of homosexual-activist/anti-Catholic British actor Ian McKellen as the the great polar bear. But who knows, maybe it's a slow time of the year.)

Even if Pullman's fanciful universe has a patchwork feel, with elements culled from other fantasy-adventure stories -- most especially "The Chronicles of Narnia" (a work Pullman disdains) -- there's hardly a dull moment, and the effects are beautifully realized, including the anthropomorphized creatures like the polar bears whose climactic fight is superbly done.

"Disdains" is a very sublimated way of describing Pullman's systematic, energetic rejection of C.S. Lewis's art and belief. To use a culinary analogy to make my point: if I only disdained domino's pizza I would not set out to create an alternative pizza that I marketed as better, more appealing and then insult anyone who still professed a preference for domino's pizza. Pullman more than disdains C.S Lewis, that's certain.

Whatever author Pullman's putative motives in writing the story, writer-director Chris Weitz's film, taken purely on its own cinematic terms, can be viewed as an exciting adventure story with, at its core, a traditional struggle between good and evil, and a generalized rejection of authoritarianism.

First of all, Pullman's motives aren't "putative", they are explicit and intentional. The traditional struggle of good and evil, and the rejection of authoritarianism, moreover, are warped in his storyline into an invective against the Church, again falsely attributing to it the attributes of "evil" and "authoritarian." Movies are cultural moments, and those who resist this movie are doing so to build up a culture of respect for the Catholic Church and in so doing militantly oppose those artists who insult and denigrate it. Correctly, I would argue.

There is, admittedly, a spirit of rebellion and stark individualism pervading the story. Lyra is continually drawn to characters who reject authority in favor of doing as they please. Equally, only by defying the powers that be, can a scientist like Lord Asriel achieve progress. Pullman is perhaps drawing parallels to the Catholic Church's restrictive stance towards the early alchemists and, later, Galileo.

Again, Pullman is not "perhaps drawing parallels." This is to grant him an absurdly-merciful benefit of the doubt. And since when do we support drudging up the hackneyed relationship between the Catholic Church and Galileo? Isn't that getting old? Even a cursory analysis of the myriad of circumstances that obtained in that controversy make it clear that focusing on a minor aberration in Church history does a disservice to the Catholic Church's vibrant, pervasive tradition of encouraging the sciences! Fair's fair.

The script also makes use of some of the occult concepts found in the books, such as the diabolically named "daemons" -- animal companions to each person, identified as their human counterpart's visible soul.

Again, occult? daemons? visible souls? Such material in a children's book is a serious matter. A child's imagination is a precious thing that should be guarded carefully.

Will seeing this film inspire teens to read the books, which many have found problematic? Rather than banning the movie or books, parents might instead take the opportunity to talk through any thorny philosophical issues with their teens.

Clearly, it's absurd to argue that every child who sees this movie is in danger of losing their faith. Parents, however, are charged with the education and formation of their children. "Thorny philosophical issues" are constantly the proximate cause of genuine crisis among youth, and sometimes it's best to nip them in the bud, not buy popcorn and absorb them in vivid technicolor dolby surround at a theater.

The religious themes of the later books may be more prominent in the follow-up films which Weitz has vowed will be less watered down. For now, this film -- altered, as it is, from its source material -- rates as intelligent and well-crafted entertainment.

Intelligent, well-crafted entertainment is not an end in itself if it betrays fundamental human goods and divorces beauty from truth. The fact that New Line is evaluating the sustainability of these latter, presumably more offensive films based on the ticket sales of this first one further council a prudent consideration of whether one can support it. In essence, there is more at-stake here that artistic integrity. Let me elaborate:

I've been thinking about the Golden Compass and trying to better formulate why I'm so opposed to it. I have not seen the movie, nor have I read the books. Here's what I came up with that might be helpful.

One could easily argue that movies are the contemporary medium of popular art. Within this medium, there are, I would submit, two great movie series vying for the imagination of the next generation. The Lord of the Rings, clearly, is the greatest. Second to that is the Chronicles of Narnia (the second film in that series, Prince Caspian, will be released in spring of '08). The authors of these two series are both brilliant intellectual Christians who employ fantasy in different ways to communicate transcendent truths about man, the world and God.

The production of these two series have provided a wonderful opportunity for a wider audience to familiarize themselves with stories long cherished by Christians in general and Catholics in particular. They are excellent tools for evangelization (and I don't meant that in a utilitarian sense), just look at the bevy of books they have prompted. Their beauty, and the richness of the worlds they create, lead towards truths concretely realized in the Christian revelation. They are "ours", and we are only too willing to share them with others.

Enter into this scene Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials series. New Line Cinema, who is producing this series and also produced The Lord of the Rings, is explicitly in their advertisements attempting to draw a parallel between the two works (I blogged about that strategy here when I first heard about the Golden Compass, and stated my problems with it then). They claim it is a continuation of Tolkien.

Now, while Pullman does share in the same broad category of "fantasy" as Lewis and Tolkien, he is also at-odds with their more fundamental philosophical and religious worldviews. Pullman has been named the "anti-Lewis" for a reason. New Line Cinema may not realize it, but Tolkien and Pullman are not peas in a pod. In fact, they aren't even Jacob and Esau. They are more like Gandalf and Sauron, more like Aslan and Jadis.

The fate of our corporate "movie imagination" balances on the edge of a knife. Catholics, I think, realize without completely understanding why, that Pullman's movie is a danger to what has so fortuitously come about as a result of Hollywood's storyline vacuum - a vacuum filled so-far, and happily, with the accumulated wisdom and beauty of Tolkien and Lewis. Pullman is poised on the brink of entering into what has been so carefully assembled, and blast it to pieces. If I may be permitted a moment of cynicism, I suspected that the avowed anti-Lewis is content to see his series of books become the new cinematic anti-Narnia, and by extension, anti-LOTR.

I remain open to the possibility that I'm making too much of all this, but I can't shake the sense that part of building up a Catholic culture, in this instance, involves sedulously resisting the lure of His Dark Materials.

***

As a postscript, I am aware of the argument that any attempt to boycott or vocally criticize this movie will supposedly only play into the hands of those who want to see the film do well (a la The Da Vinci Code). At the same time, of course, I think it is important to inform Catholics and Christians about the true nature of this film. Many people simply don't know why it problematic because and it is not overtly anti-Catholic or anti-God. There is already a very large movement to boycott the film, and a brief look at the social networking site Facebook reveals literally hundreds of thousands of folks doing so. In other words, this little post is just a drop in the bucket. And we should also refuse to be marginalized from these public debates. That's a sure path to defeat.

***

Incidentally, my previous posts on this topic have been receiving a large influx of visitors from search engines who are looking for background on the claim that this movie is anti-Catholic. I've written this post in part as a service to those new readers who might not be aware of the issues involved. Towards that end, you should also consider my previous posts on this topic, which in turn include links to other good commentaries and sources:

• update 2: New Line Cinema uses favorable USCCB review to advertise in Catholic publications
• update: Catholic League slams USCCB for positive review of Golden Compass
• Actor Daniel Craig: "They sell Dan Brown now in the Vatican"
• Golden Compass author Philip Pullman calls critics "nitwits"
• The word is getting out about The Golden Compass
• The Golden Compass is pointing towards anti-Catholicism
• Related: Posts on Philip Pullman and other dark materials

If you found this post informative, please digg it so others will find it!

Actor Daniel Craig: "They sell Dan Brown now in the Vatican"

Actor Daniel Craig (of recent James Bond fame) attended the London premier of The Golden Compass last night (previously blogged here), a movie in which he stars.

Responding to a question about the story's anti-Catholicism, he responded with typical Hollywood cluelessness:

"I'm not surprised at the criticism," said Craig. "I get that. But I think the majority of people who are criticising it haven't read it. These books are not anti-religious. Mainly they're anti-misuse of power - whether it's religious or political. They sell [The Da Vinci Code author] Dan Brown now in the Vatican so I'm sure they'll be selling this there too eventually because it presents a very healthy debate.

"It's interesting that people should get so angry because the morals in this book are solid and really good," the actor added. "Any child should read this."

Gee, thanks for the tip, Craig! I'll be sure to place my order with amazon.vatican.va real soon!

Golden Compass author Philip Pullman calls critics "nitwits"

I've been noticing an ongoing stream of headlines relating to the Golden Compass in recent weeks (it opens Dec. 7th), and also to the Catholic League's initiative to boycott the film because it is based on Philip Pullman's anti-Catholic series, His Dark Materials.

I blogged about this story back in August ("The Golden Compass is pointing towards anti-Catholicism") and composed a short summary of what you need to know about the film back in October ("The word is getting out about The Golden Compass").

Now, with the movie's release imminent, and the fate of films two and three hanging on how this first one performs (New Line Cinema has more riding on this series, it has been reported, than it did on Lord of the Rings), series author Philip Pullman has broken his silence, saying "it causes me to shake my head with sorrow that such nitwits could be loose in the world". The nitwits in question are those who are calling for a boycott of the film.

To give the Catholic League credit, their reasons for the boycott seem reasonable to me:

The author of this children's fantasy is Philip Pullman, a noted English atheist. It is his objective to bash Catholicism 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 Catholicism 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 a boycott is warranted.

The Catholic League wants Christians to boycott 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.

Friends of mine have read part or all of this series, and tell me that the books are both well written, and very dark (torture, etc.) Certainly not suitable for younger children, they said (noting sensualism, etc.). And they confirm the CL's claim that the books' anti-Catholicism becomes more blatant with each