Golden Compass boycott a success - sequel uncertain

Who says boycotts dont work?

This blog was a not-insignificant player in last year's efforts to spread awareness.

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.

LSN cites widespread call for bishops to restaff film review office

LSN reports:

In light of the fact that the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) Office for Film and Broadcasting withdrew its positive review for "The Golden Compass", Catholic leaders are reissuing a call for the Bishops to fire their film office director. Harry Forbes, the director of the USCCB, was listed as primary author for the much contested Compass review but was also the author of a December 2005 glowing review for the homosexual propaganda film Brokeback Mountain.

Human Life International (HLI) Leader Fr. Thomas J. Euteneuer commented to LifeSiteNews.com on the latest developments. "I'm very happy of course that the review has been taken down from the bishops' website, so there's no more damage that can be done by that particular review," he said.

Noting that Forbes also authored the positive review of Brokeback Mountain, Euteneuer said, "However the bishops need to correct the anomaly of having someone on staff who speaks in their name making these kinds of reviews of movies."

The HLI Leader added: "It's a scandal and I renew the call that this man should resign or be fired."

LSN also includes the contact information for those wishing to lodge a complaint.

They've also republished Forbes' previous review of Brokeback Mountain:

While the actions taken by Ennis and Jack cannot be endorsed, the universal themes of love and loss ring true.

Related: "Denver Archbishop Chaput Criticizes USCCB Film Office [Review]":

In the December 12 issue of The Denver Catholic Register, Archbishop Charles Chaput makes a thinly veiled criticism of the positive review of 'The Golden Compass' put out by the Office of Film of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). That USCCB review first posted November 29, a week prior to the film's debut on Dec. 7, was withdrawn yesterday, without explanation.

In his review of the film, Chaput writes that "The aggressively anti-religious, anti-Christian undercurrent in "The Golden Compass" is unmistakable and at times undisguised." He adds, "The idea that any Christian film critics could overlook or downplay these negative elements, as some have seemed to do, is simply baffling.'

That line bears directly on the positive review for the controversial film by USCCB Office for Film and Broadcasting Director Harry Forbes and his colleague John Mulderig.

Briefly noted: "The Most Overpaid Celebrities" (underlining mine):

Once you’re in Hollywood's A-list earnings club, it’s hard to get kicked out, no matter how badly your films perform at the box office.

Case in point: Oscar winner Nicole Kidman. She earned an estimated $15 million for her latest film, The Golden Compass, known around the studio lot these days as the biggest turkey of 2007. It grossed a dreary $26 million when it debuted stateside last weekend, though its reported budget flirted with $200 million. (That's Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings territory.) The film garnered a respectable $55 million overseas since its release, but it's unlikely the international box office will salvage this expensive pic.

Ouch.

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.

Exclusive: New Line did *not* withdraw all of its misleading ads

Remember those grossly-misleading online advertisements produced by New Line Cinema claiming the U.S Bishops had said that their new movie, The Golden Compass, is "An exciting adventure story, entirely in harmony with Catholic teaching"?

Remember how they changed the online advertisements to read "An exciting adventure story. Intelligent and well crafted - U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops" after some pressure?

Remember that they scrapped plans to run this advertisement in "the nation's top 50 Catholic diocesan papers", as reported by LifeSiteNews, owing to pressure from many named sources, including Amy Welborn and myself?

Well, this afternoon while I was taking a ride on the metro, I was reading a very popular daily newspaper, and what did I see in the movie section but the following...

(update: thanks to the reader who retouched the original image for clarity.)

Here, once again, is the original advertisement text reading "'The Golden Compass' Is An Exciting Adventure Story, Entirely in Harmony With Catholic Teaching." - U.S. Conference of CATHOLIC BISHOPS."

Go ahead, open up a local newspaper, I wouldn't be surprised if you find the same (misleading) endorsement.

Granted, these ads were probably purchased some time shortly after the review was published (or given to the New Line folks), and it's much more difficult to pull or edit a newspaper ad than an online one. But the fact remains that the initial advertising "push" for this movie in the most-read U.S. news dailies includes this fallacious quote.

Another observation: the other endorsements in this advertisement, besides "the U.S. Bishops", are by "CBS-FM Radio, Maxim, E!, Parade.com and The London Sun." Notably absent, I would submit, are the regular "top" movie reviewers: New York Times, LA Times, Variety, Ebert & Roeper, etc.

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 in an unfortunate development, one can begin to speculate if their gushing review wasn't in-fact prompted by something other than aesthetic wonder. I mean, since when does a vocally anti-Catholic, "anti-God" author merit some sort of benefit of the doubt when his books are adapted to the silver screen? How did the mainstream reviewers find so many flaws?

To review: 1) movie debuts. 2) U.S. Bishops'-sponsored reviewers laud it for it's artistic merit, 3) mainstream-affiliated reviewers pan it for it's artistic content, 4) movie bombs. 5) AmP scratches his head.

For AmP's previous coverage of The Golden Compass, click here.

Golden Compass suffers "disaster" opening weekend, no sequels expected

Not to engage in schadenfreude, but let's follow the trajectory and see where it points:

Stage 1: The Golden Compass actor Sam Elliot starts off optimistic:

"Sam Elliot said he doesn’t expect the controversy surrounding his new film ‘The Golden Compass’ to affect its run in the box office. If anything, Elliot says, it will cause more people to see the film and read the books it is based off of."

Stage 2: Marketwatch wonders if the controversy will hurt the box office:

"It's often said in the film business that any kind of publicity is good, but that may not be the case with New Line Cinema's new release, "The Golden Compass."

Stage 3: Reuters reports that The Golden Compass "dissapoints at box office":

"The Golden Compass," a costly fantasy starring Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig, got off to a slow start at the North American box office and will likely fall short of opening-weekend expectations.

New Line Cinema's $180 million film sold an estimated $8.8 million worth of tickets during its first day in theaters on Friday, according to data issued on Saturday by tracking firm Box Office Mojo."

Stage 4: Meanwhile, on meta-review site Rotten Tomatoes, GC scores a measly 44%:

"The best you can say about The Golden Compass is that it's merely the second-dullest Nicole Kidman/Daniel Craig film this year." - New York Post

Stage 5: Now in free-fall, Ropes of Silicon declares The Golden Compass "a Box-Office Disaster!":

"Out this week were two quality films in Juno and Atonement. On top of that you have the big budget fantasy epic from New Line The Golden Compass, which cost the studio $180 million to make and probably close to a bajillion dollars to market. Unfortunately for New Line the headline at Fantasy Moguls doesn't bode well for a sequel or the film itself, "GOLDEN COMPASS is a disaster w/$9M Friday & $27M 3-day."

"Yup, our very own Laremy Legel predicted the film would come in at #1 with upwards of $44 million, but it seems the film is going to fall flat and those hoping for a feature adaptation of "The Subtle Knife" or "The Amber Spyglass" are going to have to cry yourselves to sleep tonight as the fate of those two films relied on the success of this first one and $27 million opening weekend isn't going to cut it." (underlining mine.)

I don't know what the future holds, but if I had to guess, I'd wager that one could only accurately describe Stage 6 as a post mortum. Sometimes, the dust bin isn't so unfit a destination. And this is one of those times.

For AmP's previous coverage of The Golden Compass, click here.

update/related:

"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." [Read on.]

AmP mentioned in LifeSiteNews coverage of agencies withdrawing Golden Compass ads

Good tidings, and an appreciated mention from LifeSiteNews:

Controversial advertisements suggested to the nation's top 50 Catholic diocesan papers advertising the upcoming movie "The Golden Compass" have been pulled.

... Medlinger [who is responsible for the day-to-day activities] explained that when a sales representative first approached him about pitching advertisements for the film, "I said we have to find out what the USCCB movie rating is."

"When our sales rep heard that the rating from the Bishops Conference was A II he sent out that note," continued Medlinger. "Afterwards we had a conversation and we are not placing those ads."

Asked what caused him to change his mind despite the positive USCCB review, Medlinger was hesitant and would only respond: "It was my decision, it was just business we didn't want to do."

Faithful Catholic activists and bloggers can take a pat on the back for the outcome.

...

LifeSiteNews.com readers, activists and Bloggers such as Amy Welborn, Thomas Peters of American Papist, among many others, have pursued both the USCCB review and the proposed ads stirring a healthy controversy.

What can I say? Sometimes the system works.

I certainly rest better knowing that Catholic publications will not help put dollars into the coffers of an author who wrote his books to promote atheism and mock the Catholic Church.

Seriously, good job.

Pullman sales have "Surged 500% with Movie Publicity"

As predicted:

As if in answer to all those who suggested that the upcoming December 7 release of movie 'The Golden Compass' would not lead to enticing children into reading the anti-Christian novels by atheist Philip Pullman, Random House has reported a 500% increase in sales of the books. "More than ten years after its original publication, The Golden Compass has hit USA Today's Top 50 Best Sellers list, having seen a 500% increase in sales over the last three months," says the release.

The omnibus edition of Philip Pullman's complete His Dark Materials trilogy -- of which The Golden Compass is the first novel -- has moved onto USA Today's Top 50 list as well. The Golden Compass has sold over 3.5 million copies in the US to date, and the trilogy has sold over 7 million copies. - LifeSiteNews

Favorable "U.S. Bishops" review of The Golden Compass given much press

As predicted, many columnists are taking the favorable review of The Golden Compass issued by the USCCB's office for Film and Broadcasting as "gospel." A sample:

“The Golden Compass” — and Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials trilogy of novels on which it is based — has been criticized in some quarters for being anti-religious and specifically anti-Catholic.

But the U.S. Conference of Bishops recently issued its official review of the film — and it’s a rave.

Writing for the Catholic News Service (catholicnews.com), critics Harry Forbes and John Mulderig call the movie “lavish, well-acted and fast-paced.”

“The good news,” they write, “is that the first book’s explicit references to this church have been completely excised, with only the term Magisterium retained. The choice is still a bit unfortunate, however, as the word refers so specifically to the church’s teaching authority. Yet the film’s only clue that the Magisterium is a religious body comes in the form of the icons which decorate one of their local headquarters. - Robert W. Butler of the Kansas City Star

As Jim Lackey of CNS News clarifies, "technically it’s not our review; we simply distribute film office reviews to the Catholic press".

And once again, an important distinction is lost upon those looking to support their a priori.

Quick update on the Golden Compass controversy

Details emerge, and the comedy of errors continues:

Donna Freitas, a visiting assistant professor of religion at Boston University, calls the Pullman books a "theological masterpiece" in an Associated Press interview. The article, as a whole, however, isn't so bad and hits most the important and widely-known points.

Regarding New Line Cinema's attempts to advertise The Golden Compass in Catholic publications, that deal is being brokered by Advertising Media Plus, which arranges group advertisement buys for Catholic publishing institutions. It is a division of the Cathedral Foundation.

Finally, Ryan of Catholic Audio submits his satirical version of New Line's already-famous advert: Finally, some truth in advertising.

Still no public word from the USCCB in response to New Line Cinema's flagrant misuse of an already-problematic review of The Golden Compass. For all my previous posts on this story, click here.

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.

More proof that New Line Cinema is trying to advertise the Golden Compass in Catholic publications

Catholic institutions promoting a movie based on a book that attempts to bring down Catholic institutions.

This is the reality we will face if rumors come true that New Line Cinema is using the USCCB's favorable review of the Golden Compass to spearhead an advertising campaign among Catholic publications.

Today, I received another confirmation that such a project is in the works:

Last week, I couldn't help overhearing our ad salesman ask our business manager if we would want to accept a full-page ad promoting "The Golden Compass," to which the answer was (thankfully) no.

But the exchange piqued my interest, and so I asked the sales rep about it. Turns out, some agency was trying to arrange a group buy of Catholic papers around the country, and we were contacted to see whether we wanted to be in or it. I asked whether any Catholic papers were taking the ad, and he said, "Oh yes, quite a few."

Of course, from New Line Cinema's point of view, it's an excellent move: what better way to downplay criticism that the material is anti-Catholic than being able to produce a whole list of Catholic publications and institutions that have consented to advertising it?

Of course, as I reported about a year ago, some Catholic newspapers have no problem advertising for pro-abortion Governors. An anti-Catholic author, you say? No biggie.

I guess all of this leads up to the conclusion that I won't be surprised to find a new BlogAds submission from New Line Cinema asking me to advertise the Golden Compass on my sidebar (not going to happen).

So, what can you do about it? Well, as a start, if you find a Catholic publication that is running advertisements for the Golden Compass, let me know by emailing me or posting in the comment box so I can compile a list.

I'd be especially interested to find out if the New Line Cinema advertisement quotes the favorable USCCB review.

update: Curt Jester has heard from a reader that New Line Cinema is claiming that the Golden Compass is "entirely in harmony with Catholic teaching" - an incredible inflation and misapplication of the (already-flawed) particular endorsement given by the USCCB reviewer.

update 2: Catholic News Agency picks up on this story and confirms it:

The promoters of the controversial movie, The Golden Compass, are making an effort to diminish the boycott being threatened by Catholics and other Christian groups. The advertising agency for the movie has sent an email to the top 50 weekly Catholic newspapers asking that they consider running an ad promoting the movie.

Advertising Media Plus, the agency promoting The Golden Compass, is trying to use a review by Steve Forbes, the director of the U.S. Bishops’ Conference Office for Film & Broadcasting, as leverage against the boycott being called for by Catholics and Evangelicals.

National Account Manager for Advertising Media Plus, Bob Bugle sent an email to the top 50 Catholic newspapers saying that New Line Cinema is interested “in possibly advertising The Golden Compass in the Catholic press.”

His email goes on to mention that the movie has caused some controversy and then attempts to ease any concerns by citing a positive review from Harry Forbes, the Director of the USCCB’s Office of Film and Broadcasting.

Now to wait and see who takes New Line up on their golden offer....

Meanwhile, LSN reports that some are calling for the resignation of the USCCB reviewers.

Coca-Cola promotes Golden Compass to address "perilous state of the polar bear"

A nice snapshot of contemporary values:

I saw that Coca-Cola is promoting the movie [The Golden Compass], and I wrote to them to express my feelings about it -- including mentioning that the villains are called "The Magisterium" in the movie. Here is the response I got:

"We appreciate the opportunity to respond to your concerns." The Golden Compass movie is a story about friendship, love, loyalty, tolerance, courage and responsibility. This movie also provides an opportunity for Coca-Cola to help raise awareness about climate change and the perilous state of the polar bear."

"We do not believe that this fantasy movie is an attack on any religion. We would never support a film that intentionally antagonized or condemned any faith."

If they receive more letters about this, it's possible it may accomplish something. ~ Rick Kephart

Frankly, until someone makes a compelling case that this movie diminishes the survival chances of the polar bear, or somehow inhibits climage change, I doubt we'll see anything accomplished.

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.

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 succeeding volume.

The anti-Catholic message of His Dark Materials, and Pullman's intention to compose atheistic propaganda are, from my reading, really beyond any dispute. One need only look at the Ignatius title "Pied Piper of Atheism: Philip Pullman and Children's Fantast" or read through Carl Olson's many and excellent posts on the topic to admit this point. Alternately, Chris Blosser wrote a megapost on Pullman vs. C.S. Lewis in June at Against the Grain. Finally, prominent secularists are actually criticizing New Line Cinema for not including Pullman's full anti-religious venom in the movie! Honestly, he has no defense. And it makes his protestations all the more hypocritical.

Donohue responded thusly to Pullman's protestations recently:

"In the current Newsweek, Pullman lashes out at me saying, [How could Donohue know that I'm a militant atheist, and that my intention is to convert people?] That’s easy—I just quote him: ‘I’m trying to undermine the basis of Christian belief.’"

Let's take a look at what Pullman exactly said, so we can bask in his excellent use of English prosody:

"To regard it as this Donohue man has said - that I'm a militant atheist, and my intention is to convert people - how the hell does he know that?" - UK Times

I agree with Pullman - how the hell isn't he a good influence on kids?

Update: Rebecca Davies of the UK Telegraph movie blog royally doesn't get the point:

It is blatant attempts such as these to control personal choice and shirk scrutiny that have led to criticism of the Catholic [sic] in the first place.

And they’re only lucky that some independent filmmaker didn’t come along and take them to the cleaners with a full-blown anti-Catholic Golden Compass, complete with Pope Benedict lookalike.

In terms of crossing the line, I think that was a pole-vault. So let me get this straight: Pullman's writing of a subversive novel to "control" the "personal choice" of kids - that's okay. But Catholics' decrying of Pullman's attempt to control the personal choice of kids - that's wrong?

To paraphrase Davies in my own words: "It is blatant examples such as this to apply a double-standard to anti-Catholic activists that has led to my recurring criticism of the mainstream media in the first place."

"And she's rather unlucky that the AmP, an independant blogger, decided to come along and take her to the cleaners with a full-blown anti-double-standard stance, complete with direct quotations."

There, I think that works nicely.

The word is getting out about The Golden Compass

Update: Recent coverage: "Golden Compass author Philip Pullman calls critics "nitwits" (Nov. 27)

Case in point, FOX News interviewed Fr. Jonathan Morris yesterday about the anti-Catholicism of New Line Cinema's upcoming The Golden Compass (featuring supposedly-Catholic Nicole Kidman, Daniel Craig and the voice of Ian McKellen).

I'm also noticing a large bump in visitors searching the internet for straight-talk on the subject. Well, you've come to the right place. Or more accurately, this post is the right place for everything you want to find out. 23 linking blogs can't be wrong.

The Gist: Philip Pullman, the author of the book series which The Golden Compass adapts for the screen, wrote the novels to promote atheism in young children and to discredit the Catholic Church. They also aren't that great. More here.

The Golden Compass is pointing towards anti-Catholicism

Update: Recent coverage: "Golden Compass author Philip Pullman calls critics "nitwits" (Nov. 27)

CathNews alerts us to the potential problem:

Nicole Kidman has denied that a new film she's making is anti-Catholic. The movie features an organisation known as "The Magisterium", which kidnaps children to remove their souls.

The Brisbane Times reports that Kidman told a US magazine that her Catholic faith affected her consideration of the script for the film, which is titled The Golden Compass.

The fantasy film is based on a novel by Philip Pullman called Northern Lights. It is already attracting attention in the US for avoiding much of the book's perceived anti-Catholic rhetoric.

Kidman said some of the religious elements were removed from the movie script.

Kidman told the magazine: "I was raised Catholic, the Catholic Church is part of my essence.""I wouldn't be able to do this film if I thought it were at all anti-Catholic."

The Golden Compass is due for release in the US on 7 December.

I watched the extended trailer for the movie recently, and remember raising my eyebrows during some parts:



Narrator: "[This] is a world dominated by the Magisterium, which seeks to control all humanity, and whose greatest threat, is the curiosity of a child." (oh darn, he's on to us!)

Scientist Good Guy: "... [there is a] parallel universe, where there is no Magisterium." Religious Evil Guy: "That is heresy." Scientist Good Guy: "That is the truth." (aw shucks, science proved us wrong again!)

What's worse, I found an Amazon review of the novel that this movie is based upon. The review more than collaborates first-hand what CathNews mentions about the books being anti-Catholic:

A shock of bigotry

I read all three of these books and I kept waiting for the Anti-Catholic crap to be explained and rectified. I was horrified particularly that this is a book directed at children when the point of the whole story was to kill the "Authority" aka God. Not only that but all of the Priests of the Church were horrible, evil men who are lacivious, dirty, and murderous. Not one of them is good. And then the only way that the world can be saved is for two 12 year olds to make out.

There are so many other details in the story that I could name as examples of the vemonous anti Christian and particularly anti Catholic bigotry in these books. The 'tempter' is an ex nun who flat out tells the two children that Christianity is a mistake...and there is also a thinly veiled reference to sex when the book says her greatest time of 'bliss' was not when she was a nun. She also goes on to tell these two 12 year old kids that she was not married but lived with a man for four years. Then there is a bizarre story of the two male 'angels' who are in love with each other.

I'd like to tell any parents to steer clear of this book that is supposedly for children or even young adults. And also for people who are fairminded individuals and who dislike bigotry in any form.

I rated this item one star but I would give it NO STAR if I could.

And that's just a start! Read what another Amazon reviewer, from another viewpoint, had to say:

I am not a religious person. I wouldn't say I'm an atheist, but I'm seriously leaning toward agnosticism. However, this series made me feel not just uncomfortable, but downright unclean because of how it dealt with religion. Mr. Pullman is an atheist, and I do not take exception with his right to his beliefs. I probably share some of them. The problem is, this series has been published and marketed as a children's fantasy novel, with no mention of the active dislike - hatred, even - in it's portrayal of religion. Mr. Pullman is free to believe what he chooses, and I'll defend to my dying day his right to do so. However, readers (and their parents) also have a right to their beliefs, and should not be blindsided by a seemingly harmless children's book. We label music with violent lyrics, restrict access to movies with adult themes, even rate television shows so parents have some idea of the content before allowing their children to watch. It disturbs me that this book is marketed directly to children, without any indication of its anti-religious themes.

This is not a series for young children, no matter how precocious they are. Religious issues aside, it's just too dark. Even young teens should not read this series without adult input. If your child wishes to read it, you should read it first and be prepared to discuss it with them. This is especially true if you are even casually religious because it's unsettling to have your beliefs twisted into something evil and spit back at you. Adults and older teens should be aware of the subject matter before reading it. If you don't have a problem with it, fine, enjoy the books. They're certainly well written. If I had been prepared for the subject matter before going into it, I might have actually liked the books.

... and here's a third negative review along similar lines, for good measure.

Now, tally these objections with the fact that New Line Cinema is trying to market the movie as a logical/related continuation of their Lord of the Rings productions (and thereby trying to take advantage of its huge audience), and I'm not at all pleased.

The official trailer begins with the line "In 2001 New Line Cinema opened the door to Middle-Earth. This December they take you on another epic journey", while the Golden Compass is falling through air and spinning around to look like the One Ring from the LOTR promotions. How cute, but also how wrong.

I don't think I'm being pedantic on this point. People love LOTR not just for its fantasy world, but for its philosophy. To say that LOTR and the Golden Compass are two epic journeys is to ignore what kind of epic journey the LOTR presents. While perhaps sharing a similar genre of fiction, these sound like two very different tales.

Of course, you might be wondering why people are making a fuss over the anti-Catholicism of the book if the movie has tried to remove the offensive parts. Well, these types of movies always generate a renewed interest in the original titles. In the case of the LOTR and Chronicles of Narnia, this is great. In the case of the Golden Compass, this is a problem. Moreover, it seems that the Golden Compass isn't just sprinkled with the occasional anti-Catholic/anti-religious sentiment - it is deeply-inundated with the bigotry of a bitter atheist.

.... and it's marketed as a book for children?!

Update: Christopher Blosser has previously treated the problematic nature of Philip Pullman's work. If you want a more in-depth analysis of the issues involved I highly encourage you to read Christopher's post.

Update 2: Carl Olson at Ignatius Insight has also posted today on this topic (he was planning on doing an updated story about Pullman anyway, since he has covered his works in the past). Quite a triple takedown, this.