Chris Weitz Interview

Fan Reponses

Having published our interview with Chris Weitz, we were interested to hear what people thought about the director. Some were encouraged by his answers whilst others remain sceptical about his ability to make His Dark Materials the best film that it could be. We've gathered a few of these responses on this page, and though it was conducted a long time ago, you can still submit your response about the interview to webmaster@bridgetothestars.net.

It's only appropriate to start with Philip Pullman's response: "I'm glad to say that I've had some very interesting and productive conversations with Chris Weitz, who was recently appointed to direct the film(s). This is [...] an interview with Chris in which he talks about his approach. I hope you find it as encouraging as I do."

Fan Responses

My Vote for Everyone's Grandma - Kinders
Reservations - Will
Ben's Response - Ben
Andrew's Response - Andrew C.
Warily Hopeful - Merlyn

My Vote for Everyone's Grandma

by Kinders
www.kinders.tk

This response comes from one of a few scattered people who, on hearing that Chris Weitz seemed to be winning the race for director of Northern Lights, thought, "well, why not?" It comes from a guy who was impressed with the commitment and ingenuity shown in writing a lengthy dissertation on the books. That was my idea. This response comes from someone who knows that nobody is going to be good enough for the His Dark Materials adaptations - but who is resigned to the fact that it's happening. And, since we're getting whoever New Line say we're getting, we'll just have to look for the best qualities we can in whoever gets the job (or whoever prematurely assumes they're already there). Let's face it, Everyone's Grandma would be better than Brett Ratner.

Until Weitz called to let us know everything was gonna be okay, I'd thought maybe everything was going to be okay. This was Weitz's opportunity to prove to us that he could deliver what we wanted from the His Dark Materials films. What he has given us is all the answers we expected, which is not what we wanted at all. Let's have a look:

"...anyone attempting the books as films should feel utter commitment."

"When you are directing a movie, you have to give all of your time and attention to it, and I knew that I would happily do that for His Dark Materials."

"...the magic of the piece is as much in the relationships as in the potential for spectacle."

Is he copying these answers from the Good Bullshitting Textbook? Tell us something exciting, Chris. Tell us something different.

And tell it at a later date. "Allaying the fans fears" is a good idea, but only if you have something to say. Does he even have the job yet? I hope so for his sake, because he's going to be facing some desperate fan antipathy following this. The dude referred to Kubrick as lugubrious.

"...the "Authority' in question could represent any arbitrary establishment that curtails the freedom of the individual, whether it be religious, political, totalitarian, fundamentalist, communist, what have you. This gives me a certain amount of leeway in navigating the very treacherous issues that beset adapting His Dark Materials for the screen."

"...there may be some modification of terms. You will probably not hear of the "Church' but you will hear of the Magisterium."

Modification of terms? I'm led to assume that Weitz isn't currently pursuing a career in spin only because he's crap at it. My personal favourite is: "Those who will understand will understand." If, like me, the manipulative redundancy of this statement makes you feel slightly queasy, join me in a steadying liqueur and brace yourself; there's more to come. His Dark Materials, it transpires, is "not an atheistic work"* - conversely it is "a highly spiritual and reverent piece of writing". Naturally, the two are not at all compatible. Not only that, but "those who attack it as an assault upon religion are mistaken" and must have misunderstood such lines as "the Christian religion is a very powerful and convincing mistake", or avoided Pullman's admission that "wherever you see organised religion and priesthoods and power, you see cruelty and tyranny and repression. It's almost a universal law."

Weitz also reminds us that there are "elements of violence and suffering" in the films that may necessitate a PG-13 rating, but that he "can't imagine what in the books would necessitate an R". Do we really dare let someone with such a stunted imagination take on our beloved trilogy? Or rather, do we dare shun the opportunity to fight someone who will sacrifice content for net profit? He rather aimed the barrel at himself with the admission, "R ratings are restrictive..."

As for Weitz's super-changeable schizophrenic view on computer graphics, does anyone have any idea where he stands?

"I believe that there will be very soon, if there isn't already, a backlash against the CGI-heavy effects movie; which is not to say that His Dark Materials won't rely a great deal on CGI artists..."

"My main concern is that, with CGI technicians able to "make' practically "anything', there is a tendency to blow out the synapses and lose the sense of reality and the grasp on your emotions that real people and real things have."

"Iorek Byrnison will be a largely CG character; there is no way around that."

(Defeatist.)

This response comes from someone who was genuinely willing to suppress judgement on a director who I thought it unfair to judge at such an early stage. I would even consent that the guy has made an effort; but based on his responses, I just don't believe that he can carry everything that's wonderful about His Dark Materials to the screen. I hope that those fears of others have been allayed so that you might sleep easy, at least until the film's release. Quite suddenly, I need my nightlight on again.

I can only take comfort in the fact that our Chris will be "the first person to go to if there is any aspect of the film that violates [Pullman's] sense of the work's meaning." On the evidence above, he should be applying for that job in politics any day now.

*Pullman must just have been confused when he referred to his own books as "atheist republicanism".

P.S. I must say I was rather saddened to discover "the impossibility of seeing absolutely everyone on the face of the earth" to audition for roles. How very naïve of me.

To Top

Reservations

by Will

A large thanks to Mr Weitz for doing this interview, rather unprecendented and very appreciated. As for the content of the interview itself, well, it's a mixed bag. It's encouraging to hear how passionate he is about His Dark Materials, but a few extremely worrying points were made. Weitz has clearly got himself in a tizz over the religious aspects of the books - themes which are perfectly clear, indeed strident, to all except Weitz it seems. The crux of the matter, Weitz' assertion that:

"the "Authority" in question could represent any arbitrary establishment that curtails the freedom of the individual, whether it be religious, political, totalitarian, fundamentalist, communist, what have you. This gives me a certain amount of leeway in navigating the very treacherous issues that beset adapting HDM for the screen."

I vehemently do not agree with this. The Authority represents that particular kind of blank, unconditional faith humans put in religion and their total unwillingness to question it - and indeed, the structure's refusal to consider that there could be such a question. Having, say, a Communist Authority, as Weitz dares to suggest, would be a totally different novel. The book that Philip Pullman wrote is about organised religion. It's part of what makes the books special; like it or lump it, Pullman's atheism is an integral part of his novels. Weitz however attempts to awkquardly wriggle out of his conundrum:

"But there may be some modification of terms. You will probably not hear of the "Church" but you will hear of the Magisterium. Those who will understand will understand. I have no desire to change the nature or intentions of the villains of the piece, but they may appear in more subtle guises."

What Weitz means here is simply that they won't be called priests or associated in any way with Christianity. The Magisterium, unlike in His Dark Materials (where it is specified), won't be Christian. Weitz's, or rather New Line's, conundrum is of course that an anti-Christian film (marketting to innocent children nonetheless!) will not go down very well in the Bible-belt of America. As Weitz says, "they (New Line) have expressed worry about the possibility of HDM's perceived antireligiosity making it an unviable project financially." Note here the "perceived": the books are anti-religion. I would personally argue that such a heretical(!) film could do extremely well at the box office - nothing sells entertainment like controversy.

It has to be said however that such a semantic change would not necessarily nullify the message of His Dark Materials, but it would be a disappointing cop-out. I fail to see how simply changing the name of the Church is supposed to ward off criticism and placate the Christian church - are they really not going to notice the film is getting at them?

I can't criticse Mr Weitz for aiming for a PG-13 rating - it's simply uneconomical otherwise. It's a shame we'll be missing the brutal fight between two icy titans where one of the combatant's jaw is ripped clean off and then his heart eaten, the dying pumps of blood spraying all over the white fur of the victorious bear however. But then that's the beauty of books - on the page, the blood is always fresh.

Now, the positives. He's read the books! And not in the last month either after the studio hurridly told him too. Weitz's background surprised me - the directorship of American Pie doesn't inspire confidence in a man's intellectual prowess - but his scholarships in English Literature at Cambridge and especial interest in two of Pullman's main influences, Milton and Blake, is hugely encouraging. He's a fantasy (though I'm sure Philip would wince to hear his works labelled such), having optioned the Elric of Melnibone novels for Universal. Weitz's inclination to interact with His Dark Materials fans, even at this early stage, is to be commended. His lack of experience with large-scale films and grand technical designs is a worry however - he has the passion and the nous, here's hoping Chris Weitz can deliver a great film for us.

To Top

Ben's Response

by Ben

BTTS staff/fellow fans,

As a fan of HDM and as a filmmaker, I must say at this point in time I am very excited that Chris Weitz is preparing the screen adaptation. For Mr. Weitz to take the initiative and contact BTTS is a wonderful thing. To show his fellow fans that he is willing to give everything he's got for this story is great. For still being in the script phase and very little news being given I think the right questions were asked and Mr. Weitz's replies were as honest and direct as possible.

To hear him talk about his thoughts on the relationships and a character driven story was great for someone like me to hear. And the plans for shooting on location and using real animals for many daemon-involved scenes gave me butterflies in my stomach! And that's not easy for a busy artist to feel. In reading the interview, yes I certainly did feel like a 5 year old on Christmas morning. But I also understood these preliminary feelings of excitement, taking them with a grain of salt. I know and understand what is involved here in undertaking a project such as this.

And it is without restraint that I say- we do not yet know what will come. New line could cause Mr. Weitz to conform to their standards (if they are different then his). And if so he could drop out of the project, which would be a shame. The long road he and his future cast and crew have ahead will be shifty in every which way. And of course this will affect us, the other fans...

But the fact remains: Philip Pullman created an exuberant and wonderful story in His Dark Materials. These three such books have the possibility to give us three great movies. And in Chris Weitz it seems like we not only have a devoted and caring fan but also a director who will devote himself and care for these films with all his strength.

I don't want it to seem like I am sucking up to Chris Weitz (Too much) And I don't exactly agree with everything he said. The films are getting made and Chris wants to do a good job. And for me, for now that's good enough and it should be good for the films too. Unless we have a cameo from Stifler...

Sincerely, seriously and humorously,
--Ben

To Top

Andrew's Response

Andrew C

"I have to say I'm very impressed with his commitment to the spirit of the trilogy and his appreciation of the issues raised. I hope he can bring it off.

Good luck Chris!

To Top

Warily Hopeful

by Merlyn

When we first reported that Chris Weitz was in talks to become the director of the His Dark Materials movies, I, like many fans, was skeptical. I decided at that point that while I would certainly give him a chance, some of his previous work was not encouraging; he just didn't seem to me like the best possible person for the job, and a poll on our message boards reflected that opinion across the fan base. We had cheered (well, not literally) at the thought that Sam Mendes might take his hand to HDM, and collectively shuddered at the thought of Brett Ratner -- Weitz was in the middle, a director who could be lived with if he showed a decent respect for the contents of the books, but we should be wary of him until he proved himself capable.

I kept all of this in mind when I interviewed him (an enjoyable experience for which I'd like to thank Chris), and tried to present him with questions that represented this attitude of wariness. To me, he answered the questions well, and was successful in convincing me to give him a chance. Not to trust him blindly of course; but to give him the chance he deserved.

What won me over was his obvious adoration of His Dark Materials. It was to him a work of profound depth and imagination, capable of changing lives and touching people with the power and majesty of its story. I like to know that the person who will be heading this project is as much of a fan as I am. Throughout the interview I got the sense that this love and respect for the books would be followed throughout the process of making the films, even if somethings did have to be cut or tweaked a little in order to satisfy the studio and make it workable for the big screen. I was reassured that His Dark Materials would be taken seriously, and not treated as if it were being made for children. The definitive quote of the interview to me was "The darker aspects - they must be preserved from any desire to sugar-coat them or water them down. The villains of the piece wish to destroy children's souls for their own good. That is about as foul a crime as one can imagine in any book or film and it is necessary that severing, and its metaphorical connotations, be protected from focus-groups and marketers. Lyra's parentage, the suffering she fights her way through, the land of the dead, the oppressive power of the Magisterium - all must remain. As for the manner in which they should be addressed, they must be done so with human sympathy, in terms of the emotions of the characters, without unnecessary bombast, without souping them up with sweeping violins. They must be dealt with in light of an understanding that gulf in scale between the cosmic and the personal must be bridged as well as Pullman bridges it." I hope that the films really will turn out that way.

Some have questioned Weitz's comments about CGI, but I think I understood what he was saying: people are tired of and annoyed by films where actors are only thrust in front of a blue screen and no effort is made to present the necessary computerized worlds as believeable. Some films have suffered from being all special effects with very little quality filmmaking. Weitz is looking to avoid this where other directors might be tempted to overuse CGI in a film adaptation of HDM. However, sometimes CGI will be necessary due to logistics, safety etc. and in these cases Weitz will use it, but only once it appears to him as believeable. Like all good special effects, he will work to make it blend in seamlessly with the world around it to make you forget that you're watching CGI and not a real talking polar bear.

The portrayal of religion has also been questioned by some, though I'm not as worried as others about toning down the protest against religion (gee, maybe that's because I'm religious...). I've always interpreted the books as attacking the negative aspects of religion, of which there are certainly plenty, but not religion as a whole. I don't think Pullman is narrow-minded enough to believe that just because someone is religious, they're automatically evil. His conversation with Weitz, as it is presented in the interview and as Pullman's brief comment on his official website about the interview confirms is that "His feeling, and I say this with absolute certainty that I am not unfairly paraphrasing him, is that the "Authority" in question could represent any arbitrary establishment that curtails the freedom of the individual, whether it be religious, political, totalitarian, fundamentalist, communist, what have you." While some might be quick to jump on the stereotypical religious person and condemn them, I don't think that was the intention of HDM at all. For the movie adaptation, I think it's far more important that the messages of Lyra and Will get through to the audience than it is that anyone or anything is attacked: that we should think long and hard about important things like religion, never accepting something just because someone else says it is true, that we should be kind and thoughtful and cheerful and brave, curious about the world around us and willing to work hard to make the world a better place for everyone. If it can do that the way Pullman did, then it won't have to attack anything because it will have already made its point against the negative aspects of religion, and all other institutions that unnecessarily seek to control human beings.

Throughout all this, both Weitz and Pullman have said that they're working closely together to make sure that the original intentions of the story show through. Weitz seems eager to ask for feedback from the author (what fan wouldn't, if given the chance to make a film of a story he loved?), and Pullman seems more willing to offer his advice than he originally suggested with the 'take the money and run' comment.

But who can say? I'm much more open to the idea of Weitz as director than I was before the interview, and I'm allowing myself to be optimistic and hopeful again, but much still remains unanswered, and while the responses were encouraging that Chris is heading in the right direction, we've yet to see what is actually done with the films. So my vote is yet uncast in approving of or disapproving of Chris Weitz as director, and I suspect that it will remain uncast until I see 'The End' flash across the screen two years from now.

To Top