Update: Chris Weitz, the film’s director, has responded to the AM’s piece, calling it a “hatchet-job”. You can read his response here.
This month’s Atlantic Monthly has an excellent article on the controversy surrounding The Golden Compass movie, featuring new quotes from New Line and Philip Pullman. It sheds light on the decisions the movie studio have had to make about the book’s (anti-)religious content and the deliberations over how much of it should be removed. The article is only able to view through subscription, so we’ve summarised the contents here. It’s worth reading in full and addresses with clarity many of the issues fans of His Dark Materials have been concerned with for the past four years.
Toby Emmerich, New Line’s president of production, explained how the religious Magisterium have been changed to “feel vaguely kind of like a fascistic, totalitarian dictatorship, Russian / KGB / SS.” AM write rather damningly that, “with $180 million at stake” [the figure has in fact risen to $205 million +], that “the studio opted to kidnap the book’s body and leave behind its soul.”
Philip Pullman has remained resolute in his defence of the film-makers and became involved in the film much more than he expected or initially professed a desire for. The status of a living author is one New Line were understandably nervous about, however – if he spoke out against the film, Pullman could put a dent in its box office takings. AM asked Pullman if “New Line would prefer he were, well, the late author of The Golden Compass.” The author responded, “Dead? Yes! Absolutely!” If something happened to him, there “would be expressions of the most heartfelt regrets, yet privately they would be saying, ‘Thank God.'”
The article reports that Pullman has been to a screening of the film and that he “praised many specific scenes”; extolling the virtues of Dakota Blue Richards and saying that Nicole Kidman has the “exact quality of warm and cold, seductive and terrifying” to portray Mrs Coulter. When discussing the film, AM say “he chose[s] his words carefully, acknowledging that his role now is to be ‘sensible’ so that the next two films get made. Nonetheless, he was honest about what was missing:
“and that’s off the film.”
Pullman goes on, “I think if everything that is made explicit in the book or everything that is implied clearly in the book or everything that can be understood by a close reading of the book were present in the film, they’d have the biggest hit they’ve ever had in their lives. If they allowed the religious meaning of the book to be fully explicit, it would be a huge hit. Suddenly, they’d have letters of appreciation from people who felt this but never dared say it. They would be the heroes of liberal thought, of freedom of thought … And it would be the greatest pity if that didn’t happen.”
“I didn’t put that very well. What I mean is that I want this film to succeed in every possible way. And what I don’t want to do, you see, is talk the other two films out of existence. So I’ll stop there.”
Moving on to more familiar territory for long-time followers of the film, the article recounts the lengthy and troubled history of the production beginning with Tom Stoppard’s commissioned adaptation, through the unsolicited proposal of an enthusiastic Chris Weitz (and his hiring as director) through BridgeToTheStars.net’s interview with Chris Weitz that sparked such negative publicty for the film and led to The Times running an article, “God Is Cut From Film of Dark Materials”.
Weitz recalls his feelings upon reading the newspaper piece: “Why am I doing this?”, he thought. “I’ll end up being hated by the fans and ripped into by the press. And this is a huge, huge endeavor. Maybe this isn’t for me.” Weitz was of course then to leave the production, citing those “technical challenges”. With the film’s new director, Anand Tucker, leaving due to “creative differences”, Weitz came back on-board: “I’d started to care less about what people might think of me.” He also took heart from email correspondence with Philip Pullman in which the author revealed he wouldn’t mind a version of the story that didn’t include a critique of organised religion.
Script Alterations
The clearest expression of religion in The Golden Compass is the scene where Lord Asriel reads Genesis to Lyra in the North and explains the concept of Original Sin, a crucial part of His Dark Materials. This scene, says AM, “was in the earliest versions of the movie script, but over time it has been slowly erased. As Pullman points out, it “comes at the point in the story when we most need that explanation.” But no $180 million movie is going to trash the first book of the Bible, so the movie will have to do without it.”
The earlier scripts are also reported as having made passing reference to the Fall: “In the Stoppard script, Asriel, in a rage about the Authority, mocks the “apple of desire” and the “fig-leaf of shame”; a few scenes later Coulter, the evil Nicole Kidman character, yells at Asriel, “You can’t conquer God!” ”
Weitz originally wrote along similar lines, with the opening scene featuring Lyra in a college chapel listening to a sermon about the alternative Genesis. The director relates, however, “that movie was not going to get made.” By December 2004, references to Genesis were gone. What remained was Dust and its theology: Lord Asriel’s powerful speech telling Lyra how Dust is sin and that he will destroy Dust, bringing an end to death, was still present. By the final script, this too was gone. No mention of sin or death remain.
Quotes on Dust instead include Mrs Coulter telling Lyra that Dust is “evil and wicked” and makes people “sick.” Asriel says, “They taught themselves to fear Dust, instead of master it. They’ve ignored a tremendous source of power … That is what it all comes down to, Lyra. That is what Dust is. Power. Without it, we are like children before the might of the Magisterium.”
AM make a damning assessment of how this all fits together:
” “Master Dust!” “Freedom is at stake!” “We’re not alone. We’re never alone! We have each other.” They satisfy, but they don’t really explain. Or perhaps they offer explanations so familiar and straightforward that they don’t invite questions. This is Hollywood at its most hazily indignant and self-congratulatory, recycling the generic themes of countless other films – a band of grubby, half-crazed heroes takes on the System and wins.”
Chris Weitz has done what he can to keep mentions of religion in the film. He tried to keep in Asriel’s line “Dust is sin,” a line which he says “didn’t make it. What can I say?” Hollywood, he says, “is just terrified that anything that brings up religion or anything controversial will be disastrous.” Weitz reiterates that some religious imagery will be in the movie, but it seems it will be much much less than obvious: it will be so far into the background as to require “a DVD player and working knowledge of Latin to decipher the symbols.” Visible in the trailers, icons of Orthodox saints will be on the outside of some Magisterium buildings, with Latin inscriptions from the Bible sprinkled around the film.
This certainly isn’t the message New Line have been putting out. AM allege that at Cannes, “the studio had delivered a sheet of talking points to the hotel room of at least one cast member, Sam Elliott, who plays a Texas aeronaut in the film. According to Elliott, the talking points instructed that if the question of Pullman’s religious views came up, the actors should just “avoid it and play stupid.” The message they all agreed on was something along the lines of, “How can I possibly tell what Pullman had in mind?”
The publication concludes:
“Marketing plans aside, New Line executives likely believe they were doing Pullman no great disservice by stripping out his theology and replacing it with some vague derivative of the Force. Values such as obedience, religious devotion, and chastity are so rare in Hollywood’s culture that they probably seem archaic and quaint – courtly rules that no one lives by anyway. Certainly not something to get exercised over.”
Oh Jaysus… Those stupid hollywood twits…
Soon people won’t know their Dust from their Midi-Chloriens….
Jaysus
Wow.
Just wow.
I’ve never been one to cry about Hollywood toning down Pullman’s philosophical/religious points, but when you read this article, it really makes one kind of disappointed. I mean, the line: Dust is sin didn’t even make it in? Jeez.
How I wish some independent studio could have done this and left in Pullman’s real message.
I guess this sort of make’s Kidman’s statement in EW about the religious themes being a little “watered down” seem like an understatement.
I’m really sad. I knew that there were changes for the film but gosh…this is a lot to take in.
Not much of a story left then, is there. And no point in making the other two films anyway. Especially not the third. *dissapointed*.
Sad, but definitely not unexpected.
One thing I keep wondering, though. If The Golden Compass was this emormous scandel, wouldn’t it stand to make a lot more money than a watered down version?
Shanti: Pullman is of a similar mind, if you check back to his quotes in the article. The Da Vinci Code was a box office success, so a “to hell with religion!” (excuse pun) approach isn’t unprecedented either.
I’ve been rather sanguine about the inevitability of religion being removed from the film too, Corsair, but this article puts it all together in a way that makes you feel very horrible about the film.
I’ve seen all kinds of predictions about this movie, from ones even more pessimistic than this, to the cheeriest kind of Leibnizian buoyancy.
I disregard all of them. The thing is, we really don’t know how the movie will turn out. I’d rather keep it that way until December seventh. People will contradict each other, that’s inevitable, but everything is speculation so far. Speculation, as helpful as it can be, isn’t something upon which it is wise to make predictions.
I’ve thought about it. GC is the LEAST theological book of the three. Even though it seems the film has essentially been stripped of the religious themes if the studio ends up doing TSK and TAS where religion is MUCH more prominent then they can be more gung-ho about it and just go all out.
*crosses fingers*
At least I hope so.
That’s it. I just can’t care about this film anymore. It’s just funny that the books that i love above all books in the whole world have been butchered in this way. It’s like a person’s skin just lying there limp without a skeleton. Can you even call it human?
New Line didn’t stop to think what made these books so beloved and popular. It was the questions it asked, not talking soul animals, or damn amored bears, or little girls with gold trinkets.
AND THEY WOULD HAVE MADE SO MUCH MONEY IF THEY LEFT IT AS IS! Without the heavy themes it’s going to be your average fantasy movie, which few people go out in droves to see.
ugh, i’m going to pop a blood vessel if i carry on like this…
How about a metaphor for New Line as the Gobblers, taking wonderful stories full of potential and butchering the very thing that gives them that spark. I never thought I would be disappointed at the casting of Ian McKellen in a role, sadly that has come to pass he just isn’t Iorek, he doesn’t have a deep voice, he isn’t unhuman enough!
As for the exorcising of Genesis the world would be a better place if Christians took the same view as New Line and just disregarded the Bible.
Well I’ll probably watch the film and buy the soundtrack but I hope/think it will never replace the near-perfect genius of the books.
This is how Hollywood SAVED God?
Without Genesis and the Fall there is no backbone to the stories. Its what makes them relatable and understandable to those religious Americans New Line is vying for.
Grow a pair, New Line. This is just your average Fantasy Epic Movie without the religion business. Of course, you could always try the Narnia route and visciously stamp it into every scene. There’s open-minded people in America too, you know.
This is unbelievable… I would have rather seen this made my an Indie film company! Though they would have a smaller budget than New Line, I would much rather have the true story there with fewer CGI elements than this watered down pointless piece of crap. I mean, thanks to the various Christian organizations (especially the Catholic League), everyone already knows about the anti-religious elements. Why does watering it down even matter now? I’m beginning to understand the feelings of the Lemony Snickett fans when they got their butchered, one-film version of a 13 book series. And by these quotes from PP, it seems he’s not as pleased as was reported in the past.
Bloody hell. Up till now I’ve tried to disregard all the stuff about it being watered down, thinking “yeah, it’s a shame but we might still get a decent movie out of it.” But it sounds like it’s been absolutely slaughtered.
Good job New Line.
Oh well, I guess I won’t cry if this movie bombs and puts New Line in the crapper..it would be their fault for deballsifying the real story.
Wow.
I was okay with the changes we’d heard about because I truly believed that we’d be getting the same story, just told with more subtlety. That way, the narrative of the plot would remain intact and the film could still possibly make some sense. I can’t see how that will be possible now. It may be that it can be done, but I’m fairly sure it would take a tad more creativity and intellect than New Line and Chris Weitz have managed through their very best efforts.
We will have to wait and see, I suppose, but my optimism has finally been dashed. I do hope someone gets the magazine and scans it though. I’d like to read and interpret from myself. The tone of this summary was very negative.
Tara: I’ve kept the spirit of the Atlantic article as best I can. To be honest there’s just nothing positive in there to report – save Pullman saying he likes some scenes and the casting.
Chris Weitz comes across well, I think.
it looks like i’ll buy buying this issue then…
Will, you mention the Da Vinci Code, while yes this does play with religion, this film is being marketed as a kids film. It’s only the past few trailers that have given it any adult feel at all. Think of all the fuss Harry Potter caused cause some over the top (generally catholics) decided it was promoting witch craft.
The DVC is adult so they could get away with it, but new line would be sued if they released TGC/NL as it should be. Admitedly the promotion would probably benefit New Line…
To be honest, the first film as a stand-alone they can get away with it. As soon as they reach 2 & 3 tho, they have to explain dust properly otherwise there is no coherent ending to the story. Maybe this is a gamble by NL so that they can make enough money to take on any kick back from the 3rd film? meh… probably being too optimistic.
Funny thing is that this kind of problem is a result of America’s Sue You atitude (don’t take this as a sterotype, it’s not everyone, just a growing minority). If they tried to take the stage play to the US I bet it would have to be edited too…
Oh well – this film is not Northern Lights no more, I’m happy it doesn’t use that name. It means when I read the book for the 20th time I can treat it as something seperate. This film will be a fun fantasy film at best, like stardust. Fun, but nothing worth getting excited about.
I’m not sure why you’ve brought suing into this – it simply wouldn’t happen; First Amendment and all that.
Unfortunatly from at least an outsiders point of view that amendment is being eaten away very quickly. You’d jsut need to find some lawyers who want a high profile case (as it would make a fuss) and a judge who would find the films content to be questionable and over-stepping some invisble boundary. In the current climate it could happen.
If my expectations need to be adjusted any lower for the movie, I won’t be seeing it. This is without a doubt the worst thing that could happen to the movie – it’s not just that they have removed all religious content, but the fact that THAT will create gaps in the story. It’s like The Invasion all over again!
Perhaps just because certain issues such as the fall and original sin aren’t mentioned in this film doesn’t mean they didn’t happen. Maybe more detailed explanations will come out in the later films (presuming they get made and New Line decides it can afford to be a bit more bold)
I certainly hope that’s how they do it: leave religious elements for the most part as it, just not introducing them in this installment. If not, they’re gonna have a helluva time writing an entirely new backstory to disregard the Authority, Angels, the true nature of Dust, who Lyra represents instead of Eve…the list goes on and on! Let’s hope that’s not the case!
When I go to work tomorrow I’m going to pick up this magazine. I work at a library and I checked online and found out that we carry Atlantic Monthly.
I’m still upset about this, but I am going to try and be optimistic. 🙂
I still cannot understand why they did not film alternate scenes. One version for the US market and one version for the civilized world. That would also make for a great DVD release strategy.
ireally waited 4 something special but it seems that it will really be average. Maybe their FX will be extraordinary, but its not something we havent seen be4:(
Im really sad 4 Dan and Nic. Invasion thing happened again:( First Iread the books just because of film, but then felt they’re much more…
Here’s an idea: Why not make two versions? One for the US and one for Europe/the rest of the world?
This is a sad time, friends. How are they possibly going to make the next two films if Genesis and therefore Adam and Eve are taken out in this one? If I were Pullman, I would wash my hands of the whole thing.
I’m livid.
Well I am not at all surprised but am very sad to essentially get the near final blow (the final one being the film itself).
I would very much like to read the full article.
My guess is the Box Office failure that Stardust was has scared the pants off New Line and made them fear they won’t recover their 200+mill investment.
I agree with everybody here (and Pullman apparently) who says the film would have made MUCH more money had it stuck to the source material (and themes) as well as LOTR tried to do.
I truly fear for this films success now. I’m not even sure I want it to succeed. Will they then make watered down versions of SK and AS? What would be left of those books if they took out all references to religion? Certainly nothing worth watching.
It doesn’t look good it has to be said. Pullman should have taken a leaf out of Alan Moore’s book and dis-ascociated himself from the film entirely as Moore does with adaptations of his work. If Hollywood can’t remain true to the values of the books then they shouldn’t benefit from the author’s endorsement. He might end up feeling used by New Line and his credibility could be damaged in the eyes of the unforgiving media. I also feel sympathy for Weitz who may have been emasculated by New Line and may well wish he had washed his hands of the whole thing. And i’m sorry but the books evil organisation was the church not “any organisation that curtails personal freedoms”…the church. Belief in a supernatural entity that created us and watches over us is very different from more materialistic ideologies like communism or capitalism.
I may well have to eat my words if this film is any good but if I were a betting man I would put money on it being nothing like the book.
Alan Moore is a hypocrit, if he doesn’t want people to adapt his stories or to intepret them differently, then he should have kept the rights. I agree with Pullman about letting people interpret and adapt your work freely. It’s just that New Line are doing it an absolute disservice at the moment. Stardust’s lack of succes probably has something to do with that.
All in all this news is pretty depressing.
I totally agree that leaving the religious elements in would have made the film more popular as it would have become infamous with the public who have never read or heard of the books and made the movie enticing to them.
I’m still going to see it; it sounds like Dakota Blue Richards and the effects are the only good things left though. At the least we may have found a promising young actress!
I feel sorry for Chris Weitz as well, by the sounds of it he has been forced to cut loads by New Line and i can’t see how there going to do SK & AS without the religious elements.
Hollywood allows gay scenes, violence … But lets not talk about religion of Pullmam … What is the difference? Church and Hollywood burn in hell! I believe in God and will not be a film that will change that. What the Church fears? I still have hope that the film does not damaged … We express our anger!
Honestly, The Golden Compass never even had that much religion involved in the storyline in the first place. Except for a few spots here or there, it was moreso about a girl trying to save her friend, without actually knowing what really was at stake. She just wants to find her friend. It was more involved in The Subtle Knife and absolutely in The Amber Spyglass. I honestly can’t image film adaptations of the novels without religion mixed in the storylines, and Pullman and Weitz know that it will be nearly impossible.
While I am quite disappointed, I realize that it’s Hollywood, and New Line is desperate for a blockbuster. New Line wants to make sure that The Golden Compass is a hit, and that it’s the start of a new franchise for the production company. And I guess, to them, if that means taking the bits and pieces of religion out of the first film would help a lot. I’m not happy with the change at all, but the film business is just that. A business. It may be wishful thinking, but if they find that The Golden Compass is a major hit internationally, they would relax with the limits on religion for its sequels, if you follow what I’m saying. That could be a main reason why they’ve attached the last bit of The Golden Compass film to the beginning of The Subtle Knife film, as it’s the darkest and less-action filled of the three.
That’s why I never get too emotionally attached to films yet to be released. I’ve learned my lessons in the past.
I now find more New Line repugnant than I would have imagined. I do understand now it’s all about the money.
I pose questions to New Line: is the word “soul” still in the film? If not, why bother to make it? Isn’t that pretty central to the mythos Pullman writes about? How will daemons be described, as animal totems? Did New Line, in an invasive reverse-psychology tactic, generate the infamous warning e-mail? After all, what a clever way to introduce the title of Pullman’s work to the masses that had never heard of it before, and might not have given it a second thought had they not seen the e-mail. Will the originator of that e-mail please stand up?
Again to New Line: if you make the money needed to embark on producing the sequels, just how are you going to interpret angels? What, will they be aliens now?? Will the showdown in Amber Spyglass be a psuedo-Dalek battle ala Doctor Who, pure sci-fi and not at all resembling the book? (Aside: the new Doctor Who actually did snag Pullman’s storyline a bit at the end of the current Doctor’s series 2; they need to give props to Pullman for the idea. See it if you haven’t yet.)
By all accounts what we seem to be left with is a gorgeously pixelated pop-up book, a Doppleganger-Stepford wife version of Pullman’s magnum opus.
At this point I do not want to pay to see this film. I don’t even want to rent it. It’s too devastating to fund the warping of this amazing story. Maybe on a rainy day in another year or so, I would check it out for free at my local public library.
Here’s hoping we eventually get the version of His Dark Materials we deserve. Better that this had been an anime film or trilogy. Look how long it took to get LOTR or Dune in something resembling a decent adaptation.
If you want to read the full article properly instead of just the quotes selectively pulled out here, then go here:
http://burntheladle.livejournal.com/255893.html
I’m starting to fear watching it!
I mean, I really didn’t expect to see the pope setting off the bomb by cutting off his lizzard or the gay angel drowning the priest, but cutting out the genesis part?
I guess the only things left are moving illustrations and the fact that it will sell the book.
I guess we’ll hear Pullmans real position after the release of part 3 – I can’t even call it by it’s title!
I guess we’ll get a happy end where Azriel and Coulter get married and Will and Lyra have their special little window while all the sinners stay in hell where they belong.
You can always trust america to mess it all up!
Sad, sad, sad!
I pity Pullman, I guess he is trying to save at least something; this must really hurt him. Even if it makes his atheist point.
We’ll have to wait for a proper remake.
Remember though, if the film is a huge success, the studio may be more inclined to bring religion back into the picture for the next two films. Probably not all the way, but at least more. We’re lucky that religion is very rarely alluded to in this book. Had it been full of religion I would have been more worried.
As far as the omission of the Genesis bit, we won’t even see that in this film anyway. Those chapters where Lyra meets with Asriel won’t be seen until the next movie. I think that if this film is successful enough then they could pretty easily re-shoot that scene and add that dialogue back in. It probably wouldn’t be difficult at all. They would have 2 years to do it as well. Hopefully they will have the guts to put the religious themes back in the next two movies.
I really doubt that they will put the controversial stuff back in if the film is a success. If they get away with it – why should they? On the other hand, they have this election thingy going on next year and maybe the political climate will change enough to take away some power from the churches of the retarded. I’m not very hopeful though.
The idea of a director’s cut for the free world has a certain charme.
What I hope for now is that these struggles have some influence on the Book of Dust!
Damn, I had so many expectations about this film..
I feel really dissapointed. :/
Now I don’t know…
I have to agree with the person above who said that they hope the film bombs and sinks New Line. I expected some removal of controversial elements, but not this version. I think Pullman’s pretty clear in both what he says and doesn’t say about it and he may be loving the money he’s going to make (or made on selling the rights) but he’s got to be struggling with his soul over what he’s allowed by selling it in the first place. Oops sorry I guess “soul” is a bad word, shouldn’t have mentioned it.
I absolutely don’t think that them making a bunch of money will mean that they suddenly add the religious element back in. It would make so little sense after butchering the rest of the story to this level.
I honestly have zero interest in seeing it anymore. I have published an article on Pullman’s work and delivered papers on him at conferences, and I will always be a huge fan of his work, but I cannot support this film at all. I can’t even say that I can recommend it to anyone except maybe my 8 year old nephew because he will think the armored bears are cool. In fact, anyone I know who loves the book will be so turned off by this article’s assessment that I am certain they will feel the same way.
Pullman obviously gave far too much credit to the studio to “do the right thing.” I imagine that if he could say it without damaging the chances of the other two films from being made that he would say he regrets giving it to New Line.
And I don’t think there will ever be a director’s cut that keeps the religion intact. There will probably only be a deleted scenes section that contains nothing but filler. The whole thing makes me so sad. I am shocked that we live in 2007 and this level of censorship is so alive and well.
Susan
Susan is right!
The Golden Compass movie will be like Narnia: only for kids.
All childrens will think the armored bears are cool. But what about us, adult fans, the older generation?
I will see the movie…
But I am afraid that the cinema will be with a lot of children, making noise. They don’t understand the real meaning of Lyra’s world.
I am 26 years old. I read the book in 2000. I’ve been waiting for this momente since than.
What’s up? Nothing! I will turn into my LOTR DVDs.
Isn’t it ironic. The book is about an extremist religious organisation who think only their views are right. And the movie has been censored to appease a small group of religious extremists who think only their views are right.
The point to Pullman’s masterpiece is defeated. What he intended was a book that can appeal to children as fantasy, and adults in a deeper sense. What they’ve created is a movie that can appeal to children as fantasy without any depth for the rest of us.
Brings new meaning to the words “free society”
I have to admit that this extensive article has disappointed, disillusioned, and discouraged me. I have read the entire peace and it has deeply affected my outlook on the film. Initially, I was hopeful that the film would retain at least something like the line, “Dust is sin,” or something similar. To learn that all religious allusions except for subtle ones in the background that no one will notice is especially disappointing.
The question that begs to be raised is, considering the stink the movie is already causing as it is among conservatives, would it have caused much of a difference to retain the religious elements? People were going to complain either way. People weren’t going to see it either way. The media was going to exaggerate the “atheistic” threat it poses either way. Those who will be persuaded not to see the movie were going to be either way. New Line should have been intelligent enough to realize that they could never escape the controversy that the release of this film would provoke.
I can only hope that, if New Line does carry out the next two films, they reintroduce the religious concepts. You can’t tell the story and capture it accurately if you discard the allusions to Adam and Eve in the Amber Spyglass. Then the meaning of the entire story’s climax will no longer exist. Then the words, “There is now!” will hold no impact.
In a strange way I am somewhat relieved. I can stop worrying about whether or not this film is going to be worth watching, and just go back to ignoring it completely. I never thought I’d be saying this, but I hope this movie flops…New Line deserves nothing less.
Never mind.
We have all been safely and gradually let down over the months, so it doesn’t hurt that much.
And what does it matter anyway, as what hope was there of this terribly satanic production ever daring to show it’s defiant face above anything more than New Line’s confidential Confession booth?
Still, it was good to hope, and it worked for a little while.
All turning out to be a perfectly unoffensive, wholesome Hollywood ending then, just as planned.
Laying it on too thick?
Exactly as Kirk says: u have to go one way or the other, or not at all, instead of trying to squirm and hide in the middle- as New Line have chosen to do.
Since reading the article i can imagine what is left: a rounded mediocre fantasy that has nothing beneath the surface except frantic Hollywood moralising. All the soul the brilliant actors have put in will be lost beneath the shameless censorship.
sigh… i really wanted to wait for the films release to make any judgments about the film, but reading all this is really depressing.
what a shame.