BridgeToTheStars.net had the opportunity to speak with one of the stars of The Golden Compass, Sam Elliott, who plays Lee Scoresby in the movie. We asked him what he thought about religion being removed from the film, plus how it was to work on a project with such vast amounts of post-production – which have sent the movie rocketing over budget and in a crunch to finish in time. Watch the video below, and we’ll have more from the Rockefeller event and Sam Elliott later on.
Sam Elliott on The Golden Compass
October 13, 2007
This entry was posted in The Golden Compass movie. Bookmark the permalink.
Cheers for that guys. Nice interview. He seems like a cool dude to me. I like him.
Did u get my e-mail about doing some filming as the characters? Let me know what you think…
again,the actors seem nervous about the whole religion thing-that dont know, cant talk about it..ect..im getting more and more worried-the whole plot is practically about religion!!!!!ARRRRRRRRRG!!!!!
To be fair, I thought that was quite promising. He sounded as though religion hasn’t been taken out but wasn’t sure what he could talk about…
Dude, who did the interview? I don’t think getting right up in his face at the beginning was very nice, nor warranted. I mean just because it’s simply referred to as The Magesterium in the film and not the church doesn’t change the fact that in the book WE know that the Magesterium is the church…..so I’d like the interviewer to explain to me how the religious element has been taken out…..You don’t need for this sort of thing to be bashed around your head to GET it. I have doubts that anyone will see it and NOT think that the Magesterium is the church.
Here’s a cue, I thought Brits were nice?! Why not ask him about what you LIKE about the look of the film, or about his part in it…..instead of being the trashy digging for dirt/make people uncomfortable type of journalist (and I use that term loosely)….it’s reprehensible.
Oh, and Sam Elliot is an amazing actor BTW, and I think his portrayal of Scoresby will be fantastic.
He’d already done an entire line of journalists who would be asking him general questions, so I don’t think a slightly tougher question was unwarranted. Especially given that it’s the number one thing fans of the books are worried about.
New Line have already said the religious elements have been all but removed and the Magisterium has become simply a fascist government (who needs a parable against those?).
In real life, Magisterium = the Catholic church. So I don’t think it’s been toned down that much.
Why ask him a “nice” question J. Scott? Thank goodness Will asked a question that we wanted to know the answer to, rather than “What’s it like to work with Nicole Kidman” to which we’d get some awesome response like “Gee, she’s great…”
Good interview Will – you asked what I would have asked 🙂
Because it’s polite, Ian? I appreciate that Will went where no other journalist dared to go, since we’re all curious, and I’m glad to have gotten his answer. You’ll think I’m a traitor for it, but I do think it could have been worded differently or maybe not the first question. The entire interview felt a bit antagonistic, and Sam Elliot is just an innocent bystander in all of this.
When did New Line say that all the religious elements have been removed, Will? The latest I heard is that it has been watered down a little, which is what Elliot just said.
I didn’t really have time to ask him about his life and times; we were only supposed to get one question so I didn’t want to waste it.
At the set visit back in January, a New Line executive said “from our point of view the Magisterium is a totalitarian government. That’s what it is. It’s not about religion, it’s not about God, it’s about totalitarianism.”
There’s not a single mention of religion on the official website or in the full production notes for the film. As I said to Mr Elliot, if it’s been “toned down” as he contends, then it’s been “toned down to the point of not being there.”
I appreciate he’s just a bystander, but the question still begs to be asked.
Fair enough. I still disagree with the manner in which it was presented, but I suppose you didn’t mean it to come off the way it did to certain people here.
Hmmm, it seems that New Line is singing a different tune than Weitz and the cast. And I would guess that it’s just business as usual that makes New Line say that religion is totally not there, since it obviously is present in the trailer. ‘Anyone who can see will see,’ as Weitz says.
Yeah i agree with what will says, if he didn’t use that question to ask about what he thought on the removal of religion, how would we ever know?
And im a catholic, and im not offended one bit by the book, and for that fact how it portrays people in this religion,but im olny one person, so it doesnt really count.
That was a horrible interview…First off, why was the camera at his waist? Second, Why do you presume you know the way to film is being made, have you seen it? No…its not done yet. The first book has hardly any of the religious aspect in it, even if you made the book word for word, that still wouldn’t be clear until the later stories.
Very weak..Too bad you wasted your time with Sam trying to get across your own agenda instead of asking smart questions.
Shame.
I thought the second question was interesting, actually. And it’s good that we got two questions when we were really only meant to get one.
Yes, the first one sounded slightly antagonistic, but I can’t help thinking the sound quality of the video plays a part in that, as Will’s voice is quite loud what with being closer to the mic which can naturally make things sound a bit different. And it was a good question from a fan perspective: can you honestly say that you wouldn’t have wanted to know that yourself after all the speculation about it?
Holding the camera right in his face would have been genuinely antagonistic, besides getting between me and him; so it wasn’t really an option.
And as Cookiemonster says, my second question wasn’t exactly hardcore – “are you looking forward to seeing the film” is presumably the slowball question commentators here want all the time every time.
The interviewer sucks.. He’s too aggressive. Sam Elliot is just an actor doing his job. Why should he know or care about religious elements removed from the film. I wouldn’t even be surprised if he never even read the book.
“Maybe you know something I don’t know, I haven’t seen the movie yet, so I don’t know…” Great response from The Stranger XD
As much as I want to know (and before the movie gets released) how they dealed with the religious aspects of the book, I think this question needs to be asked to someone that has more say in the production than Sam Elliot. It seems to me (so far) that he has done a great job in his department. No offense Will, but it seemed a little antagonistic really…but I’m sure you meant no harm…
That song “Go On, Take the Money and Run” is playing in the background!!!! Talk about irony…
Sam Elliot was not the right person to ask this question to, and Will should have known this. By asking the question to him, it only made you look like you have your own agenda of defaming this movie before it’s even out. Even when he tried to answer it to the best of his knowledge, you simply came back at him with a “No, I’m pretty sure I am right” type answer. I mean you really just came off as a dick.
No offense though.
Yeah Will, you should have verbally felated the rich movie star man, after all people who’ve been in an incredibly tough business for nigh on 40 years deffinitely can’t handle some vaguely intrusive questioning. Also, your expensive film crew sucks, and you lack fancy graphics and biting “witty” commentary, you totally suck at this entertainment reporting stuff.
Also, you didn’t live up to a ridiculous national stereotype (accent aside) so yeah, totally, y’know, go die in a fire.
PS. Oh, and also, your mum…
No offense though.
Just looked back here, and this is all getting a bit silly now. Will’s not professional, he didn’t have some big camera crew with him like most interviews you see on TV or something. Not to mention he flew halfway round the world to ~get~ this interview for us. I think people need to cut him a bit of slack here.
Criticise the technique if you must, I think we can all agree it’s not perfect, but at least keep it civil. Calling people a ‘dick’ doesn’t fall into the category of civil.
matt, what would you have considered a “smart question”? i saw nothing unintelligent or unnecessary about asking what will wanted to know on behalf of sraffies here at the ‘pub. also, conduct is irrelevant in this scenario; elliot took it well enough, why shouldn’t you?
as for who he ought to have asked – the question has been put out there, and that’s what matters. if nobody involved can give a respectable answer to it, that speaks for itself.
Bruce – Sam Elliot has read the book.
I don’t know, I just feel it was unnecessary.
This whole discussion is getting unnecessary as well…
How did anybody asket him about the changes of the final of the film?
Since I kind of started this, I’ll respond again.
Magisterium (from the Latin magister, “teacher”) is a technical ecclesiastical term in Roman Catholic Church referring to the teaching authority of the church. This authority is understood to be embodied in the episcopacy, which is the aggregation of the current bishops of the church, led by the Bishop of Rome (the Pope) has authority over the bishops, individually and as a body, as well as over each and every Catholic directly.
So say what you will..Will, but the word evokes the church whether in the film it is a totalitarian gov’t or not. It remains that the word itself has a meaning, and in that I feel that the church is not dropped from the script, but rather hidden. I am not condoning this mind you, if there were references to the church in it I’d be happy, but when you think about it…..if they film The Amber Spyglass….people are GOING to get it. Whether you like it or not this movie (and its sequels) are going to be dripping with religious stuff, even if they don’t come right out and mention it.
As to your interview: When I say that you needed to be nicer, I meant that you could have asked SO many other questions…but EVEN if you HAD to ask the one you started with you could have asked in a better manner….and for your edification…
-DO you think the religious element has been removed from the film? If so, why? If not why?
-HAS the religious element been removed from the film, or has it been disguised. What are YOUR thoughts?
You see, first off, you forget who you are talking to. You’re not talking to Weitz, nor are you talking to the producers….so asking Elliot this question, in the manner you did, was tantamount to stepping right up nose to nose with him and blaming him for an aspect of a film you don’t like…when you haven’t even SEEN the film. While I don’t feel that you should have asked him this question, the fact that you did meant you should have been more tactful.
To the others who posted about what I said. It’s not about him being a rich actor ect….it’s about being human and being kind! I’m a writer, and this kind of interview is the MAIN reason that when I went to school I never even THOUGHT about journalism, because today there’s no such thing….it’s a dream people gave up on long ago so they could be jerks. So, while I realize that you all wanted an answer to that question, this was not the way, nor the person to go about it with.
I’m sorry Will, but that’s how I feel. I cringed when I watched it. I shudder to think you asking that question, in that manner, to Daniel Craig….as I’m pretty sure James Bond would pop you in the nose.
Like, whut?
[extending a virtual shake-hands to “J. Scott”]
Very well said, man.