Here's a quote that I like from Atheist Alliance International (AAI) about the controversey over the film: "During the release of movies such as 'The Passion of the Christ' and 'Jesus Camp', AAI did not promote censorship in any form. AAI, in fact, encouraged its members to experience these films and discuss them freely in order to discover their own truths. AAI is only asking for the same consideration and respect from the religious community."

The movie, to be honest, bored me to tears.

Unfortunately the movie was paced in such a manner that I felt no real emotional connection to any of the characters, and the plot was very much lacking in any real depth, or so it seemed to me.

What I find sad is that the movie is not being judged fairly. People are too concerned with the drama surrounding the ideas in the books to address the movie directly. Either fans are loving it because they loved the books, or critics of the book are hating it simply because they feel attacked by the book. No one seems able to address the film on it's own merit.

I suppose this is the problem when one takes a popular book series and makes it into a movie, people are unable to divorce one from the other.

Wait, the changes they made did not affect the depictions of the Magisterial leaders in the film? Or the changes had no effect on the behavior of the religious loonies in real life? I'm not sure which group you're referring to, which says it all to me.

For the Gnostics, Cathars, and followers of Marcion, the deceptive Demiurge of the Jewish texts was overthrown by the authority and revealation of Jesus Christ. There is no mention of a Christ-like figure in Pullman's trilogy, though there must have been one since The Church seems to be distinct from Judaism.

But overall the the books are a Nietzschean repudiation of the Christian tradition. The Church suppresses all the pleasures and freedoms which are part of natural human thriving.

Does the film use the term "intercision" to refer to the seperation of human from daimon as the book does? "Intercision" is meant to sound like "circumcision", and according to the witches of the north intercision was simply a high-tech and effective procedure that finally acheived the goal of de-souling that had been previously attemped by various genital modifications of both males and females.

This is the reason we secularists must work for the complete elimination of all the Middle-Eastern monotheistic faiths. If they want to surgically rape babies, we have to deconvert as many Jewish, Christian, and Muslim crazies until we have such a majority that we can force them to stop these sexual assaults.

If you had any doubts about what a phony fascist that Bill Donohue is, one need only examine his reasons for the boycott. Initially, he bemoaned the horrid atheist agenda that the film would impart. Then when he discovered that the film had pretty much been defanged, he switched tactics and claimed the boycott was to prevent children and young adults who might feel compelled to read the books by watching the film. Heaven forbid, that this media hog abandon a chance for him to be in the media spotlight (much like the odious Donald Wildmon).

Unfortunately, I don't think it will ultimately help this film, since we have so many unquestioning indoctrinated people in the US, who vilify things because their religious leaders tell them to rather than because they have any personal knowledge or have done any research for themselves. This scandal does not seem to have taken root overseas where the film is enjoying larger success and people are apparently more confident in their beliefs. Donohue and his minions act as though they were protecting a thin-skinned human rather than a god who could suffer no ill effects from such trivial things as humans, or books, or films. The irony never ceases to amaze me in how so many of the devout (at least in the US) take offense and cry foul over anything that depicts them as authoritarian tyrants who seek to control everyone (including people outside of their flocks) through intimidation and suppression of opposing viewpoints, and then proceed to conduct themselves in exactly the way that they claim they are unfairly depicted.

Namaste.

Lynet has already written about the religious and anti-religious themes in the books a month ago.