The Golden Compass

[ODogg]

Re: The Golden Compass

Valid points

Remember, Dante's Inferno was once banned by the church and it's now considered a literary classic.

It's not valid points though because no one is calling for this movie to be banned. Banning and boycotting are apples and oranges.

[Beantown]

Re: The Golden Compass

Ok, I have seen this type of thing many times in debates on issues like this. Where is anyone saying that this movie should be banned? There is a huge difference between asking for a boycott and asking for a ban. Folks who disagree with it's message and are asking for a boycott are not violating free speech, they are practicing free speech.

If I choose not to go see it due to not agreeing with some aspect of it, that is my right. Also, I might add, by me not seeing it for whatever reason i'm not violating anyone's free speech. Once again, people have a right to put whatever message they want in a movie, music, game or whatever, but I also have a right to choose not to spend my hard earned cash on it and/or badmouth said movie, music or game if I so desire.

No where in his post did he say the word "banned" or anything like that.

[ODogg]

Re: The Golden Compass

No where in his post did he say the word "banned" or anything like that.

He does not use the specific word banned but that is what is meant by comments such as "What happend to freedom of speech." and "An artist shouldn't have to suppress a thought or vision." A ban suppresses freedom of speech and thoughts and visions. A boycott doesn't.

[Beantown]

Re: The Golden Compass

He does not use the specific word banned but that is what is meant by comments such as "What happend to freedom of speech." and "An artist shouldn't have to suppress a thought or vision." A ban suppresses freedom of speech and thoughts and visions. A boycott doesn't.

He was actually responding to a post that talked about who the writer of the script dumbed down the script as to not offend anyone.

pWn3d.

[ODogg]

Re: The Golden Compass

He was actually responding to a post that talked about who the writer of the script dumbed down the script as to not offend anyone.

pWn3d.

And......that's not censorship or violation of freedom of speech either. That's a company decision that has nothing to do with the government. Big difference.

[SPTO]

Re: The Golden Compass

And......that's not censorship or violation of freedom of speech either. That's a company decision that has nothing to do with the government. Big difference.

Well it's not formal censorship but it's self censorship. You know as well as anyone that if the studio and the scriptwriters were totally faithful to the book then this movie would get even MORE hate and probably formal calls for boycott by the Vatican.

[Beantown]

Re: The Golden Compass

And......that's not censorship or violation of freedom of speech either. That's a company decision that has nothing to do with the government. Big difference.

You're the only one bringing the government or anything into this thread.

Oakfan brought up the point that the writer changed the script so he didn't offend anyone. TripleJ said it's a shame that artists have to do that.

Again, where was anyone talking about banning anything?

[triplej96]

Re: The Golden Compass

Ok, I have seen this type of thing many times in debates on issues like this. Where is anyone saying that this movie should be banned? There is a huge difference between asking for a boycott and asking for a ban. Folks who disagree with it's message and are asking for a boycott are not violating free speech, they are practicing free speech.

If I choose not to go see it due to not agreeing with some aspect of it, that is my right. Also, I might add, by me not seeing it for whatever reason i'm not violating anyone's free speech. Once again, people have a right to put whatever message they want in a movie, music, game or whatever, but I also have a right to choose not to spend my hard earned cash on it and/or badmouth said movie, music or game if I so desire.

I never once said anything about being banned or boycott. Although "boycotting" by religious groups will more than likely just cause more interest and money for the movie. I'm just responding to this.

"The producers of the movie, fearing a backlash, toned down the religion in the movie to the point of diluting the product."

This is rather unfortunate for movie goers, film makers, and the business. Suppressing thoughts and ideas just so some people don't throw a fit. I'm not saying you are throwing a fit. The people that will/did attempt to boy cot such a film are the people who will ruin what could have been.

[ODogg]

Re: The Golden Compass

You're the only one bringing the government or anything into this thread.

Well I dunno...maybe because violating someone's freedom of speech is a governmental issue?

Oakfan brought up the point that the writer changed the script so he didn't offend anyone. TripleJ said it's a shame that artists have to do that.

And I never took issue with that aspect. I took issue with the whole "violation of freedom of speech" aspect.

Again, where was anyone talking about banning anything?

Once again, comments such as "What happend to freedom of speech." and "An artist shouldn't have to suppress a thought or vision." imply banning. A ban suppresses freedom of speech and thoughts and visions. A boycott doesn't. The arguement that boycotts are supressing someone's freedom of speech is incorrect, in fact starting or participating in a boycott of something is using one's freedom of speech.

As for the angle of the artist supressed his vision due to the company's desire to "tone it down", that is entirely the artist's decision. If he didn't like it then he should have gone to another company to have it published in the way he would have liked. That is by no means anything other than self-censorship. When you self censor it is not tragic nor a bad thing, it's a compromise one chooses to make.

[ODogg]

Re: The Golden Compass

This is rather unfortunate for movie goers, film makers, and the business. Suppressing thoughts and ideas just so some people don't throw a fit.

How is it unfortunate? Did anyone hold a gun to his head and make him do it? He chose to supress or change his own ideas. That's the reality of the world. If he really felt committed to his vision then he would have found other ways to try to get it out unblemished. Obviously he felt the compromise was worthwhile.

[Beantown]

Re: The Golden Compass

Once again, comments such as "What happend to freedom of speech." and "An artist shouldn't have to suppress a thought or vision." imply banning. A ban suppresses freedom of speech and thoughts and visions. A boycott doesn't. The arguement that boycotts are supressing someone's freedom of speech is incorrect, in fact starting or participating in a boycott of something is using one's freedom of speech.

How does that imply banning?

To me, that implies sadness that artists have to dumb down their scripts or thoughts because of the world we live in these days. It has nothing to do with banning certain things, or keeping this or that from happening. It's artists, writers, etc. keeping themself down so they don't offend people out in the world.

[SPTO]

Re: The Golden Compass

How is it unfortunate? Did anyone hold a gun to his head and make him do it? He chose to supress or change his own ideas. That's the reality of the world. If he really felt committed to his vision then he would have found other ways to try to get it out unblemished. Obviously he felt the compromise was worthwhile.

Yes but if he/she put out the content unfiltered on the scripted page no one in Hollywood would touch the movie. Let's say a studio is brave enough to release an unfiltered version of the movie the people involved in the film would be vilified in a lot of quarters. In fact, i'd wager that some may not even find work again.

It's the way of the world and THAT'S why compromise was made.

[triplej96]

Re: The Golden Compass

Well I dunno...maybe because violating someone's freedom of speech is a governmental issue?



And I never took issue with that aspect. I took issue with the whole "violation of freedom of speech" aspect.



Once again, comments such as "What happend to freedom of speech." and "An artist shouldn't have to suppress a thought or vision." imply banning. A ban suppresses freedom of speech and thoughts and visions. A boycott doesn't. The arguement that boycotts are supressing someone's freedom of speech is incorrect, in fact starting or participating in a boycott of something is using one's freedom of speech.

As for the angle of the artist supressed his vision due to the company's desire to "tone it down", that is entirely the artist's decision. If he didn't like it then he should have gone to another company to have it published in the way he would have liked. That is by no means anything other than self-censorship. When you self censor it is not tragic nor a bad thing, it's a compromise one chooses to make.

I wouldn't say it was the artist's decision more like the producers....More times than not producers will have the say in something like this not the actual artist. Producers prob said to the writers "we need to tone this down so our company isn't attacked by extremist" or something to that flavor. Thus worrying about some persons reaction caused a censorship. To me this is a very bad thing in art especially film.

[realtalktruth]

Re: The Golden Compass

killing dogs doesn't really count..

wow seriously, i mean if it doesn't count, then why are people so heated about michael vick? i mean why is it that people assume that i am michael vick and i like fighting and killing dogs and betting? if my screen name was oj do i kill my wife or something? im just saying that people are going to do what they are going to do and video games, hip-hop, t.v., violence, etc..... that they see or hear is going to do nothing to stop them. if anything those things just makes the subject more real but without them it would not change a thing. thats why its people freedom of speech and expression to write, talk about, or show whatever they want including golden compass.

[jmood88]

Re: The Golden Compass

How does that imply banning?

To me, that implies sadness that artists have to dumb down their scripts or thoughts because of the world we live in these days. It has nothing to do with banning certain things, or keeping this or that from happening. It's artists, writers, etc. keeping themself down so they don't offend people out in the world.

Books and other media have been getting banned/censored for generations.