Fall-out...
Ah, I've got to tell, even among the controversy, I appreciated nearly every response to my previous blog posting. Now, though, I feel as though I should address a few things.
First, the issue of 'endorsing' a film. As reporters, we are encouraged to keep blogs. It allows us to connect with our readers and share information and opinions. I feel as long as it remains professional, honest and good-natured then I have a lot of freedom as to what I can reasonably post.
Example: I'd like to see the film No Country for Old Men. -- reasonable
I wrote the film No Country for Old Men. -- not reasonable
I don't think I underestimate my ability to influence when I say my blog is read by 6 loyal readers who are either related to me or are my friends -- either way, if my blog is providing a life-changing experience or paradigm altering event no one will be more surprised than me.
Now, my opinion was on the front page -- but that's more luck of the draw than my master plan to dominate the hearts and minds of our loyal readers. Copy editors need to have a refer to a blog and my blog had a picture (the movie poster.) So there you go. No grand designs.
Secondly, The Golden Compass.
Three points:
1. I am convinced children seeing this film will not be swayed into new-found atheism. The film has been watered down and children can appreciate many things without a thought to any agenda, real or implied.
2. I have read all three of the His Dark Materials books. And yes, they are anti-organized religion and anti-religious zealotry. They even kill a person called G-d.
I read each of them. I loved the books. Devoured them. And guess what? I still believe in G-d. Yep, that's right. Deep and abiding belief in a loving, wondrous G-d.
This book may be required reading at Atheist U, but it did nothing to hurt my belief. And those were the raw books. A water-down, PC-friendly 2 hour movie isn't going to rock very many boats.
3. This boycott...I tell ya, I hear boycott and I think, "I gotta see that...tell me more." Banned books are some of the all time bestsellers. Controversial musicians who have been boycotted by the Catholic League have gold records to show for it. Calling for a boycott of this movie has made every little rebel and junior shock-my-parents ready to be the first in line.
"Ooooh, let's go see the anti-G-d movie, that's so dark."
Why not tell people, "Hey, go see the movie if you like -- no pressure -- and if you have any questions about it, we'll talk."
If you turn every little controversy to a Bonfire of the Vanities...it's going to be counter-productive.
So, there's my bit.
I still want to see The Golden Compass. The reviews are lukewarm but that's fine by me. If you don't want to see, I respect that. If you don't want your kids to see it -- you're a parent and your jobs is taking care of your children, I respect that. But judge others based on if they want to see a film...I don't have much respect for that.
First, the issue of 'endorsing' a film. As reporters, we are encouraged to keep blogs. It allows us to connect with our readers and share information and opinions. I feel as long as it remains professional, honest and good-natured then I have a lot of freedom as to what I can reasonably post.
Example: I'd like to see the film No Country for Old Men. -- reasonable
I wrote the film No Country for Old Men. -- not reasonable
I don't think I underestimate my ability to influence when I say my blog is read by 6 loyal readers who are either related to me or are my friends -- either way, if my blog is providing a life-changing experience or paradigm altering event no one will be more surprised than me.
Now, my opinion was on the front page -- but that's more luck of the draw than my master plan to dominate the hearts and minds of our loyal readers. Copy editors need to have a refer to a blog and my blog had a picture (the movie poster.) So there you go. No grand designs.
Secondly, The Golden Compass.
Three points:
1. I am convinced children seeing this film will not be swayed into new-found atheism. The film has been watered down and children can appreciate many things without a thought to any agenda, real or implied.
2. I have read all three of the His Dark Materials books. And yes, they are anti-organized religion and anti-religious zealotry. They even kill a person called G-d.
I read each of them. I loved the books. Devoured them. And guess what? I still believe in G-d. Yep, that's right. Deep and abiding belief in a loving, wondrous G-d.
This book may be required reading at Atheist U, but it did nothing to hurt my belief. And those were the raw books. A water-down, PC-friendly 2 hour movie isn't going to rock very many boats.
3. This boycott...I tell ya, I hear boycott and I think, "I gotta see that...tell me more." Banned books are some of the all time bestsellers. Controversial musicians who have been boycotted by the Catholic League have gold records to show for it. Calling for a boycott of this movie has made every little rebel and junior shock-my-parents ready to be the first in line.
"Ooooh, let's go see the anti-G-d movie, that's so dark."
Why not tell people, "Hey, go see the movie if you like -- no pressure -- and if you have any questions about it, we'll talk."
If you turn every little controversy to a Bonfire of the Vanities...it's going to be counter-productive.
So, there's my bit.
I still want to see The Golden Compass. The reviews are lukewarm but that's fine by me. If you don't want to see, I respect that. If you don't want your kids to see it -- you're a parent and your jobs is taking care of your children, I respect that. But judge others based on if they want to see a film...I don't have much respect for that.
Labels: media, movie, power of the people
December 6, 2007 at 1:36 PM
Well said on all points. But, this being Shelby and the south, they are all wrong. top
December 8, 2007 at 11:45 PM
Boycott? I did not ask for a boycott. Now would I ever recommend one, for the very reasons Cherish stated, and more.
In my original post, I stated that The Star posted the advertisement for the blog with a copy of the movie poster on the front page of the paper saying you could not wait to see it. And, I went on to say that doing so gave the appearance of endorsement to the public.
That being the case, I was concerned because I knew of Pullman's motivations, and thought the readers of The Star would like to know that information as well.
I thought that folks may not wish to fund Pullman's efforts to strike a blow against beliefs that many of your readers hold to be true. If not, fine - go see the movie, and watch it with your heart. If you do, you will hear truth where it is spoken.
But, I gave no mention of a boycott - In fact, in a followup I stated that the movie could speak to the truth about God even if the intent of Pullman was for it to do otherwise.
I know that not everyone welcomes people of faith expressing their views. Since my first post, I was told by followup bloggers that I wrote a diatribe, was called a zealot and refereed to as a "crazy Christian". As I said then, there are worse things to be called.
I believe that the exchange of ideas is good. Talking about movies, therefore, is good. Sharing ideas about our faith and how it influences our decisions, and choices, is healthy. top