Originally Posted By DAR As I mentioned in another thread: An early (mixed) review of the movie I read said the film and books won't put kids on a path to atheism no more than the Narnia stories would convert them to Christianity.
Originally Posted By threeundertwo First of all, if nothing else, this really makes me want to read the books: <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/bigread/top100.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/bigr ead/top100.shtml</a> Also 2 of my kids have read them and really liked them. The middle school picked The Golden Compass for the book club book for kids (5-8th grade, so 10yrs at the youngest), so I'm surprised to see comments suggesting this is more appropriate for older kids. Harry Potter spoiler warning************* Re: Harry Potter, I'm amazed at the school that banned them. I assume it's a religious school? I'm surprised more people haven't picked up on the Christian symbolism in the HP books - including the main character's resurrection towards the end. Rowling is Christian, and sees herself as following in the tradition of the Inklings (Tolkien, CS Lewis) who aimed to "prepare children's minds for God." She was an expert on ancient symbols and used Christian symbols throughout the books. My kids love pointing out the Golden Griffin (Gryffin d'or) in the stained glass over the door to our Church. This has probably been covered before. I don't read World Events much. For further reading about the Christian symbols in HP, here's an interview with Rowling herself: <a href="http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1572107/20071017/index.jhtml" target="_blank">http://www.mtv.com/news/articl es/1572107/20071017/index.jhtml</a>
Originally Posted By sherrytodd Well, I've finished the first one. I do like his writing more then I liked Rowling's style. It is a lot more mature. But the book definately was more graphic. A lot of blood, death and graphic details. My son is nine and I don't really think I'd like him reading this book yet, not for any subvert anti-religous messages, but for the violence and mature material, but I don't think he would understand a lot of the book as well. It is a complex story. I had to go back and reread a few paragraphs myself. I think that the movie will be dumbed down quite a bit, particularly from the differences in just the previews that I have seen.
Originally Posted By DAR Since he's come back to being a full time reviewer for the Sun Times Ebert has given out four stars to a lot of movies.
Originally Posted By jdub >>Since he's come back to being a full time reviewer for the Sun Times Ebert has given out four stars to a lot of movies.<< How cool he's seen so many good ones lately! (and hey, if I was 100, and the senior reviewer for my paper, and a National Semi Legend, and could score the sympathy points--or freak out the bosses with my voice--I'D demand on only reviewing the flicks I WANTED to see, too!) ;`D
Originally Posted By Maxxdadd Critics aside, evidently the public is burning out on the genre. It barly got above $26 mil this weekend, which in Hollywood terms, is a disapointing opening. Can it be that people can smell crap before actually entering a theatre? Or is is more about being turned off by controversy as a marketing tool? Or is it actually the film everyone should see, but were too busy watching Enchanted instead? We may never know. Look for it on DVD by Easter, which in itself is kind of ironic.
Originally Posted By DAR Yeah the only sure things right now in the Fantasy genre are Potter and Narnia. The only other movie that is a guaranteed money maker will be the Hobbit when that ever gets made.
Originally Posted By woody The movie didn't exactly have a good promotion, but this is also true of Beowulf. Both movies suffer from looking cheezy.
